New Bolivian anti-poverty campaign

[Janus]

The Bolivian government has just unveiled a new plan to eradicate poverty and create more jobs in this country. Around $7 billion will be invested in the hopes that 100,000 jobs will be created.

Bolivia unveils anti-poverty plan (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5090850.stm)

What do you think of this?

[Ander]

I think Morales is planning surprises every month :) This sounds very progressive, but we'll have to see how it goes. Who knows, this could be the first model socialist country in the world.

[bayano]

MAS and evo's camp took a majority of the votes for the constituent assembly for a new constitution. this will be exciting to watch, and it will be another young constitution to set against the other progressive/radical contenders like cuba, venezuela, south africa, mozambique and else where.

[EusebioScrib]

Psssh. Typical bourgeois crap. I don't get why "lefties" get hooked into this crap. Bolivia, DPRK, Venezuela, Cuba, Iran. It's all the same shit, just different assholes!

[RebeldePorLaPAZ]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2006, 05:17 AM
Psssh. Typical bourgeois crap. I don't get why "lefties" get hooked into this crap. Bolivia, DPRK, Venezuela, Cuba, Iran. It's all the same shit, just different assholes!
How are Cuba, Venezuela and Bolivia assholes?

Lets look at Cuba, tell me whats wrong with them, what kind of socialism do you belive in if you don't belive in the Cuban Revolution?


--Paz

[Cheung Mo]

Juche and Islamism are anti-socialist ideologies and must be crushed by those who struggle for equality and freedom.

[bolshevik butcher]

Yeh I mean eradicicating poverty, improinvg health services, education for all these things are just an irrelevancy. Venezuela even has examples of workers democracy but socialists don't believe in anything like that. Stop being so ridiculously ultraleftist. I woulndn't say that Cuba was a functioning socialsit society but the Cuban working class has obviously gained from the revolution. Venezuela is on a path towards socialism i believe as for Bolivia it will be interesting to see how things develop but this is certainly a porgressive measure.

[Karl Marx's Camel]

Bolivia, DPRK, Venezuela, Cuba, Iran. It's all the same shit, just different assholes!

Well, at least the governments in Bolivia and Venezuela are democratically elected. And so far they have done a great deal for their own countries.

[rebelworker]

How one could imply the south African Giverment is progressive boggles the mind.

As for the others, what type of socialism are we talking about. Do I think these govts ahve made improvements, yes, but I would have the same critique of them that I would of any other social domocratic or democratic socialist party. The process is essentially run to a large degree from the top down and dose not deal with the complete elimination of capitalism(which has show histroically very resiliant to "leftist" goverments) or the day to day inequality of boss-worker or beurocrat/politicain-mass power imbalance.

The state will be manouvered in a welfare state direction and the ruling class(either the outright capitalists or the new managerial/Party member class, similar to what emerged in the soviet union, will slowly regain controll. The real problem with the faith in the state route to socialism is that it essentially dissarms the working class. Labour and community movements can be "incorperated" into the new state structure and people are no longer capable of effectivly pushing our agenda.

This was why Stalin took controll so easily, by that time the bolshevik party had sucesssfully subordinated all bodies and organisations of proletarian struggle (factory councils, left newspapers, revolutionary organisations).

What will happen in Cuba when castro dies? Probably a top down power shift to his brother. This will leave people alienated from political controll( a central tenant to real communism) and demobalized. If the US choses this time to try and push for change, the working class will be ill equiped to fight back in the chaos that will ensue.

Just a few things to think about...

[EusebioScrib]

Lets look at Cuba, tell me whats wrong with them, what kind of socialism do you belive in if you don't belive in the Cuban Revolution?

The Cuban Revolution was essentially a national liberation revolution, which are always bourgeois in nature. Castro only picked up a "socialist" policy to get in good with the USSR because for whatever reasons he found them to be better imperialists than the US.

Cuba practicies a quasi-state-capitalism, just like Venezuela, Bolivia, Iran, etc.


