Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Analysis and exchange oh Haiti/Socialism vs Capitalism

Expand Messages
  • les evenchick
    I am interested in hearing response to this discussion. Les To: Africa-Politics@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Africa-Politics] FW: Aristid installed by U.S.
    Message 1 of 3 , Mar 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      I am interested in hearing response to this
      discussion.

      Les


      To: Africa-Politics@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [Africa-Politics] FW: Aristid
      installed by U.S. imperialism
      Art Clemons wrote:

      > Lil Joe: It is interesting how Americans, when
      they want to support a
      > person in power, intimate that their Boy has
      been elected; when they
      > oppose the one in power they denounce the
      elections as "rigged". But,
      > as I will post tomorrow, the issue is not
      whether or not Aristd was
      > "elected" but what class power he represents.
      the Haitian State, however,
      > and therefore the Aristid government
      representsb the Haitian
      > capitalist and transnational corporations. This
      is the issue; not
      > whether or not he was elected.

      Art Clemons: Using your logic, then almost nobody
      who is elected can
      represent folks but only represents capitalists
      and transnational
      corporations.

      Lil Joe: In one sense, that of immediacy in the
      present that is correct.
      "Representative democracy" in class society is
      sham democracy. The only
      genuine democracy is direct, participatory
      democracy, which is impossible in
      class society.

      The concept of representative democracy in
      bourgeois society was first,
      systematically developed by Thomas Hobbes in The
      Leviathan: Hobbes argued
      that in the "state of nature" human beings are in
      a constant state of deadly
      conflict: "bellum omnium contra omens" (war of
      all against all). That
      therefore to avoid mutual annihilation the
      individuals yield their natural
      right to kill in pursuit of self interests, and
      passes this authority to the
      State. Thus arose the concept of the Social
      Contract.

      Locke further developed this, although on a
      different socio-epistemological
      basis in that he posited that human nature is not
      "natural", but learned by
      socialization, upbringing and education. John
      Locke, and later Jeremy
      Bentham developed the idea of enlightened
      self-interests in which those
      interests were subsumed in representative
      democracy. From this evolved the
      ideological illusion that members of parliament
      represented
      politico-geographical "constituents". Rousseau,
      who posited that individuals
      in parliament representing the interests of
      constituents are collectively
      transcendent of those individuals subsumed in the
      General Will, further
      developed this concept.

      Representing the interests of the nobility,
      personified in the king Edmond
      Burke and Frederick Hegel critiqued this
      democratic "tyranny of the
      majority". They argued that the nobility, based
      on inherited wealth were
      separated from the economic competition of
      bourgeois society qua "bellum
      omnium contra omens". Therefore it was argued
      that nobles e.g. the House of
      Lords and the King were economically positioned
      to be politically above the
      fray and above corruption.

      Hamilton et al made the same arguments in the
      American Federalist Papers
      about the necessity for property qualifications
      to become members of
      Congress, and even to vote. In the U.S., the myth
      is that Judges, and
      Justices appointed for life: not having to
      compete for judicial office are
      above the fray of party politics.

      Marx and Engels argued that the State presented,
      as community of interests
      of citizens is an illusory community in that in
      class society class
      interests are mutually exclusive and the
      economically most powerful is the
      politically dominant class. Political parties are
      based on class power, and
      represent class interests rather than
      politico-geographical
      "constituencies". Governments therefore represent
      class interests, which are
      written into Constitutions and legislation.

      I am not say that whomsoever is elected "only
      represents capitalists and
      transnational corporations", however. No! I am
      saying that the
      working-class must self-organize politically, and
      contend for State Power.
      Just as the Conservative Party Members of
      Parliament represent the Class
      interests of Capitalists so the Labour Party
      Members of Parliament represent
      the Working-Class.

      Be that as it may what we learn from observation
      of the trade unioned based
      Social-Democratic, Socialist, Communist and
      Labour Party Parliamentary
      Majority, and therefore governments in Germany,
      France, Italy and Britain,
      respectively over the past decade is that where
      the productive forces remain
      the property of the capitalist class thses
      Social-Democratic, Socialist,
      Communist and Labour Party dominated Parliaments
      and governments inevitably
      represent the interests of Capital, not Labour.

      The only way the Proletariat can win the battle
      of democracy, and not
      represent capitalists and transnational
      corporations is that the workers
      government expropriate capital, that is transfer
      the productive forces and
      financial institutions from private property of
      capitalists to public
      property of the worker's state. Insomuch as the
      economically dominate class
      dominates state politics, the working-class
      becomes the economically
      dominate class but by expropriating the
      productive forces from capitalist
      ownership, thus workers self-management of
      production and distribution.


