Socialism in one country

[Dimentio]

History has shown that different modes of production could exist on different places in the world for some time, if they are sustained by equal access to technology, innovation and a social superstructure. For example, the Roman slave system co-existed with Parthian and Persian feudalism for hundreds of years.

I think the term "world revolution" is highly hypothetical, since "revolutionary situations" (characterised by social instability) tend to disintegrate the web of communications necessary to sustained the globalised form of capitalism. During the latest period of global disintegration (1914-1945), most countries moved towards autarchy. It is highly plausible that even if an event which could be called a "world revolution" would occur, it would be defeated in some regions and successful in other regions (even if it is a concerted attempt). Therefore follows, that it is logical to assume that large regions, perhaps even entire continents, would see the previous mode of production prevail.

I believe that the term "socialism in one country" is also highly outdated. Moreover, it ignores the fact that countries are of varying size and natural wealth. A few countries are so big that they could constitute self-sustaining economies. Most countries are too small and too disorganised to be able to transcend the relations of capitalism.

The only two countries which I think could form socialism within their borders, relatively independent from the world capitalist system, are Canada and Australia. The reason why is not only abundant resources, but also a small and comparatively well-educated population. It would be easy to sustain such a population during a transition time.

Other candidates are Russia, Brazil, the United States, The European Union and perhaps even China. But all these areas have a comparatively larger population, and in the case of Russia and Brazil either an eroding infrastructure or a badly constructed infrastructure.

The point is: Both a global internationalist revolution and a national revolution are moot as options. What progressive organisations which want to build the foundations for a transition to a just society must do is to organise on a regional rather than a national basis.

[ls]

Don't you think that can lead to "pan-whateverist" chauvinism too, if you say that "all of the indian subcontinent must be liberated" then you're excluding loads of other people as well, there are a million different variations from "liberating the whole balkans" to "eastern european" even through to "western europe must be liberated first" shit, let's just be realistic and say we'll see what happens, not "this must be liberated first". Movements can emerge based only on conditions in each country, that is a given and you can't cut and paste the conditions from one part of western europe, or india, or northern asia, or eastern asia onto another part of the same region, it will not work.

[Dave B]

I think there is a pro so called ‘first world’ centric view on the development of communist consciousness and where communism ‘should’ develop first,.


Despite the fact that a bit of so called ‘first world chauvinism’ can and does creep into this it ‘should’ according to Marxist theory really be a technical analysis of where an established working class, advanced industrial production, infrastructure and technology so happens to have developed first etc.



Rather than any kind of spurious criticism of what ‘kind of people’ live where and when as some kind of comment on their alleged ‘innate qualities’.



Even that can be a bit strange sometimes as the British ‘stole’ essential steel making and textile technology from ‘India’, at the end of a barrel of a gun admittedly.

It would appear that globally anti capitalists consciousness, albeit perhaps confused, is stronger in areas where capitalism has only just begun to take hold.




It may be that in these areas that the ideology of capitalism and all its evils has not had time to be fully incorporated and indoctrinated into the culture or whatever. Hence the greater tendency to reject it.


There may even be in a rejection of the value systems of capitalism in the so called ‘third world’ a bit of a cultural hangover from the idea of primitive communism and collectivism of so called feudalism.

A bit of he kind of ‘Mir’ stuff as in the following and that the so called superstructure or ideology takes maybe a few generations to work itself out of and into the system.



http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1894/01/russia.htm (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1894/01/russia.htm)



I think Karl and Fred were a bit baffled and exasperated as to why the ‘English’ workers, long suffering under capitalism, seemed to be the least radical of all the European working class.

Having said that even the English seemed capable of slotting into the communist idea 200 years ago eg the Shakers.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/10/15.htm (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/10/15.htm)


Although if you want an ‘embarrassing’ and egregious racist comment to this effect from the man himself there is one from volume III




The possibility is here presented for definite economic development taking place, depending, of course, upon favourable circumstances, inborn racial characteristics, etc.


http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1894-c3/ch47.htm (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1894-c3/ch47.htm)
.

[Dimentio]

Don't you think that can lead to "pan-whateverist" chauvinism too, if you say that "all of the indian subcontinent must be liberated" then you're excluding loads of other people as well, there are a million different variations from "liberating the whole balkans" to "eastern european" even through to "western europe must be liberated first" shit, let's just be realistic and say we'll see what happens, not "this must be liberated first". Movements can emerge based only on conditions in each country, that is a given and you can't cut and paste the conditions from one part of western europe, or india, or northern asia, or eastern asia onto another part of the same region, it will not work.

Not if the ultimate aim is to create a new global society. But it could take centuries.