On 12/8/09, Xoli Dlabantu <[email protected]> wrote: > 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] . >
-- Sent from my mobile device mtkunene -- 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] .