      Art Clemons: In fact, one of Haiti's problems is
      precisely that Haitians
      have neither jobs nor resources sufficient to
      provide for the people, and
      corporations in general don't even bother hiring
      Haitians or locating plants
      in Haiti.

      Lil Joe: If you re-read my post you will notice
      that I argue that the
      Haitian workers revolution can be successful only
      in context of a World
      Proletarian Revolution. I indicated that the
      French and Haitian workers are
      one class. The expropriation of the productive
      forces by the Haitian
      proletariat, placing production and distribution
      of the Haitian workers
      themselves supported by Socialist, Communist and
      Labour Party governments in
      Europe is the only way that Haitian workers in a
      Haitian workers government,
      managing production and distribution in the
      interests of Haitian
      proletarians can and in fact will legislate and
      implement full employment.


      Art Clemons: Haiti under present terms can't
      support all of its
      people regardless of the system of government
      without other countries
      either offering aid or employment.

      Lil Joe: I have already dealt with this. However,
      as an aside, you have
      illusions as to the motivations of Capital,
      transnational or domestic, and
      the Governments of Capital domination if you
      think that international
      capitalists and their governments will "offer aid
      or employment" to Haitian
      workers out of some altruistic sentiment. The
      workers internationally are
      the only source that will support Haitian
      workers.

      > Art: 2nd, comparing Cuba to Haiti is not a
      reasonable comparison,
      > Haiti never has been a wealthy country...
      >
      > Lil Joe: The 1% Haitian bourgeoisie IS wealthy!
      The issue is whether
      > or not, like the Cuban communists, the Haitian
      workers and peasants
      > ought to expropriate capitalist and foreign
      investment capital.

      Art Clemons: It would not do Haitians any good to
      claim what wealth still in
      Haiti.

      Lil Joe: Need I say more?

      Clemons has just exposed himself and proved that
      there is no basis for
      cross-class "race unity". Clemons represents the
      political thinking of the
      Black bourgeoisie in Haiti in that he is opposed
      to Haitian workers
      expropriating bourgeois wealth and placing it at
      the disposal of the Haitian
      proletariat by proletarian expropriation.

      The bourgeoisie mealy-mouths its class interests
      in rhetoric of "national
      interests", "racial interests" and so on.

      Clemons asserts in classic bourgeois
      nationalistic rhetoric: "it would not
      do 'Haitians' any good" to expropriate capital.
      Conversely, this intimates
      that the Haitian bourgeoisie of 1% of the Haitian
      population in possession
      of 50% of national wealth along with dismal
      poverty of the Haitian
      proletariat acerbated by 70% unemployment in an
      economy wherein the average
      wage of labour is $1.00 per workday is okay!

      Clemons' point of view is the class perspective
      of the bourgeoisie.
      The politico-ideologists of transnational
      corporations and the Haitian
      capitalists exhort Haitian workers that they
      should not expropriate capital
      because it wouldn't "do any good" to do so!

      The communistic proletariat argues to the
      contrary that worker expropriation
      of the productive forces, and the initial
      redistribution of bourgeois wealth
      is good for the working-class. What good it will
      do is that the workers
      themselves would owning the productive forces as
      proletarian social property
      will end capitalist commodity production by
      wage-labor, and subsequently end
      the extremes of the wealth and poverty engendered
      by capitalist commodity
      production and wage-labour.


      Art Clemons: Cuba is large enough to feed itself,
      what it can't do is offer
      an improved way of life without foreigners buying
      produce, goods or services
      from Cubans.

      Lil Joe: Clemons has erected and is knocking down
      a straw man. I have never
      presented Cuban as a model of proletarian
      communism.

      Rather, I have consistently argued to the
      contrary that it is not possible
      to have Socialism in One Country -- still less in
      an agrarian based island
      economy.

      The working-class internationally, especially in
      the highly industrially
      developed and technologically advanced countries
      must by winning the battle
      of democracy legislating the transfer of the
      productive forces from
      capitalist class property to proletarian public
      property end the capitalist
      mode of production and appropriation: the
      overthrow of the market economy.

