Biardeau R. Javier Aporrea I would begin by quickly with a small quote from the current ambassador to Algeria, Michel Mujica:
"Here we are faced with a dilemma. The alternative is not between capitalism lies in the inequality consubstantiated or a private social democracy. If we resign ourselves to one of two possibilities mentioned above, drown the possibilities of socialist democracy. "(substantive democracy, formal democracy and hegemony in Antonio Gramsci, 1994, p. 51)
Michel Mujica wrote a text that should not be sleeping in the silence of the library, but dwelling should be just discussions of what we call here the "popular constitutional process." It's called "substantive democracy, formal democracy and hegemony by Antonio Gramsci." I somehow wanted to make today a kind of homage to a thesis of this book, because they are very relevant to what we are discussing today, especially for a discussion that I did not perceive from the prospect of a "moralism optimistic", from "self-fulfilling prophecy" that projects that by 2021 we will see the sky and reach the socialist paradise, but just watching and considering that historical processes are subject to the social and political struggles that depend on the historical struggles and social composition of specific classes and, as we say in common sense terms, the "non-pregnant wishes."
I. - We are at a critical juncture
physical If almost all the "theoretical models" are built on the assumption the "vacuum", a "friction-free space" in the historical process we have social and political friction, strife, conflict, antagonism, progress, setbacks, ebbs and flows. And I think that the Bolivarian revolution is living a moment that the intellectual Edgardo Lander scored critical juncture (See: http://www.aporrea.org/actualidad/a47861.html).
II .- Have you taken stock of real socialism?
a crossroads, and so there are roads that should not be taken if they do not want to repeat mistakes that are already known in the experiences of the "actually existing socialism," especially since since Venezuela has not taken stock of inventory of the experience of transition to socialism of bureaucratic socialism, or as they like to call it, that would be the first concern. To what extent, in Venezuela, has been broken, from a standpoint of intellectual and political structure, balance and inventory of the experiences of real socialism? What conclusions emerge from this inventory balance for political practice?
III .- Many questions about the First Socialist Plan
I think there are multiple reference scripts present in the public policy of the Bolivarian revolution. In Venezuela we have achieved the Bolivarian Alternative Agenda meets all its objectives. But if we analyze the later plans, especially what we call the First Plan Socialist, the question we must ask is: To what extent the process popular, national, revolutionary has the effective capacity to achieve, realize the ambitions and aspirations there are contained? In what political conditions? In what institutional conditions? With what motive forces, leaders and national and international support? In what context of international forces? In what economic context? To avoid, from my point of view, a historical invariant, something that has happened repeatedly in the experience of real socialism: the issue of the "besieged fortress." Ie Does the Venezuelan revolution is going to constantly justify a debate marked by a transition to socialism in the context of becoming a "fortress besieged revolutionary?
We have for example a specific case: the Chilean case. A democratic, peaceful, legal, constitutional, democratic transition to socialism, which did not just among its strengths with those who assume everyone here we have: with the "base of support" of armed forces engaged in stabilization popular constituent process with the revolutionary process, but justamente ¿cuál fue el devenir y destino del caso Chileno a partir de las fricciones del campo político? No fue simplemente un “golpe seco y frío”. Nosotros pudimos observar en el caso chileno —que fue emblemático— cómo la fluidez e inestabilidad de las correlaciones de fuerzas en el parlamento chileno generaron una precondición para el golpe de estado de Pinochet. Es decir, el propio parlamento chileno le abrió la puerta al golpe militar. Y a veces nosotros perdemos de vista estos pequeños detalles históricos.
IV.- Hay un campo minado que debemos desarmar para el 2010
Eso lo digo a propósito de la prospectiva política inmediata para el año next. Sometimes we think that what is being discussed at this juncture and the present situation, the electoral law, elections this year, the coming elections, are mobilized as if the lane is the "rail revolution" was completely oiled. I think there are bumps in the road, there is a minefield that must disarm, and I think that is the task of intellectuals: to predict and analyze in detail the minefield.
geopolitically A field weakened by the U.S. administration and its allies, and geopolitically weakened by the Venezuelan right, which has been carving, weaving a support structure, in what they call "civil society organizations, they call it as "democratic society." They are assumed to be monopolists of "democratic society." Trying again to revitalize the so-called "transition programs," which called on the United States Office of democratic transition, with its "color revolutions."
