Log in

View Full Version : The WSWS Takes the Side of Reaction



Paul Pott
3rd October 2013, 07:07
So I'm getting fed up with the World Socialist Web Site.

This is the shameful article I'm speaking of:
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/10/02/vene-o02.html (http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/10/02/vene-o02.html)

I'm a regular reader of the WSWS, despite not being a supporter of the organization that it is an organ of (ICFI) or of Trotskyism in general. Most of the articles and analyses that don't stem from the cult of Trotsky provide a much needed radical view on current events compared to the ocean of bourgeois obscurity that dominates the internet on most issues, and I think all leftists find this to be a fresh breath of air, Trot or otherwise.

A major exception to this is the WSWS's recent coverage on Venezuela. Just last week I wrote about this in my Revleft "blog", in which I pointed out that the author of that article is taking the side of the old comprador elite and US imperialism by parroting their narratives on Venezuela, and by ignoring the campaign against the living standards of the Venezuelan people waged by the part of capital aligned against the government in hopes of bringing the masses to support the right wing opposition. This is essentially austerity through artificial scarcity, a form of what is euphemized in ruling circles in Washington as "soft power". Yesterday, the WSWS continued its coverage along the same lines.

That this exact thing happened in, for example, Chile, in a more extreme form is apparently irrelevant to the left wing rightists that write for the WSWS, or, at least, it warrants no mention.

Most glaring of all, it seems to be lost on the author that inflation and scarcity are down quite a bit from their election season high (and I don't think I have to explain why the timing can't be stressed enough). The article in question seems to be copying point for point from a recent New York Times article, which claims just as the WSWS does that Venezuela's economic problems are 'getting worse' which is in fact not true. WSWS also cites a poll in which a tiny percentage of those polled see signs of sabotage in the economy. Since almost all other polls show a majority of Venezuelans continue to see the Maduro presidency in a positive light, one could easily get the impression that WSWS's cited source is suspect, especially since severe economic issues do exist in Venezuela, an environment in which presidents tend not to be popular (ask Francois Hollande). Unless Venezuelans both generally support Maduro and call him a liar, it would seem this poll does not represent popular opinion. At any rate, as the opposition controls most media as well as the economy, its poison is bound to infect popular belief to some extent.

This disgusting article parrots the claim that Maduro's expulsion of US diplomats is simply a distraction rather than a response to a security concern. Such tropes are to be expected from major media, but a "socialist" website should know better.

Of course, the WSWS justifies its gloss negligence by stating that the Venezuelan ruling class faces a crisis of capitalism and defiance on the part of the working class. That the Maduro government fears a movement of the working class independent from its reformist agenda as much as it fears the rightist opposition is not in question. The issue is whether the "left" should support imperialism and its propaganda in order to spite the national bourgeoisie, protecting another faction of capital which is much more hostile to the working class in the process. On that, the WSWS is failing history.

Fin. Please chime in.

Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist
3rd October 2013, 07:28
I really liked your blog post on this, I wish I could chime in more but I am going to get some much needed sleep in a minute. All I will say for now is I think that this is out of the ICFI's tendency to consider themselves "left" of mainstream trotskyism while at the same time trying to portray themselves as a more politically tenable orthodox alternative to the Spartacus League and since mainstream Trotskyism has largely gathered behind Chavez as a "revolutionary force" (the IMT claim that Venezuelan revolution is socialist in character but is at risk of bureaucratic degeneration, I know that the CWI also claims that there is a revolution in Venezuela but I don't know what character they assigned to it.) So since they see themselves within the context of the Trotskyist left, they feel the necessity to reject what those groups are saying. Now to a certain degree this is a healthy instinct, since it seems that Trotskyism's approach to Chavez is the sort of tailing that characterizes the right wing opportunism of these groups and the knee jerk reaction to their politics represents a good way to establish a line of demarcation between the revolutionary left and the left wing of capital. However the problem with the ICFI's critique of this position is that it relies on capitalist critiques of Chavez and falsified data and does not in any way recognize the working class gains made under his regime, and assumes that whatever opposing it is an improvement. It seems that they are engaging what is appropriately called "left"-wing oppertunism, an oppertunism which hides itself in a leftist veal but which is actually little more than an excuse to justify opposing something for one's own ideological or political benefit from a right wing rather than Marxist perspective. Such an attitude is generally similar to those who oppose national liberation on the basis that all nations ought to be abolished, well ok then but not all nations are equal or the same.

Glitchcraft
3rd October 2013, 21:32
I don't know why anyone considers the SEP anything other than a cult lead by a scam artist. A top down hierarchy led by an anti-union, bourgeois owner of a printing company. Being under the absolute direction of David North is the opposite of Democratic Centralism. Being Anti-Union is the opposite of defending or empowering the working class. Using the capitalist courts to attack other socialist groups is unforgivable. They deserve absolutely no support. Of coarse they have shitty politics, good politics might attract people that would see the glaring contradictions of the SEP. Someone who had the ability to wiki Gerry Healy and read for 10 minutes might actually join.

I'm not endorsing Trotsky here but:
The CWI, IMT and SEP horribly distort Trotskys works to support their own corruption or capitulation.
If David North is a Trot then Bob Avakian is the reincarnation of Mao and Obama really is a Communist.