Yeh I mean eradicicating poverty, improinvg health services, education for all these things are just an irrelevancy. Venezuela even has examples of workers democracy but socialists don't believe in anything like that.

Workers' democracy? What does that mean anyway? Workers can vote! YAY! Well, we have that in the US, Europe, Australia and what not, so who cares? These programs are all very similar to what most bourgeois nations do. Socialism comes from below, not from above.


Stop being so ridiculously ultraleftist.

Why? Does it make you mad when I show the true side of your "socialism."

[MiniOswald]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2006, 05:58 PM
Castro only picked up a "socialist" policy to get in good with the USSR because for whatever reasons he found them to be better imperialists than the US.

Not sure you're right about Castro here. Dont worry, I wont go off on a Castro loving tangent, im just as critical as most of the members here.

Im not sure that his primary intention was always power, I mean he gave up a comfortable life to fight that revolution, if he'd only wanted power and would have chosen any idealogy to get it, why not just throw in his lot with Batista and climb the ladder there?

Im pretty sure when he started out his intentions were good and to the left, in general, there are certain issues on which he was clearly wrong at the time, homosexuality and what not. But I think he did want to help the cuban people then.

As for now, well hes found himself to be very comfortable in his position and likes to spend more time whining about Bush than the average new revlefter and thats a damn lot, rather than worrying about the people.

[bayano]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2006, 12:37 PM
How one could imply the south African Giverment is progressive boggles the mind.
ummm, no one implied the south african government was progressive. what i said is that it has a progressive constitution, and it does have some unique progressive elements that cant be found in any other constitutions in the world. i said i was interested in comparing the new bolivian constitution whenever its finished to other constitutions that are or have progressive elements. but we know that not all (and probably most) countries dont live by their constitutions

[EusebioScrib]

Not sure you're right about Castro here.

I can't find the link. But back in my Stalinist days I read this article which criticised Cuba as not being MList. While generally speaking it was utter crap, the beginning was very insightful. It discussed how Castro just wanted to overthrow a dictator, not set up socialism. Initially the US sponsored him and he was pro-USA and said he was "anti-soviet." Then suddently he changed his views and became a communist. Hmmm...

Some of Stalinists here may know which article I'm talking about...

[Delta]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2006, 09:58 AM

The Cuban Revolution was essentially a national liberation revolution, which are always bourgeois in nature. Castro only picked up a "socialist" policy to get in good with the USSR because for whatever reasons he found them to be better imperialists than the US
This isn't what I've heard. Perhaps the sources I learned from were incorrect, but I thought that Cuba took to the Soviets because it was the only power on earth that could protect the Cuban Revolution from intervention from the Americans.

[Karl Marx's Camel]

Castro only picked up a "socialist" policy to get in good with the USSR because for whatever reasons he found them to be better imperialists than the US.

Perhaps you are right. IMHO I think you might be right.

It is my understanding, however, that the "socialist" policy, in the first year or two, was not implemented because the regime was/is socialist or spesifically because the regime wanted to make up to the USSR, but because "socialist"-like policies was the only thing that could get Cuba back on its feet. The ideological straitjacket and so on was, I think, gradually implemented, and the dogma increased gradually. That progressive society with new and healthy ideas, I think, did not last many years.

We should remember though, that even though they resembled "socialist" policies, and even though this policy benefitted the workers and the peasants, they were not the ones in control of the state.

We should also remember that even though things were quite good in the 70's and people at the time were quite equal, people started to notice an political and economical elite growing out of the state. IMHO the difference still exist.

Fidel is watching everything on his giant wide screen TV, claiming that the Cuban people do not need more TV's (bullshit) so he give 30,000 television sets to Bolivia, yet a lot of Cubans have to watch television on Russian black and white tellies, some of them barely working, or not working properly at all.

[bayano]

so, aside from everyone's mistrust or adoration for cuba, what do they think about the constituent assembly process in bolivia and the nationalization of the energy interests? evo has made good so far on both of his most commonly discussed 'promises', which had been the main demands of the social movements when he was in the streets with them