We have changed our logo again and will keep it up for a short review of the question of ‘realizable socialism’.
The idea emerged in the vacuum of marxist/leftist views of what an evolutionary/revolutionary socialism should actually look like. The refusal to plan ahead for the need to construct a socialist system led to disastrous results…
This is a selection from the Kindle/public domain PDF of Democratic Market Neo-communism transferred back from PDF format to microsoft Word with possibly quirky results.The point here is to abandon classic communism as the nightmare it is for a version as here that will produce a robust economy, satisfy ecological constraints, and still appeal to a new public, the universal class and its core sector the working class. The way to do that is to create a communism with the look of liberalism, and a liberalism with the look of communism. A difficult task, at first, but with a new set of mental habits the job almost does itself.
The original document needs more work, some amplification and a closer focus on ecological socialism. Start thinking, how construct a neo-communism that will not provoke a fury of refusal in a general public? Our version has three sectors and allows markets run by socialist entrepreneurs/managers to license resources from the Commons to engage in a new form of socialist market. Issues of ‘clearing’ and the hastles of such as Ludwig Mises don’t even arise, in theory. But new forms of planning are visible on the horizon we have a system with immense potential light years from the stolid idiocy of marxist type pseudo-communism with its state capitalism, etc…https://www.dropbox.com/home/Public?preview=Democratic_Market_Neo_Communism_ver_5.pdf
In its current form the socialist/communist left is stuck in versions of marxism that can’t activate properly as transitional or revolutionary options.
The bolshevik era shows clearly that put into action the principles of Marx will derail…
The left simply dawdles in its past and the revolutionary moment if it came would derail all over again. The public will not stand for a repeat using marxist cliches: the whole framework must be rethought, and divorced from marxist cadres (which are mostly jargon chatter clubs without the slightest intention of anything radical) Continue reading ” The current left steeped in marxist confusion could never carry out a revolution…”
Revolutionary rhetoric that doesn’t even mention the term ‘revolution’ is a form of daydreaming at this point. And ecologists end up with one track minds where we need a balanced totality: the issue is not climate change but a set of four problems in one, or more… Perhaps this is strategic reticence. How is capitalism to be overthrown? If these daydreamers could slash the tires of one SUV apiece one might take them seriously beyond hand wringers…I don’t recommend that, the idea is what counts here, to start. Was the end of slavery worth the union dead? What’s the body count estimates for postcapitalism and will the new cadre take the gandhians out to be shot?
To overthrow capitalism requires violent action on a massive scale, and it is not clear what these constant invocations of revolution in polite language really mean. Monbiot’s essay is important in any case. This is a transformation of the original thrust of working class revolution. The two must combine and/or restate their basics.
Revolt is illegal, you in? A whole movement could be wiped out in a week by the powers that be to prevent any change (which is not an argument against revolutionary action).
We should note the way the french and russian revolutions slipped into being unexpectedly…
The same will prove true in the coming crisis. But the revolutionaries must be ready and not blow it with leninist instant replays.
The revolution needs to be done right and stated clearly in advance.
We have suggested it many times here and at least adopted a comprehensive approach we call ES/DMNC or eco-socialist ‘democratic market socialism’ which is at least a theoretical focus on a basic four components for a new society, that plus an ecological content. You think about four problems in one: politics, planning/markets, a postcapitalist Commons and this four term reflection then proceeds to construct an interior of ecological socialism. This model can be expanded but the basic point is that we can’t just focus on ecological issues. This approach is adapted to evolutionary/revolutionary versions but it is hard to see how this can be done along an evolutionary path. As noted however the situation could suddenly ripen. We should proceed with an evolutionary version to start but state clearly the need for revolutionary potentials and honestly being to ask how a civil war against capitalist might be brought about.
“We have to overthrow this system which is eating the planet with perpetual growth. I mean since when was GDP a sensible measure of human welfare?”
Source: To Save Humanity and Planet, Says Climate Activist, ‘We Must Go Straight to the Heart of Capitalism and Overthrow It’
Source: Life on the Left: No shortcuts: The climate revolution must be ecosocialist
This useful and very specific essay outlines a whole series of issues in the range of eco-socialism and the whole discussion fits into our model of DMNC like a glove: this involves seeing our ‘democratic market neoo-communism’ as a version of eco-socialism. On paper the two fit together janus-faced and our ‘new economy’ can be adapted to minimal growth or no growth, regulation of all CO2 issues in the context of our ‘green neo-communism’, and a social project to move past fossil fuels in a constrained schedule. Only something like our DMNC could achieve this and its component of ecological courts and presidential component guarding/constructing a Commons could plan and execute an eco-socialist program inside our DMNC: a rolls royce successor to the ‘green new deal’. Our method of speaking to both the electoral and revolutionary options demands a review of the limits of ‘new deals’ and our version would be a ‘neo-communist’ (green) new deal.
This article clearly illuminates the revolutionary dilemma behind any real proposals to stay on a carbon reduction budget although there is the possibility of a hybrid as a chaotic collapse allows a combined electoral/revolutionary outcome.
Our analysis is uniquely defined but does inherit a fair use of legacy marxist ideas taken critically but we consider on the hand the idea of ‘socialism’ in one country AND an international.
Our model has set of sliding scales, one being its remaining use of ‘markets’ based on a Commons: it can throttle back and forth between percentages of planned and market sectors.
In an extreme situation the ES/DMNC can go into survival mode as a rescue degrowth outcome and move to prevent an elite bunkers in the arctic syndrome condemning billions to calamity.
This useful and compelling essay raises more questions than it answers and it is difficult to navigate the choppy waters of definitional socialism. We should note the term arises before the work of Marx and we are not bound by the legacy of marxism as such here. We have claimed that Marx’s theories are flawed and this may well muddle his brilliant classic, Critique of the Gotha Program. We need to construct a superset of the marxist legacy that can avail of its potential but recast the basics where needed. Continue reading “what is ‘democratic market neo-communism’…?//What is Socialism?”