On 10/26/06, raghu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's not true in all eras. A lot of OECD leftism has been "third
> worldist." Years ago, many leftists in OECD countries were extremely
Even today much of OECD leftism is "third worldist" in the sense of
highlighting oppression and encouraging or applauding revolution in
the third world. The funny thing though is (as Yoshie points out)
people often prescribe revolution for the thrid world, but reform in
the West. Look at how many posts on PEN-L you see about the democratic
party, labor unions and minimum wage legislation. There is a very good
reason for this of course, revolutions are hard, painful and often
bloody. On the other hand when Yoshie tries to discuss for example
women's rights issue in Iran, she gets dismissive comments like the
whole Iranian regime is sexist at its core, so it is futile to talk
about reforming women's rights in the current setup.
Perhaps we should not be so glib in advocating revolution in Iran
either and pay at least some attention to the possibility of reform in
an imperfect environment.
The West continues to prove Marx and other early socialist writers
wrong: no socialism in the West. The French are the only
revolutionary people in the West; they got close once; they know how
to pull an urban revolution; and they still don't care for capitalism
very much; but socialism is not on the political agenda even in
France. Our resident conservative David Shemano might wonder why some
of us still swear by Marxism and socialism, given demonstrated lack of
their application in our own countries.
The French might surprise the world yet, but it is possible that,
beyond a certain level, proletarianization and economic development
makes socialism less rather than more practical than before, contrary
to what Marxism had traditionally suggested before the rise of
anti-colonial and anti-neo-colonial revolutions.
So, as you say, third-worldism in a broad sense -- beyond the shift
from romanticization of the Third World to the breakdown of
anti-imperialist consensus -- remains alive on the Western Left.
On the other hand, as I look at the world today, I think that Antonio
Gramsci and Samir Amin are very useful theoretical inspirations if not
guides.
Gramsci because social struggle in each nation today is more a war of
position than a war of maneuver, even where struggle became
revolutionary and led to a very traditional (and perhaps retro)
people's war in the countryside, as in Nepal. The CPN (Maoist)
decided to join forces with the seven reformist parliamentary parties
with which it had fought in part, overthrow monarchy together, and put
a constituent assembly on the political agenda, perhaps inspired by
the Venezuelan experience. The continental turn to the Left to
various degrees in Latin America is best understood as a war of
position fought on the national and regional levels at the same time.
Amin because the rise of the Bolivarian Revolution and Washington's
Iraq War and Iran Campaign together raised a concrete possibility of
transition to a new multi-polar world order, a new world order after
American hegemony. The Iraq War has weakened the military foundation
of American hegemony; the Iraq War and high oil prices strengthened
Tehran's bargaining position, which the populist faction (unlike the
reformist faction) in Iran is willing to use to assert itself as a
regional power; Iran's rise, coupled with North Korea's nuclear
pursuit, has driven a wedge between the USA on one hand and Russia and
China, whose fortunes have also risen due to their recent economic
development, on the other hand, for the two sides have different
interests in the Middle East and East Asia; and the Bolivarian
Revolution has presented itself as a concrete alternative to the
developing world and has used diplomacy to actively construct an
anti-imperialist bloc (even as the old mainstay of the Non-Aligned
Movement, India, has increasingly turned to Washington and Tel Aviv).
We are potentially at a crossroads in history.
--
Yoshie
<http://montages.blogspot.com/>
<http://mrzine.org>
<http://monthlyreview.org/>
