J. Posadas August 4, 1977
to the Ethiopian military they lack political initiative to negotiate with both Eritrea and Somalia, the Ogaden conflict. Both Somalia and Eritrea Ogaden want a socialist, considering that the core Bourgeois is in the minority. Ethiopia's government lacked the initiative to negotiate with both.
want to return to Somalia Ogaden for himself, but then this will reflect in an internal conflict. If you return to Somalia, Ogaden joins a workers' state, but at the same time, it takes work and a struggle that makes the intervention part of the Yankees. The easy, because it prevents the concentration and centralization, and thus, stimulates the division of interests and the Yankees have made entry, and consequently leave the conservative tendencies favored. The Ethiopian leadership lacked the initiative to understand this.
There is a lack of program base for Marxist understand the problems, because they still cling to a bourgeois formation, follow the political line on the left of the bourgeoisie. And while not all the responsibility is theirs, no longer have it, and are not to blame the educated non-Stalinist, "because no one prevented them from education. Demonstrates the limitation of these sectors that are mediocre nationalists and workers who seek support for their national purposes, and at the same time, it demonstrates the superiority of Cuba against all this. Cuba, having begun, conversely, trying to clean up capitalism ends up going to free Africa, which indicates that there is a good Marxist base in Cuba, not consciously developed or applied but there is a Marxist basis. Because the function they are doing, given the basis for understanding.
Instead, these Somali nationalist Marxist talk much but leave it at that, they are very backward way of another stage, which still apply nationalism along with state ownership in the economy. The background of all the steps it is taking Somalia is determined by the national interest, not bourgeois but not revolutionary but had offered a settlement to Ethiopia.
In Somalia there is no political or trade union. The main thing the economy is nationalized, with directions that even with bourgeois conceptions feel that to develop should nationalize the economy, but at the same time to prevent this widespread benefit of the entire population, there is a Stalinist-type apparatus. There is no life or discussion of association or political discussion, but there is a rise in status of the population and although the unions have no role as such, deal with building houses, to teach reading and writing.
This shows the contradictions of a revolution whose direction is very unsafe, you have to advance the development of organs that are essential to guide people to a universal understanding of what the problem is not Somalia, but it is a global issue, it which in turn, goes against the nationalist leaders who want to do.
is therefore interesting to note that in Ethiopia, three months of the revolution sold 90,000 books of Marx, and that the army political instructors are Ethiopian students who had ten years living in Cuba.
whole area, is geographically rugged, mountainous and jungle (with all kinds of animals), it also has areas rich in vegetation, and there are many mines. Especially
is a strategic area of \u200b\u200bcommunication with the sea and opening to the rest of Africa. Throughout Ethiopia there is communication with the rest of Africa; and for example, Ogaden overlooking the Red Sea is fundamental. This whole area was formerly united but with different interests and languages, was never truly united country, which is why there are movements claiming the culture of each place, but what culture?: They have no cultural tradition consistent. Their culture is in the form of speaking, have not built anything to the civilization, life, art, economics, not sense their claims of cultural traditions are traditions of tribe of nomads. For the Ethiopians lack initiative to put it this way: "neither you nor we have any cultural tradition." Just have a religion created for a few, nothing more.
There is no question of culture or civilization, any more than there was in most of the problems of race in the Soviet Union. It was really a social problem which remained parked by the inertia of the Czar, which thus precluded the development and thus continued to dominate. Therefore, it is really only matters of culture, civilization, languages, traditions, when they are related to the progress or the life of humanity.
The Soviets should be involved in this line, because they pose problems on self-determination today. There is objectively a problem of self- backlog still exists, for example, self-determination calls Ogaden and has no real basis. At the time of Lenin was the first experience and worked out well, even giving them a republic had been resolved to the anarchists, to show that it was impossible to do what they wanted.
The Soviet Union has neither the initiative to tell the Ethiopians to the movement posed a solution to this or that way. These are problems that are going to be extending and expanding across Africa. What is that in the tradition of Dgibuti? If Dgibuti was invented by the Portuguese. "We want to keep our tradition," say, "what it is: is not known, were originally the Portuguese and then French Dgibuti using mainly as a military port.
States must give workers historic cultural initiative, respecting the traditions but at the same time raising the understanding that any of these countries, if they are just isolated. Instead, they may develop eg. language, and then find the need to speak another language. It is as with the Quechua or Aymara in Bolivia, we propose (in 1946) that the Indians should be incorporated to speak the English language, and economic and social development would lead to them to see the need for English language, and the Quechua or Aymara languages \u200b\u200bsome languages \u200b\u200bare dead.