V. - The opposition can expect to earn no less than 30 to 35% of the national parliament
I do not foresee a 2021 as it plans Luis Britto Garcia. I foresee a few years ahead in which they will try again to install a "democratic transition office in Venezuela, where the parliament is going to turn a fundamental "sounding board" for the Venezuelan right offensive, trying to capitalize on some political and institutional space they control. Try to build a 30 or 35% minimum space from a parliamentary coalition perfect enables them to control this area. Simultaneously trying to divide the social and political alliance that supports the Bolivarian Revolution (PPT, PCV, PSUV and social movements), trying to cause friction, trying to seduce some sectors of the revolutionary political alliance from Washington, to try to generate a scenario if not division, at least to weaken the forces supporting the revolution and growth and advance the right of the Venezuelan parliament.
So in that context is not 2021 but 2010 I pose what for me are fundamental challenges that we must address and include the relationship between democracy and transition to socialism.
VI .- Chávez has taken a political vacuum and if you keep doing this may cause problems
One of the comments made at the beginning is the theme of the "hyper-leadership." Others would have called the "progressive Bonapartism, dry cesarismoa others, some have confused the terminology of Gramsci on the progressive Caesarism with positivist reading Vallenilla Lanz on democratic Caesarism. Here we must remember that for Gramsci Caesarism background is a catastrophic equilibrium of forces in conflict, leading him to assume commitments to sectors not committed to the revolution to achieve comparative advantage in the balance of power. I think this scheme of power is a big mistake, and does not advance the revolution from the perspective of building an anti-democratic and socialist hegemony. What Gramsci basically arises at a time in which a collective political management structure is not well established, a "great personality" politics takes under his weight, the dialectics of revolution or the dialectic of the restoration. And I think Chavez has taken a political vacuum, a vacuum of political mediation and dialogue is important that if used can generate "own throat knives for the Bolivarian revolution": the indispensability of the Leader, the fragility of the revolutionary leadership. Here the "moment of the Leader" swallows the "time leading popular and organized," it must ensure the continuity of the constituent popular.
For tasks, functions, to advance the Bolivarian revolution requires a political structure, we call it, an intellectual collective, not only administrative and electoral structure, as has named Vladimir Acosta. Not only require individual intellectuals, notables and prominent personalities, it requires critical thinking organic to the revolutionary movement, requires a recovery of the link between socialism and democracy, that the ideological right has consistently tried to obscure, to generate a kind of dilemma which socialism is the "totalitarianism", and representative democracy is precisely the political model of the "end of history", the destination station and the last path left.
VII .- Rethinking the relationship between socialism and democracy
I think one of the fundamental tasks, whether by assigning tasks, is just back to rethink the relationship between socialism and democracy, overcoming the habits of thought that has left the Leninist script, the script's Bolshevik orthodoxy on a left that in Venezuela, has been stamped by the pregnancy, the role played by the influence of the Third International revolutionary socialism in Latin America and the role of the intelligentsia conveyed to the Third International, the model of socialist states, and Marxism-Leninism as a script, such as habits, reflecting conditioned to think and imagine the transition to socialism. Stalinism castrating played a role in shaping critical thinking and our American revolutionary.
VIII. Cuban and Venezuelan road to socialism via
I see with concern that in Venezuela there is no conclusive answer about the significance of national and specifies the path of the Bolivarian revolution, in relation to the Cuban experience. I see with surprise that the attitude is basically no difference defend, without qualification, the political future of the Cuban revolution without understanding the unique differences and characteristics of popular constituent process in each country. Each country follows a unique historical experience specific and builds his own way, but not copied or transplanted "models of socialism." Do not think it necessary that we load to the defense of the historical legacy of the Cuban revolution. We can support the experience, but that is a fundamental task that belongs to the Cuban people and their revolutionary currents, its failures or weaknesses should not become "handicaps" of the Venezuelan revolution.
