I'm not sure that I would agree that a constituent assembly is a "structure." David. It seems to me it is an action: constituents assemble at the behest of initiatives undertaken by broad popular participation. That action may eventually congeal into a structure. Whether or not such a structure is deemed 'democratic' would be essentially contested.
Is a plebiscite -- conceived, administered, financed and manipulated by elites -- "democratic" as long as the majority of the population is "eligible" to register a choice between two offered candidates? On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 5:58 PM, David Shemano <[email protected]>wrote: > Carroll Cox writes: > > "Anti-capitalist movements at least in principle can/could overthrow > capitalist regimes, leading to democratically organized constituent > assemblies." > > There are two statements here. The first is that anti-capitalist movement > can overthrow capitalist regimes (i.e., anti-capitalist revolutions can > occur). The second statement is that such revolutions can lead to > democratic political structures. > > I am curious about the second statement. In your view (the generic you), > what is the evidence for the second statement? This is not intended as a > contentious question. The fact that I may disagree with you about whether > any specific post-revolutionary political structure is democratic, or an > improvement, is irrelevant to the question. The questions is, from your > perspective, what is the evidence that supports the statement that > anti-capitalist revolutions can lead to democratic political structures? > > David Shemano > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > -- Cheers, Tom Walker (Sandwichman)
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
