when i first read cronin's article i was excited for the debate that would unfold on this forum.
however i am very disappointed with the ANCYL response. it makes for an interesting read when accusations are chucked at an article that however wrong its premise is, as being reactionary when the accusations bring nothing to the table and are in fact a reaction to the initiator of debate. in fact Jeremy's article is highly miss- targeted in that he focuses on the debate in the media which is highly bias and shortened and not on the political debate that is happening or should be happening between all our organizations. Jeremy in my view make a few errors in his analysis. some of which were answered by YL. However the question of nationalization cannot simply be reduced to that of economics and money. yes the freedom charter refers to the wealth being distributed but the separation of the mines out of political context has lead him to his false analysis. we must view the mines as a step towards the larger goal, as a marxist he should of recognized the political significance of nationalization as a stepping stone to further nationalization weather to the limit of the freedom charter or onwards to complete socialization of all aspects of the economy. He speaks of the arguments for taking the mines for no compensation by referring to the cost of road and rail maintenance etc. yet then reduces his arguments against nationalization without this continued level of economic analysis. nationalization of the mines would not necessarily be limited to "success in profit, failure in losses" type scenario's, government control could lead to price fixing for national industry which could involve the processing of these minerals as the YL points out ad stimulate growth in that given industry, better government foresight could mean better economic planning especially in terms of infrastructure, work to home transportation and better utilization of waste (piping hot cooling water from smelters could be used for heating in winter in cold areas for example). finally it can be viewed as a move to a more democratic way of life. Most of your life is spent working, normally for a business which you have no say or control over, one poor decision or one cost saving technique could leave you out of a job and the company bust which effects the local economy, government and the tax payer. if a company is state owned there could be much better dialog between worker and manager, there is the added interest of government to keep the plant open as it keeps jobs (and voters) and benefits the economy on a larger scale. so government cant just look at numbers like capitalism does when it comes down to the important decision, it has to take the PEOPLE that it effects into consideration and that is what a communist should care about. briefly on ANC-YL, i am in full support of there stance on mines and in the need to respond to Cronin's article, however i am very disappointed with this constant reduction to race, yes there is economic separation that is visible along racial lines but that does not excuse an attack on Jeremy's colour as a means to resolving debate. the ANC-YL is not the IFP, we do not reduce debates to that of what should have ended when the apartheid government did. it shows a clear lack of political insight to make such comments and is highly counter productive. i get very disappointed when arguments are brought along these lines of race or 'tribe' and i particularly dislike the use of our leaders who opposed such reductions with all there might used in the same article. good luck for all the comrades still in study mode. Brendan Lee --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You are subscribed. This footer can help you. Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this message. You can visit the group WEB SITE at http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, pages, files and membership. To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this address (repeat): [email protected] . -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