IX. Capitalist sector grows but radical anti-capitalist discourse
I think that during the transition to socialism, as you said Victor Alvarez, is quite suggestive to think that while the economy strengthens still capitalist mixed sign, which strengthens private sector specific fractions, the presidential address speech poses a socialist radicalization. So how do you combine data on growth trends of the capitalist productive matrix radicalization presidential speech? How do we assimilate these two trends? What happens there?
X. We do not have a place to be discussed in depth the dilemmas of socialist construction
I think there is a second theme. About Eva Golinger a need to create centers of socialist thought, for example, I note with concern we do not have the structures of revolutionary thought, a balance sheet or inventory of all such theoretical discussions on the transition from the point of view of the socialist economy. Ie, where in Venezuela is discussed for example Oscar Lange, Kalecki? Where we discuss the debate Mandel, Bettelheim, on the law of value, on socialist accumulation, with Guevara in Cuba itself? Where is this discussion that to inform the movement, popular constituent power on the transit of "private ownership of the means of production" to the various forms of social property (distinguishing that "nationalization" is not "Socialization") and the dynamics of the market economy in socialist planning conditions? Where is discussing the issue of capital accumulation and socialism in Venezuela?
XI. Socialism and the relationship of forces
Samir Amin has recently written that the theme of transitions in the XXI century can not as easily seen as revolutionary thought in the minds of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Marx assumed, writing the Communist Manifesto, the revolution was pretty close, very close. The experience of 1871 made him think that it was so close and retreated into his cr {d ela political economy Notice bourgeois in the British Museum. Engels wrote a preface regarding the class struggle in France which presents a perspective shift from insurgency to gradual progress through a revolution of the majority, using the parliaments in the German social democracy. Then the same German Social Democratic Party-concentrated in the first world war and the approval of appropriations war shattered all the controversy in Europe about the possibility of a broad alliance of the forces of revolutionary socialism.
That ended in the divide between what was the Socialist International at the time and Leninist Third International. As revolutionary socialism we can see how Stalin participated in the "Third Period", in a wedge that deepened the split between social democrats and communists in the German party itself, which had expectations of continuing revolution. Stalin came to argue that the social democratic left was the worst of "social fascism," as he called it. Later it was trying to amend the so-called "popular fronts", but the Stalinist counter-revolution had already advanced. We also have the controversy, after the death of Lenin in relation to the succession in the Bolshevik party in relation to the different wings ideological, then we have the Sino-Soviet conflict, and stop counting. After Lenin's death, already foreshadowed despotic tendencies and counter-revolutionaries within the Bolshevik tradition.
words, the path of balance and inventory of real socialism, bureaucratic socialism is not simply an optimistic prophecy where we're going to fill with flowers by simple will or simple moralizing or a simple self-help psychology optimistic, but we face precisely the real difficulty of any transition to socialism based on the correlation of forces that are there. That is, where optimism depends not simple dreams but the composition of classes and the social composition of the struggles.
XII .- The different visions of the revolution
Here Roland Denis is telling us that the popular movement looks partially administered, where there is a sort of military republic, corporate, bureaucratic interpretation of Roland and at the same time, I hear voices saying that socialism walking rapidly toward the achievement of a just society of equality, freedom and justice. How can two people who inhabit the same social space, are so radically dissimilar perceptions of "process" part of left field?
So to me it seems important to reflect in depth on the transition to socialism. Lost for example, Samir Amin, when he says: Is it possible to keep the Soviet paradigm of development that initiated the welfare state or the national development of third-world countries, to maintain the illusion of the transitional post-capitalist? The answer it is not. He even says how to deal with three fundamental contradictions of capitalism in structural terms, not in terms of revolutionary government's revolutionary project or situation.
The first is the economic alignment, that is thinking about replacing a mounted company economy Private property and market on the commercial lineup that is still present worldwide. When he speaks for example of China: one country, two systems, which is not one country, two systems, but the expansion precisely regulated and controlled by state planning certainly the commercialization of large sectors of economic activity in China.
