Belarus

[Karl Marx's Camel]

I am interested in the opinions of others in this forum, in particular the leninists, considering Belarus's economy is mostly state owned, and since leninists have a tendency of swallowing every economy that is not in private hands into the category of "socialist" (and in some cases countries like Vietnam and China have been hailed as 'socialist nations').

So what you think of Belarus?

[Spirit of Spartacus]

and since leninists have a tendency of swallowing every economy that is not in private hands into the category of "socialist"

That's just not true.


So what you think of Belarus?

I've yet to study the situation in Belarus, but from what I've read/heard of it so far, I think positively of it.

[BobKKKindle$]

My opinion is somewhat mixed but I do contend that Belarus is not socialist or democratic. President Alexander Lukashenko does not allow extensive opposition to the regime in order to preserve his power and in the past has rigged elections in order to try and establish a degree of legitimacy for his government. The key reason that the citizens of Belarus still choose to support (or rather, not actively confront and challenge) the prevailing order is because the state-run economy does provide a minimum degree of financial and material security in contrast to the macroeconomic instability that many other eastern european countries such as Poland have endured following the implementation of reforms.

However, although state ownership and management is of course not equivalent to Socialism, based on several macro-economic indicators the situation in Belarus is favorable in comparison to many other countries of the Warsaw pact - unemployment, for example, is only 1.5%. But it could be argued that these conditions are the result of favorable trading terms with Russia which have allowed Belarus access to a large export market and enable the country to important important raw materials and commodities such as Natural gas below normal market price. One could suggest that this is part of an attempt on the part of Russia to re-establish a sphere of influence in eastern Europe.

[Spirit of Spartacus]

President Alexander Lukashenko does not allow extensive opposition to the regime in order to preserve his power

In other words, clamps down on the liberals and other lackeys of Yankee imperialism, who would like to open the Belorussian economy to the imperialist world system.


and in the past has rigged elections in order to try and establish a degree of legitimacy for his government.

As if bourgeois democracy were the perfect way to ascertain the wishes of the masses.

And, as if the allegations of rigging were substantiated in any meaningful way.


The key reason that the citizens of Belarus still choose to support (or rather, not actively confront and challenge) the prevailing order is because the state-run economy does provide a minimum degree of financial and material security in contrast to the macroeconomic instability that many other eastern european countries such as Poland have endured following the implementation of reforms.

In other words, working people see their class interests as being best served by the current economic policy of the Belorussian regime.

Therefore, we should be supporting President Lukashenko, and criticize him only when his policies deviate from the class interests of the workers, and we shouldn't be giving a hoot for the unsubstantiated allegations of "rigging" elections.

(And mind you, these are allegations which come from an imperialist media which remains suspiciously silent about the electoral fraud in the US itself)



However, although state ownership and management is of course not equivalent to Socialism, based on several macro-economic indicators the situation in Belarus is favorable in comparison to many other countries of the Warsaw pact - unemployment, for example, is only 1.5%. But it could be argued that these conditions are the result of favorable trading terms with Russia which have allowed Belarus access to a large export market and enable the country to important important raw materials and commodities such as Natural gas below normal market price. One could suggest that this is part of an attempt on the part of Russia to re-establish a sphere of influence in eastern Europe.

In other words, the Lukashenko regime made the best and most pragmatic choices which serve the economic interests of the working masses of Belarus.

[sexyguy]

NWGO,

Just so we can be clear in answering your question, can you tell us what you understand by ’socialist’ and would you like to tell us which states or movements around the planet you support and think are progressive, and why.

[Organic Revolution]

Originally posted by Spirit of [email protected] 27, 2007 10:34 am

President Alexander Lukashenko does not allow extensive opposition to the regime in order to preserve his power

In other words, clamps down on the liberals and other lackeys of Yankee imperialism, who would like to open the Belorussian economy to the imperialist world system.


and in the past has rigged elections in order to try and establish a degree of legitimacy for his government.

As if bourgeois democracy were the perfect way to ascertain the wishes of the masses.

And, as if the allegations of rigging were substantiated in any meaningful way.


