The case of Exxon is notorious already: a natural resource that should belong to all is now a malevolent force of capitalist capital in the destruction of a planet…
This is a useful article but is still stuck, as with the Cubans in the fallacies of original marxism:
We must return to the teachings of Lenin and Trotsky. A workers’ state, as Lenin described in his classical text, The State and Revolution, is but a quasi-state that immediately begins to dissolve, as it represents the dictatorship of the majority over the minority. Thus, Lenin proposed a series of basic rules inspired by the lessons of the Paris Commune: the election and recall of all public officials, that no public office has a higher wage than that of a skilled worker, the people in arms instead of a standing army etc.
It might help to forget Lenin, Trotsky and bolshevism, the dictatorship of the proletariat, etc…etc.. As for the Paris Commune, it was a near miraculous moment but it cannot easily resolve the full set of requirements for a post capitalist system.
The needless dilemma suffered by Cuba reflects the flaws in the original conception of marxism of the stages of production: it unwittingly strengthens the process of reversal because of the inability to create a postcapitalist economy. The idea that socialism and communism can’t have a market is the original fallacy of the Marx world. But that market can’t be based on private property: capital and resources must be a part of a Commons. That is different from state capitalism.
Here our conception of (ecological) democratic market neo-communism can help to balance the false contradictions created by a misleading original theory.
Cuba has a golden opportunity to the job right because it has accomplished the task of expropriation.To throw that away would be a great misfortune. But the resolution is not state capitalism but the creation of a Commons and a new set of democratic and economic institutions. Further, democracy must enter and blend with communism.
Planing can coexist with a neo-communism market sphere which also interact with the larger global economy without being blackmailed by exterior capital.
Our DMNC model can avail of this foundation and yet introduce markets in our special sense. It could have a robust economy under a communist umbrella. It ca also be an ecological experiment, introduce Chavez style Communes and/or workers’ cooperatives.
It would be a pity to simply drift into the same failed ‘reform’ that has been the curse of Russia. Here the Vietnamese model is simply not adequate to the case.
After Donald Trump came into office, Washington’s position on the Cuban Revolution has become ever-more belligerent, in a radical change of policy from that followed by President Obama.
Maduro has an opportunity given the failure of the coup to move toward the completion of the socialist revolution: we have suggested that our DMNC model can discipline the movement toward expropriation with a balanced outcome.
Given the reality of ‘primitive accumulation’ capitalist protest against expropriation is completely hypocritical.
We have been critical of Sanders for coopting the terms socialism and revolution but the problem pervades most of the left now and we have basically social democracy promoted as socialism and the issue of revolutionary transformation eliminated from discussion. That’s seems sensible to many but the problem is that at a moment of terrible crisis social transformation has been evicted from the mix. We have to endure this pseudo-leftists who may do some good in their own way. But without even advocating ‘revolution’ we must insist on the semantic clarity of historically defined terms if the probability of failure will create an unconscious acquiescence to a purloined radicalism…
Socialism implies the expropriation of the means of production.
A summary of Democratic Socialists of America’s Strategy Document – June 2016 Download PDF 2016 was a game changing year for leftists and progressives. We are finally reemerging as a vital and powerful force after an extended period of stagnation and demoralization, and we face a political landscape more favorable than perhaps at any time…
We have been hard on Sanders but even today we suggested, or at least considered, that he run, cf. the article from Commons Dreams, Ten Reasons Why Sanders Should Run in 2020. I kinda like the guy, going ‘off with his head’ here smacks of inconsistency. The reason in fact is that his thinking is unclear and could go either way: he just might be a real crypto-socialist and stealth-seed a revolution, chuckle. But he should be honest and if he is a socialist he should be held to account to socialist platforms, such as the expropriation of capital, a very touchy issue for Clintonite democrats, one daren’t mention Wall streeters.
The issue we raise is no quibble. If Sanders got elected he would have to turn the CIA on real socialists and communists, a betrayal so grotesque Sanders would be charged with a variant of false-flagging. His is a de facto false flag op already because he is using someone else’s flag, with the result, just more than possibly, of getting them killed because his followers and the real socialists will end up fighting each other. It is in fact an old situation, Mensheviks/Bolsheviks, but different now because back then the terms ‘socialism’ and ‘commnunism’ were fairly clear as to their meaning.
In fact Sanders may have eliminated himself here. Even so a false usage of the terms ‘socialism’ and ‘revolution’ ironically gives them venue and a kind of publicity…You can’t get away with the strategy Sanders has adopted. He could end up with the blood of real socialists on his hands.