********************  POSTING RULES & NOTES  ********************
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*****************************************************************

Maduro is the "counter-revolution." Today's "choice is between several 
imperialisms — the U.S. and Guaidó, Russian and China with Maduro."

What shit!! But thanks for reminding us, Lou, what an ignoramus Gonzalez is.

-----Original Message-----
From: Marxism [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Louis 
Proyect via Marxism
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2019 7:33 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Marxism] What Happened to the Struggle for Socialism in Latin America?

********************  POSTING RULES & NOTES  ********************
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*****************************************************************

Mike Gonzalez interview:

"Chávez was anti-capitalist in his discourse, but never had an 
anti-capitalist strategy. Expropriations were purchases and often in 
reaction to the disinvestment or flight of a specific capitalist."

https://truthout.org/articles/what-happened-to-latin-americas-socialism/

As if a strategy could have guaranteed success. Gonzalez, like his 
ideological partner Sam Farber, never consider the question of the 
relationship of class forces. If Venezuela had carried out the 
wide-scale nationalizations of the Cuban revolution, it would have faced 
sanctions, subversion and even military intervention that make the last 
5 years look small-scale by comparison. Cuba was able to survive because 
it had the backing of the USSR.

The simple truth is that Venezuela, Nicaragua, Vietnam, and any other 
peripheral society cannot survive on their own in a world where 
capitalist property relations prevail

The only way a "socialist strategy" might have worked in Latin America 
was if if it had been continent-wide in the same way Simon Bolivar had 
led. That would have required a different kind of leadership in Brazil 
than the Workers Party that was spineless.

It is easy for people like Gonzalez, Farber, et al to review what 
happened in Venezuela or Cuba like they were reviewing a movie. Let them 
go out and make their own. It ain't easy. I say that as someone who was 
deeply involved with Nicaraguan solidarity in the 80s and saw a country 
incapable of resolving contradictions of the kind that Marx referred to 
in the 18th Brumaire:

"Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; 
they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under 
circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past. The 
tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains 
of the living."
_________________________________________________________
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/rfidler%40ncf.ca


_________________________________________________________
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to