Secondly, Amir Samin presents us with what we going to do with the destruction of nature? To what extent our political projects and our public policies effectively address the criticism of the productivist and development to address, not rhetorically but in practical terms, the development issue sustainable growth and accumulation in conditions which ecology is saying that productivist, growth and accumulation are problematic?.
XIII .- The hyper-consumerism, the opposite of profiteering
Third and correlated with this second point, the issue of consumerism. I think that malls in Venezuela are emblematic reference pole face meetings conducted by the PSUV some Saturdays or Sundays. I have participated in the meetings of my battalion of the PSUV, but I'm surprised the attractiveness strikingly, mobilization of Shopping Centers, which is mobilizing against PSUV battalions today. I see the malls full of commercial reasonableness and desire. I see the commercial logic of alienation in a society in transition to socialism, working with all the ease of the world. I see no discussion on this point in the socialist battalions. So what to tell me what kind of world of flowers and angels are socialists? I think this is a capitalist consumer society, without a capitalist production structure that supports the needs and aspirations pattern induced by the culture industry, advertising and media.
And finally, to close, Samin Amin poses the issue of North-South uneven development. I think that Venezuela has a key role, with all the mistakes and successes, as the vanguard of globalization to reorganize the revolutionary left movements in the world. And I think Venezuela, provided that work has been spending forces to be deployed to the internal strengthening of the revolutionary process in a fundamental projection propaganda achievements of the Bolivarian revolution.
XIV .- The role of Venezuela and the intellectuals
is necessary, from my point of view, that Venezuela understands its role in the struggles of anti-globalization movements, the struggles of the South in relation to new multipolar integration schemes, but also humble regarding the presentation of their progress. Because if we make too much propaganda on the achievements of the revolution are not such, and becomes a crude balance, a stark inventory on the effective progress of the revolution in various fields, can be very bad. We may look bad, for example, the difficulty of effectively passing on the achievements of Barrio Adentro I to other levels of national public health system, such as public hospitals. We can look bad if we observe that most of the Mercal are not strengthened by the production or domestic supply but by the import dependency for food. We can be very bad if, as I said Victor Alvarez, analyze how fiscal and financial incentives are being capitalized by an emerging bourgeoisie or economic sectors that can do as one who turned around the table and had a face to Hugo Rafael Chávez Frías and another face to the opposition.
XV .- To be much less complacent at this time
revolution is, I think we have to be much less complacent at this time with the Bolivarian revolution and demand that the political leadership structure that does not turn intellectuals as history has been known to porters. If Romulo Betancourt said that the armed forces were bought with prostitutes and whiskey, I think he said and if it did not say a thought, that intellectuals are "cooked in its own juice." That is, Betancourt "beheaded" or neutralized in practice important fractions revolutionary intelligentsia: What made Betancourt's Democratic Action, which was brilliantly Machiavellian to prevent the very possibility of radical left? In this popular national revolutionary movement, if we do not see that what he did Betancourt, we will not see what you are trying to make right with the young Venezuelan.
XVI. Están recuperando el mito Betancourt como un liderazgo democrático alternativo
Para finalizar, solamente un detalle. Revisen en bibliotecas y librerías la gran ofensiva con relación a la mitología del “padre de la democracia”. Jóvenes repitiendo las consignas de Acción Democrática y volviendo a pensar que Rómulo Betancourt es el modelo a seguir como liderazgo. Jóvenes que se entrenan, que son pagados para ir a cursos internacionales y nacionales para recibir el guión del anticomunismo, elaborado justamente por esa bisagra que se conformó en el seno de un partido que también fue un partido nacionalista popular y revolucionario y que terminó siendo justamente the beachhead to prevent a social process in Venezuela. Do not forget, Betancourt defeated politically and militarily to the revolutionary left in Venezuela. And the left contributed many ideological and political errors. Among them, dogmatically assume Marxism-Leninism and neglecting the relationship between socialism and democracy.
jbiardeau@gmail.com
social networking
0 comments:
Post a Comment