Doug Henwood wrote: > In some ways, that's too easy: the "economic" questions are dismissed as > trivial in the face of "politics." But what is "politics" in this sense? > What would an actual regime do in the face of imperialist hostility? How do > you get people housed, clothed, educated, and fed? I don't see the remotest relevance to this. There is NO possibility of any more attempts at 'socialism in one country', so the whole discussion is not just irrelevant, it's merely indicative on a 'one-country' mindset, and that is exactly what I object to. > Capitalism may be brutal in Chile, but it "works" in the sense that it can > reproduce itself, and that it's convinced most people that there's no > alternative. Until it stops working in both senses, and until socialists > have answers to just these sorts of questions, capitalism will continue in > Chile and everywhere else. Socialism has virtually no credibility anywhere > right now. > Well, right, Doug. Who in their senses could disagree? But so what? Mark