If no previous economic and cultural life, what they have to claim?: Are subject to the life of "piece of land" that has made the private property system, and they, will you respect that?. Instead, they should say: respect for culture, tradition, why? What is the importance of our culture and tradition, what contribution to life?, "Are ways of life" they say. Yes, but backward, "habits of life", but do not mind using a car, either the Yankees or the Soviets, "habits of life" but do not mind using a device with the touch of a button which makes the food. So why does it not stay with their customs?.
All this shows that lack cultural preparation of the management of workers' state. Cuba should have done this and at the same time act like they're doing.
We respect all, if there are a few people who want to maintain tradition, do so, but at the same time show the relationship through cultural, they use things, eat, live and sleep, not according to tradition, but the progress that is overcoming tradition. Not that they've eliminated their tradition, but it has been surpassed in the workers' state.
have to intervene much giving ideas, for example to perform a task of the proletariat with the peasantry, but the essential basis is not the proletariat as a group, but the policy agenda and the workers' state. In the USSR the problem of nationalities was discussed fully and the new Constitution is a very big progress because it overcomes the problem of nationalities in the Soviet Union. What
capitalist country has achieved that?. The capitalist system was artificially Ogaden, where as a natural means there are only a few wild animals, while the workers' state resolves the question of nationalities.
In the Soviet Union, though a bit bureaucratic, and Soviets are all different nationalities are concentrated in a higher form of social, human, that is the Soviet workers' state. The bureaucracy does not discuss this because it has no initiative, but soon will be, because when you get up to publish a book saying that we must return to the first seven years of the Soviet Union is already the conditions to intervene in higher form.
The problem of self-determination or of languages, is based on the system of ownership. The workers' state has not helped but distant, unresolved in a scientifically best that can influence the world including North America, "but it is solving. In contrast to these places and countries there is no reference to the system of land ownership and location, is still a haven in which they protect them, because they are afraid of the future and progress, and consequently are subjected and entangled in that. That is the historical background of the issue, but they would see the progress of the economy and social relations in the world represented by the workers' states, and resolve in unifying, ending with the differentiation based on language or in tradition. Ogaden For example, what differentiation is cultural?; not contributed anything.
These are all the problems of this stage are mixed with nuclear war, before starting a nuclear war and these problems are up and tomorrow is going to present all at once. See for example the Vietnamese. One of its major developments and that before the end of the war we have raised, is the unification of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, returning to its origin, in the sense that they have the same origin and customs, languages \u200b\u200band relationships very common, as above. But that does not unify arrogantly, but to a federation through the unification of the three countries, with their strength and ability and based on the example of workers 'state, among them, the Chinese workers' state. That is an organization to advance. The direction of the Soviet Union has not said anything about all this, and the Vietnamese are much more worried than they are.
These are problems that must be lived today. When you publish a book on what is said in the USSR there is a tendency to want to return to the first seven years of the Soviet Union, it is because these issues are already raised concerns in general. Because this design does not emerge from a concrete analysis of the current stage, but a vision of the future world and, above all, the past to see the future.
There is no programmatic conclusions on all these issues. The Soviet Union decided the issue of nationality because centralized economy and government leadership, so educated the people about it is the foundation of all other movements of life. That the movement of the mind, thought, is a reflection and an expression of life movement, but at the same time, the mind is before life, because it can not predict what's coming tomorrow, thinking instead yes.
The Soviet leadership does not express this. Was the program that showed he can not continue living in the past. What gives the past?: A form of production, relationships that involve the absence of science, art and culture, and above all, the absence of Soviet democracy. If the Soviet Union made democracy the first seven years, does not prevent nuclear war, but it eliminates 60% of deaths there will be, because it helps the American people to tie their hands there's murderers . This works out as the essential basis of the problems of democracy, which have the right to speak. No, the problem of democracy is the obligation of thinking to develop the economy, culture and society. That is the democracy of the Greek original.
The essential basis the workers' state is its political authority, and therefore must have the theoretical and programmatic and develop it steadily. Not renewed because the theoretical basis and program is not renewed, extended, otherwise it is false. J.
POSADAS
August 4, 1977
http://www.quatrieme-internationale-posadiste.org/archive/espagnol/otrostxtdocs/losProblemasDeLaCaultura.html
social networking
0 comments:
Post a Comment