The key reason that the citizens of Belarus still choose to support (or rather, not actively confront and challenge) the prevailing order is because the state-run economy does provide a minimum degree of financial and material security in contrast to the macroeconomic instability that many other eastern european countries such as Poland have endured following the implementation of reforms.

In other words, working people see their class interests as being best served by the current economic policy of the Belorussian regime.

Therefore, we should be supporting President Lukashenko, and criticize him only when his policies deviate from the class interests of the workers, and we shouldn't be giving a hoot for the unsubstantiated allegations of "rigging" elections.

(And mind you, these are allegations which come from an imperialist media which remains suspiciously silent about the electoral fraud in the US itself)



However, although state ownership and management is of course not equivalent to Socialism, based on several macro-economic indicators the situation in Belarus is favorable in comparison to many other countries of the Warsaw pact - unemployment, for example, is only 1.5%. But it could be argued that these conditions are the result of favorable trading terms with Russia which have allowed Belarus access to a large export market and enable the country to important important raw materials and commodities such as Natural gas below normal market price. One could suggest that this is part of an attempt on the part of Russia to re-establish a sphere of influence in eastern Europe.

In other words, the Lukashenko regime made the best and most pragmatic choices which serve the economic interests of the working masses of Belarus.
Bassically, your insane. It seems like any repressive, state capitalist economy (China, Vietnam, Cuba, USSR) were wonderful examples of free peoples, in your opinion.

Why dont you get your head out of your ass and figure out that people don't need repression, or leaders oppressing populations, for the good of the people.

IMO, the economy presents an interesting thing to me as farms are collectivized, and the economy is relatively stable. The one problem I see with this is that they are depending on Yankee imperialist oil from Russia, therefore they are bowing down to a capitalist nation.

[The Author]

I agree with Spirit of Spartacus' assessment of Belarus. Compared to the other former Soviet Republics, at least the republic of Belarus takes better care of its citizens and recognizes more of the Soviet past for what it was than dismissing it as "totalitarianism." Also good is that there is a united Communist Party and that the Social-Democratic, Gorbachevite faction has been liquidated.

The problem with Belarus is that in order to fulfill the needs of its citizens, it needs to fill the shoes of the Soviet Union. Before, when you had the Belorussian S.S.R., it was one republic in a fraternal socialist union that benefited through trade and cooperation and helped to the advancement of socialism in each of the 15 republics. Now you have Belarus on its own, bullied by capitalist Russia, NATO to the West, and forced to trade with faraway countries like Cuba, Venezuela, and the D.P.R.K. Also a problem, is the slogan behind the Belarusian government: "The State for the People!" This is not a correct slogan. Communists advocate a state for the working class, a proletarian dictatorship, not a "People's State." This is what was advocated starting with the Khrushchevites onwards. Belarus is doing the right things in maintaining the welfare of the working class for the most part, but there could be more room for improvement, and I am critical of what this republic will follow on its political path- the road to communism, or the road to "democracy."

As for the "opposition," these are the anti-communist, fascist nationalist filth that supported the Nazis during the war. If they come to power, you'll see a repeat of what's happening in the Baltics, what's happening in Ukraine and Georgia, and the other Soviet republics. Nationalism oppressing the working classes of the East for the benefit of the imperialists of the West. And this is something we don't want.

[Karl Marx's Camel]

NWGO,

Just so we can be clear in answering your question, can you tell us what you understand by ’socialist’ and would you like to tell us which states or movements around the planet you support and think are progressive, and why.

In a nutshell, dictatorship of the proletariat not just in name of, but by the proletariat, ie executed and steered by the masses.

[Coggeh]

The one problem I see with this is that they are depending on Yankee imperialist oil from Russia, therefore they are bowing down to a capitalist nation.

Well the country needs its oil , thats a fact like , another reason chavez has alot of sway in politics is oil . Its out of their hands what they can do so don't bother blaming them for it .

[sexyguy]

NWGO,

Just so we can be clear in answering your question, can you tell us what you understand by ’socialist’ and would you like to tell us which states or movements around the planet you support and think are progressive, and why.


In a nutshell, dictatorship of the proletariat not just in name of, but by the proletariat, ie executed and steered by the masses.

So you don’t actually support any state or movement in the world, only the one in your head. Is that not so? "In a nutshell"