Mzukuru, "Many philosophers have interpreted the world.The point however is how to change it"(Karl Marx) The main problem I seem to have with the document is over elaboration on the material than on the ideal. The character over the formulation. The material over the dialectic, and it doesn't assist anyone with linking the present and the future. It inhabits on the causes of the present status quo and not on the remedy of the effects. Okay, lets assume that everyone is aware of the CST developmental path as is expected of any member of the party as a working class vanguard. So what...What next...How ? Are we talking about state socialism or a pluralistic socialist path...
In the South African context, no rural development strategy ( not agricultural development strategy) will ever be relevant without: 1) creating an appropriate rural-urban balance, 2) Exansion of small-scale, labour intensive industries in the the rural areas(that is why it is dangerous to limit rural development to agriculture) 3) Elimination of factor-price distortions from the IDZs' 4) Choosing of appropriate labour-intensive technologies of production in the rural areas, 5) Modifying the direct linkage between education and employment, and 6) Reducing population growth through reductions in absolute poverty and inequality, particularly women, along with the expanded provision of family planning and rural health services. SACP documents recently are unfortunately characterised by very broad analyses that lack specifics and leave little room for delegation and mandate. They are more of guidelines than actual socialist transitional programmes. Again if i may ask, what's socialist about this document.ewhat do we hope to achieve with it. what does it unlock creatively. Coradely regards reciprocated Comrade Xoli Please read my document on NIDS from Communist University or google my name (Xoli Dlabantu) On 12/7/09, Sikhumbuzo Thomo <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Xoli > > > > It is always necessary to look at agricultural development in a *broad, > comprehensive way*. It is not sufficient to deal with the agro-technical > aspects only or for the party to restrict itself to the ‘prime movers’ > going. Agricultural development will not take-off automatically if we only > redistribute land, much more is need. Peasants and farm workers are not > automatically better off either when agricultural products get unhindered > access to markets abroad. In order to promote agricultural and rural > development in a sustainable, equitable and human centered way, policies > have to be formulated and implemented concurrently at all levels form local > to national even globally, while taking cognizance of a context which is > much wider than agriculture alone. > > > > A good analytical instrument is a pre-requisite for taking well-informed > decisions and the discussion document shows the model. Now no where in the > world where a developing country like ours where capitalism was forced onto > a backward feudal system (let alone the land grab by the colonialist) in a > distorted manner has agricultural production possessed its own dynamic > transformation and growth! It is essentially dependent on and constrained by > external factors. > > > > The incomplete subordination of non-capitalist forms of production by > capitalism is manifested in our economic dualism. There is a co-existence of > mutually interrelated segments of the labour force (a) a majority that is > engaged in dynamic activities propelled by the capitalist imperative for > accumulation and (b) a majority which is trapped in non-capitalist forms of > production and engaged in low productivity economic pursuits that are static > from the point of accumulation. > > > > All said the majority of the labour force in this sector is engaged in the > so-called informal sector of the economy, primarily of the survival nature, > in subsistence agriculture! In general there is a high level of unemployment > and under-employment in this sector, an enclaved development so to speak > which the document goes at length decomposing this mode for the benefit of > the political redress which should by no means be separated form the land > question as well as the economic within the agrarian resolve. > > > > ST > > On 12/7/09, Xoli Dlabantu <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Comrades, >> What is communist with the rural development document? I for one do >> not see it as a means to a socialist end. Frankly speaking, it lacks >> the dialectics component, though it might be fair in outlining the >> materilialist part. We should remember that socialist transformation >> of a capitalist society is a pre-determined phenomenon and as such, we >> cannot be fooled. We've yet to see a true transitional rural >> development strategy, not chalatancy. >> >> Regards, >> Xoli >> >> On 12/6/09, Dominic Tweedie <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > >> > The SACP Rural Development Discussion Document (click here for a PDF >> > download from the SACP web site), released in advance of the SACP >> > Special >> > National Congress of December 2009, succeeds quite well, in the first >> four >> > of its five parts, to make a sympathetic and factual narrative that >> depicts >> > the plight of the South African rural areas. >> > >> > As such, it can be contrasted and compared with the remainder of the >> > Communist University Generic Course on “Development, Rural and Urban”, >> > of >> > which it now becomes, for the time being, the final part. >> > >> > It is in the fifth and final three pages (1198 words), called “Our >> response >> > to rural development”, that this discussion document falls apart in >> > spectacular fashion. >> > >> > What a communist document should do above all is to concretise, meaning >> that >> > it should bring all of the empirical, abstract facts and circumstances >> into >> > the ordered, organic form of a unity-and-struggle-of-opposites, that >> shows >> > clearly the internal dynamic of the system under examination. >> > >> > Only then can communists, as such, speak of communist intervention in a >> > system. >> > >> > Instead, this document ponders whether there may be “gaps” that need to >> be >> > filled, and then it proceeds to offer a long, eclectic, bullet-pointed >> > shopping list of things that might be done. >> > >> > Communists should not be trying to work this way (i.e. filling gaps). >> > >> > The concluding paragraph of the document includes a disclaimer: “Due to >> the >> > enormity of the task not all areas regarding all the issues raised in >> this >> > paper could be exhaustively dealt with.” >> > >> > This is an admission by the author that his or her conception of Rural >> > Development is disorderly and not synthetic or concrete. This is not >> > good >> > enough as preparation for a policy-forming debate. >> > >> > The following paragraph, full of conceptual errors, is a good indication >> of >> > where the comrade is going wrong: >> > >> > “As a starting point and a short-term strategy towards linking >> > industrial >> > strategy, the economic policy and agrarian and land reform programme >> > referred to above, there are some things that can be done to improve >> > land >> > and agrarian reform approaches and strategies.” >> > >> > A strategy is not a starting point; a strategy works towards a goal, or >> > end-point. >> > >> > Strategy is not short-term, but long-term; tactics are short-term means >> to >> > the strategic, longer-term end. >> > >> > “Strategies”, in any particular case, are not plural, but singular; >> > there >> > might be many possible tactical roads to take, but the strategic goal >> should >> > be one. >> > >> > These are unfortunately quite common errors within our South African >> > discourse. >> > >> > As for Rural Development in particular, South Africa seems to lack >> scholars >> > who are prepared to study experience elsewhere. The logo above >> > represents >> > one of thousands of Rural Development agencies and institutions around >> the >> > world that are apparent on the Internet. It is from the Government of >> > Karnataka, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department. Karnataka is >> > a >> > state in India. >> > >> > As overseas, so also within the country, there is a large amount of >> > experience, which is not apparent in the discussion document. >> > >> > The document, without supporting argument, is finally concluded with an >> > admirable slogan: Build People’s Land Committees, Build People’s Power! >> > >> > Yet, after nearly 16 years since the democratic breakthrough of 1994, >> > and >> > after 20 years of restored communist legality in South Africa, our sole >> > discussion document on Rural Development has no mention of any actual >> > People’s Land Committees, or of any organic intellectuals leading such >> > committees. >> > >> > Although a moment’s thought recalls that the Food and Agriculture >> Workers’ >> > Union (FAWU), which contains many Party members, is involved at the >> > rural >> > grass roots, and that the SACP itself with its 96,000 members includes >> many >> > in rural areas, yet there is no account of our practical political >> > experience in this document. >> > >> > Click on this link: >> > >> > SACP Rural Development Discussion Document, 2009(4915 words) >> > >> > >> > -- >> > 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] . >> > >> >> -- >> 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] . >> > > -- > 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] . > -- 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] .
