Re: RE: Market socialism as a form of utopianism

2002-07-11 Thread Carl Remick

From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Utopianism will always play a role in the socialist movement, because 
people
need to have some idea of what they're fighting _for_, not just what 
they're
fighting against.

Absolutely.  And if the devil can quote scripture to suit his purpose, I too 
as a devotely irreligious person can cite the bible's memorable comment on 
this topic:  Where there is no vision, the people perish. (Proverbs 29:18) 
  Utopian visions can catalyze thought and action.  They are not to be 
sneered at.

Carl

_
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com




Re: Re: RE: Market socialism as a form of utopianism

2002-07-11 Thread Carl Remick

From: Carl Remick [EMAIL PROTECTED]

I too as a devotely irreligious person can cite the bible ...

Er, make that devoutly. Normally I don't follow up on spelling errors, but 
since Louis Proyect seems to be setting a new, higher standard on this 
score, I figured I should be punctilious in this instance :)

Carl


_
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx




Re: Re: RE: Market socialism as a form of utopianism

2002-07-11 Thread Louis Proyect

Absolutely.  And if the devil can quote scripture to suit his purpose, I too 
as a devotely irreligious person can cite the bible's memorable comment on 
this topic:  Where there is no vision, the people perish. (Proverbs 29:18) 
  Utopian visions can catalyze thought and action.  They are not to be 
sneered at.

Carl

This doesn't quite address my concerns. When William Morris wrote something
like this, he was using his literary imagination:

But on the Monday in question the Committee of Public Safety, on the one
hand afraid of general unorganised pillage, and on the other emboldened by
the wavering conduct of the authorities, sent a deputation provided with
carts and all necessary gear to clear out two or three big provision stores
in the centre of town, leaving papers with the shop managers promising to
pay the price of them: and also in the part of the town where they were
strongest they took possession of several bakers' shops and set men at work
in them for the benefit of the people; - all of which was done with little
or no disturbance, the police assisting in keeping order at the sack of the
stores, as they would have done at a big fire. 

With Hahnel-Albert's Looking Forward, you are not dealing with imaginary
political landscapes, you are dealing with blueprints for a future society:

One tool for eliminating workplace hierarchy is workers' councils of all
relevant workers. Small councils deal with immediate problems confronting
small work groups. Larger councils make decisions for work teams
encompassing a network of work groups, for example, in a wing or on a
floor. Still larger councils make decisions for a division, a complex of
divisions, or a plant, and federations of councils make decisions for an
industry. Every council and federation principally concerns itself with
affairs at its own level while contributing to decisions at higher levels
in proportion to how they are affected. Some decisions require a majority
of all members. Others, where the change has more drastic implications, may
require two-thirds. Nothing requires that every decision must await every
council's or worker's input. Personnel decisions are made only by people
directly concerned. Decisions about breaks that affect a whole floor would
be made by all involved on that floor. Plant decisions would be made by
plant councils.

In the first instance, with Morris, you are dealing with a genre of
literature, namely the utopian novel. There are other examples, from More's
Utopian to Samuel Butler's Erewhon. In the case of Hahnel-Albert, you
are confronted with *utopianism*, a form of political advocacy that seeks
ideal solutions to problems that had historical origins. In all of the
various writings of Hahnel and Albert, you find almost no understanding of
why the Soviet economy failed. Without such an understanding, nostrums like
Looking Forward are useless. If the entire Bolshevik Party had voted in
favor of Looking Forward in 1921, that would have had zero impact on the
subsequent evolution of Soviet society. It imploded because of civil war
and the failure of socialist revolutions in the west.

Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org




Re: Re: Re: RE: Market socialism as a form of utopianism

2002-07-11 Thread Carl Remick

From: Louis Proyect [EMAIL PROTECTED]

In the first instance, with Morris, you are dealing with a genre of
literature, namely the utopian novel. ... In the case of Hahnel-Albert, you
are confronted with *utopianism*, a form of political advocacy that seeks
ideal solutions to problems that had historical origins.

Ralph Waldo Emerson much agreed with you.  In criticizing the utopianism of 
Charles Fourier, he said in part:  Our feeling was, that Fourier had 
skipped no fact but one, namely, Life. He treats man as a plastic thing, 
something that may be put up or down, ripened or retarded, moulded, 
polished, made into solid, or fluid, or gas, at the will of the leader; or, 
perhaps, as a vegetable, from which, though now a poor crab, a very good 
peach can by manure and exposure be in time produced, but skips the faculty 
of life, which spawns and scorns system and system-makers, which eludes all 
conditions, which makes or supplants a thousand phalanxes and New-Harmonies 
with each pulsation.

Carl


_
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com




Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Market socialism as a form of utopianism

2002-07-11 Thread Gar Lipow

I don't think it is ahistorical to deal with the limits of the 
possible. Most utopian socialists today are activists. And in fact, I 
doubt that in the immediate issues, what we are fighting for today 
Albert and Hahel, Justin, and Michael Perlman would find much to 
disagree about. But if you want to win m ore than immediate reform, 
knowing where you want to go is part of knowing what to do.

Besides, regardless on what you blame the failures on , actually 
existing socialisms have been pretty miserable places to live - not 
only in material  goods but in terms of freedom. Workers are not stupid. 
If you ever want workers to support socialism in the future, you are 
going to have to give examples of how it can work better than it has in 
the past.

Carl Remick wrote:

 From: Louis Proyect [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 In the first instance, with Morris, you are dealing with a genre of
 literature, namely the utopian novel. ... In the case of 
 Hahnel-Albert, you
 are confronted with *utopianism*, a form of political advocacy that seeks
 ideal solutions to problems that had historical origins.
 
