Re: Re: Putin's enthronement
At 16:26 08/05/00 -0700, you wrote: At 12:09 AM 5/9/00 +0100, you wrote: The left has fallen into the trap of thinking that it should not criticise this Russian regime too much, for fear of appearing to ally with its own ruling class. I don't know about that. I, for one, likened Putin's rise to power to a covert coup d'etat. I think that the main reason for sparse attention to Putin is that not many on pen-l know much about Russia. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://liberalarts.lmu.edu/~jdevine Perhaps we can learn. Russia could be very interesting, a laboratory on the interface between capitalism and socialism. Where the high tide of capitalism reaches may define the chances of recouping anything for socialism. There are millions in Russia who value aspects of socialism. The battle is not yet over, for example land is not yet privatised. Many organs are still in state control. But I suspect that for subscribers seriously to study this question requires them to be open to concepts of market socialism. The market clearly cannot be abolished in Russia. But how can it be regulated and how could the overall result once again be "socialism"? There are similar issues in China. Kasyanov. It is easy enough to do a bit of homework. He was tipped as PM when Putin made him acting PM on Sunday. He was a former employee of the old Soviet central planning committee who stayed in government. He was head of the finance ministry's foreign debt department from 1993. So he will know everything about laundering IMF loans. How powerful will the oligarchs be, such as Boris Berezovsky and Roman Abramovich? They have just got 70% of Russia's aluminium under a consortium. Alexander Volshin is a Berezovsky ally and chief of the Kremlin staff. His re-appointment will be a clear signal of Putin's class base. Berezovsky was present yesterday at the wreath laying ceremony at Kursk, with Putin. The draft plan for the organisation of the economy, composed by German Gref has been criticised by Zyuganov as a very dangerous document that will deepen Russia (economically) liberal reforms. Gref is a member of the liberal group of reformers from St Petersburg, Putin's base. The west is sympathising with people like him versus what the west calls "crony capitalism" - of the oligarchs. Putin is likely to balance these two forces. Meanwhile he has powers that have been described as those of the French President and the US president combined. He has just confirmed reports that he is preparing legislation to bring Chechnya under direct federal rule. As befitting a man inaugurated in the Czar's throne room, he is ensuring that Russia will once again be a prison of the nations. The west does business with him with a feather. Chris Burford London
Re: Re: Re: Putin's enthronement
Chris B. writes: Perhaps we can learn. Russia could be very interesting, a laboratory on the interface between capitalism and socialism. Where the high tide of capitalism reaches may define the chances of recouping anything for socialism. There are millions in Russia who value aspects of socialism. The battle is not yet over, for example land is not yet privatised. Many organs are still in state control. I'm afraid that the possibilities for socialism's revival in Russia look pretty dim at this point. The kind of "socialism" that prevailed Before the Fall was extremely top-down in organization, totally bureaucratic. This meant that workers were demobilized and thus extremely cynical, where all mobilization was channelled to serve the official purposes of the State and the Party. The persistence of this working-class weakness was one important reason, of course, that when the old Party-State and its system fell, the gangsters (now called the "oligarchy") were able to take over the new system and its state. (The victorious US and its IMF encouraged this result, by imposing a Carthaginian Peace in the name of "shock therapy" and "normalization," backed by ideological shills like the current US Treasury Secretary, Lawrence Summers.) Without self-mobilization by a spirited and politically-conscious working class, history has shown that state ownership of the means of production doesn't mean much for the creation of democratic socialism. After all, ancient Egypt had state ownership of the the land and most other means of production. State ownership is necessary, but not sufficient. The workers must also "own" the state. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://liberalarts.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Putin's enthronement
At 00:28 08/03/00 +, Louis Proyect wrote: Is it also not time that the marxist internet left starts to turn on Putin? Where is there any leadership on this? Chris Burford London You won't hear much about Putin on this mailing list but I have been battling supporters of Putin on the alt.politics.socialism.trotsky newsgroup for a month. Basically I argue that while it was correct to support the Serbs in their war with NATO, Chechnya is a totally different story. I am surprised at the lack of discussion on this list of what Putin is and what he is doing. Yesterday he was installed with everything but a crown, with all the other signifiers any postmodernist servant of the oligarch's media companies could have wished, in the throne room of the Czars. Yeltsin, present out of respect for the gilding of the establishement, Gorbachev to give continuity, over 1500 people to applaud his solitary slight figure, undwarfed by anyone taller, as he walked past the assembled ranks of applauders. Afterwards a thirty gun salute and a guard of honour led by a Russian priest. Today a visit to a mass grave of war dead from the great patiotic war. All this symbolism has meaning. It is that foremost is the "integrity of Russia", "the destiny of the fatherland" and the crushing of the right to self determination of the Chechen people. More ominously this crushing has been the excuse for the oligarchs to impose on Russia the former head of the successor to the KGB, in Yeltsin's words to "take care of Russia". In practice what? No nation which oppresses another can itself be free but unfortunately the Communists, who are attracted by the smack of authoritarian central government have done a deal with Putin in return for the post of Speaker of the Duma. He knocked out potential rivals and flattered the Communists with coming second in the election for President. Underneath the words about democracy, freedom, and peaceful transition there is the dictatorship of one body of people over another: "In the performance of my duty I will be guided by the interests of the state." Putin declared - a statement which I suggest stood out by comparison with the platitudes. It is true that the western politicians have been lulled into collusion with him and his oligarchs with suggestions that he will now move into a political phase of dialogue with the Chechens. But meanwhile what is most important of all is the political economy he will strengthen. For the western news media, the briefings have stressed his "liberal agenda". His likely prime minister Mikhail Kasyanov is significantly described as a financial specialist and "skilled debt negotiator" - ideal for striking a deal with western finance capital. Andrei Illanov is described as a "radical liberal economist". German Gref is described as having been charged with "crafting the economy". This crafting is likely to combine the worst of all possible worlds- freedom for finance capital and the oligarchs, authoritarian discipline for the working people. By comparison with what it did over East Timor and Indonesia, it is clear that the West, for its own imperialist motives, has colluded in this repressive political settlement. The left has fallen into the trap of thinking that it should not criticise this Russian regime too much, for fear of appearing to ally with its own ruling class. The reverse is in fact the case. Chris Burford London
Re: Putin's enthronement
At 12:09 AM 5/9/00 +0100, you wrote: The left has fallen into the trap of thinking that it should not criticise this Russian regime too much, for fear of appearing to ally with its own ruling class. I don't know about that. I, for one, likened Putin's rise to power to a covert coup d'etat. I think that the main reason for sparse attention to Putin is that not many on pen-l know much about Russia. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://liberalarts.lmu.edu/~jdevine