 
 Ralph Waldo Emerson much agreed with you.  In criticizing the utopianism 
 of Charles Fourier, he said in part:  Our feeling was, that Fourier had 
 skipped no fact but one, namely, Life. He treats man as a plastic thing, 
 something that may be put up or down, ripened or retarded, moulded, 
 polished, made into solid, or fluid, or gas, at the will of the leader; 
 or, perhaps, as a vegetable, from which, though now a poor crab, a very 
 good peach can by manure and exposure be in time produced, but skips the 
 faculty of life, which spawns and scorns system and system-makers, which 
 eludes all conditions, which makes or supplants a thousand phalanxes and 
 New-Harmonies with each pulsation.
 
 Carl
 
 
 _
 Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
 
 




Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Market socialism as a form of utopianism

2002-07-11 Thread Louis Proyect

Gar wrote:
I don't think it is ahistorical to deal with the limits of the 
possible. Most utopian socialists today are activists. 

I am sorry, Gar. This is not a question of activist credibility. This is
not why I object to Looking Forward. It is about how socialism can be
achieved. I believe that it miseducates people to write elaborate models.
Marxists focus on strategies for revolution, not how future
post-revolutionary societies will function.

Besides, regardless on what you blame the failures on , actually 
existing socialisms have been pretty miserable places to live - not 
only in material  goods but in terms of freedom. Workers are not stupid. 
If you ever want workers to support socialism in the future, you are 
going to have to give examples of how it can work better than it has in 
the past.

I disagree. There will never be a revolution in a country like the USA
until the material conditions have worsened to an extent not experienced in
our lifetime. When that time arrives--as I am sure it will--people will
care less about what took place in the USSR. We are looking at corporate
malfeasance and declining stock markets, a combination that even Bush says
might lead to questioning of the capitalist system. We are also faced with
the prospects of a cataclysmic war with Iraq. In face of objective
conditions that are only likely to worsen in the next ten years or so, it
would be a diversion from our tasks as socialists to concoct castles in the
air. People will not want assurances how the system of the future will
work, they will want leadership to get the boot of capital off their necks.
Hate to sound apocalyptic, but that's the way I see it.

Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org




Re: Re: Market socialism as a form of utopianism

2002-07-11 Thread Gar Lipow


 
 I am sorry, Gar. This is not a question of activist credibility. This is
 not why I object to Looking Forward. It is about how socialism can be
 achieved. I believe that it miseducates people to write elaborate models.
 Marxists focus on strategies for revolution, not how future
 post-revolutionary societies will function.


If it is the only thing maybe. But as part of a broader program of 
activism, how does it miseducate?


 
 
Besides, regardless on what you blame the failures on , actually 
existing socialisms have been pretty miserable places to live - not 
only in material  goods but in terms of freedom. Workers are not stupid. 
If you ever want workers to support socialism in the future, you are 
going to have to give examples of how it can work better than it has in 
the past.

 
 I disagree. There will never be a revolution in a country like the USA
 until the material conditions have worsened to an extent not experienced in
 our lifetime. When that time arrives--as I am sure it will--people will
 care less about what took place in the USSR. We are looking at corporate
 malfeasance and declining stock markets, a combination that even Bush says
 might lead to questioning of the capitalist system. We are also faced with
 the prospects of a cataclysmic war with Iraq. In face of objective
 conditions that are only likely to worsen in the next ten years or so, it
 would be a diversion from our tasks as socialists to concoct castles in the
 air. People will not want assurances how the system of the future will
 work, they will want leadership to get the boot of capital off their necks.
 Hate to sound apocalyptic, but that's the way I see it.
 



The worse the better eh? Both from personal experience, and from my 
reading of history people are mostly likely to engage in either radical 
or revolutionary activity when they have hope - when they believe things 
can be better. I think you can find more examples of revolution during 
times of hope than during times of despair...






Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Market socialism as a form of utopianism

2002-07-11 Thread Carl Remick

From: Carl Remick [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Ralph Waldo Emerson, ... criticizing the utopianism of Charles Fourier, 
said in part ...

Michael Perelman asked offlist about the source of that quote.  It's from 
Emerson's essay Fourierism and the Socialists -- text at 
http://www.xmission.com/~seldom74/emerson/fourier.html

Carl



_
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com




Re: Re: Re: Market socialism as a form of utopianism

2002-07-11 Thread Louis Proyect

Gar:
If it is the only thing maybe. But as part of a broader program of 
activism, how does it miseducate?

It tries to makes a connection between our ideas and what happened in
history. Against the managerialism of Lenin, Albert-Hahnel propose
participatory economics. Russia did not end up with a bureaucratic
monstrosity because of things in Lenin's brain, but because the civil war
of 1918-1920 led to death of most of the people who actually made the
revolution. Their place was taken by pie-cards and time-servers. This was
not a function of ideology, but history.

The worse the better eh? Both from personal experience, and from my 
reading of history people are mostly likely to engage in either radical 
or revolutionary activity when they have hope - when they believe things 
can be better. 

Well, our experience must be different. During the most explosive growth of
the revolutionary movement in this country, from the Debs era, to the
building of the CIO in the 1930s, to the 1960s antiwar, black and student
movement, there was very little model building. I expect this will be the
case during the next radicalization.

Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org




Re: Re: Re: Market socialism as a form of utopianism

2002-07-11 Thread joanna bujes

At 11:54 AM 07/11/2002 -0700, Gar wrote:
The worse the better eh? Both from personal experience, and from my 
reading of history people are mostly likely to engage in either radical or 
revolutionary activity when they have hope - when they believe things can 
be better. I think you can find more examples of revolution during times 
of hope than during times of despair...

Yeah. Even that old weirdo, Eric Hoffer, noticed this.

Joanna