      Ending capitalist commodity production and
      wage-labour in the most
      industrially developed and technologically
      advanced countries, by worker's
      power internationally economic relations between
      regions will no longer be
      based on market mechanisms. On the basis of
      industrial social production
      and mechanized agriculture Proletarians in power
      will distribute technology
      and produce from each region according to its
      natural means of production
      and to each region according to its needs. With
      the abolition of the market,
      domestically and internationally, with the end of
      commodity production and
      bourgeois nation-states such bourgeois
      abstractions as "comparative
      advantage" and "terms of trade" will be no more.

      By Communism the species being of our common
      humanity dominates production
      and distribution with workers contributing to the
      labour process from each
      according to his/her ability and freely
      appropriates by each according to
      his/her needs and desires. This doesn't exist in
      Cuba and can't exist in
      Haiti separate and apart from the cosmopolitan
      proletariat expropriating the
      productive forces in the most industrialized
      countries. It is in this
      global context of proletarian international
      communism that relations between
      nations, and island nations will produce and
      distribute goods and services
      freely. Such anachronisms as "foreigners buying
      produce, goods or services
      from Cubans" or Haitians will become a thing of
      the Past.

      Capital-Globalization is already in the economic
      process making political
      geography impossible. Geographical distinctions
      are already becoming
      irrelevant in countries where the productive
      forces and advanced technology
      and mechanized capitalist agriculture is/or has
      overthrown microstates: e.g.
      the European Union which is compelling the United
      States to do the same --
      via: NAFTA and FTAA.

      A South American Union including Central America
      and the Caribbean Union is
      inevitable. That's right: Haiti, and Jamaica are
      American economies and not
      in Africa. Not Pan-Africanism based on colour but
      Pan-American communism is
      the destiny of the Caribbean economic union. The
      Caribbean island economies
      including Cuba and Haiti are part of the South
      American -Central
      American-Caribbean economic and political
      structure. In this regard the
      present worker uprising in Haiti is the same as,
      and part and parcel of the
      worker rebellion in Argentina.

      The capital is social production in conflict with
      the anarchy engendered by
      the capitalistic mode of appropriation.
      Proletarian class-consciousness is
      social consciousness engendered by social
      production in conflict with
      private [i.e. market] appropriation. Proletarian
      class-consciousness is
      individual self-awareness of social beings being
      fragmented by an
      historically limited economic mode of
      appropriation.

      Art Clemons: Most of what you term "bourgeoisie"
      has left the
      country already and the effect of said folk is
      minimal. It should also
      be noted that despite their income, there was not
      enough in the way of
      resources to support the people of Haiti.


      Lil Joe: This petty-bourgeois mentality is not
      what I have argued. What I
      have argued, daily and on many separate threads
      is the capitalistic mode of
      production and appropriation is global, a
      cosmopolitan mode of production
      and exchange and that therefore the cosmopolitan
      bourgeoisie can be, must be
      fought by the cosmopolitan proletariat.

      The fact that large sectors capitalists "has left
      the country already and
      the effect of said folk is minimal" only supports
      my argument that the
      Haitian proletariat has to take the productive
      forces along with workers in
      every country doing same.

      > Art: 3rd, are you truthfully claiming that a
      bunch of thugs
      > from Haiti's former army are a better form of
      government than
      > that offered by Aristide?
      >
      > Lil Joe: I never said that, nor have I ever
      advocated the political
      > cult of individual. What I wrote is that the
      Haitian workers
      > revolts is legitimate. Precisly because it is a
      mass revolt by
      > workers against the bourgeois state. I reject
      you - together with
      > CNN, Bush. NBC. &C. reverting to demogogy by
      denouncing Haitian
      > insurrectionists as "thugs". Do you also think
      that Bush, and the
      > CBC are also "thugs"?

      Art Clemons: The revolt in Haiti isn't a revolt
      of the people or of
      leftists. It's sad that you think so. Instead
      leadership is being provided
      by a group of what can only be termed right wing
      former army members, folks
      who had no hesitation exploiting other Haitians
      in the recent past. As for
      Bush being a thug if the brass knuckles fit, he
      can badly use them. I do
      wonder though why you want to blame the
      relatively powerless CBC for Bush
      when he has ignored said group since 2001.


      Lil Joe: This demagogic rhetoric about
      "right-wing"/"left-wing" is pure
      bullshit! I never referred to the "leaders of the
      revolt" as "leftists".
      Nor have I referred to the workers insurrection
      as a "revolt of the people".

      "The times of that superstition which attributed
      revolutions to the ill-will
      of a few agitators have long passed away.
      Everyone knows nowadays that
      wherever there is a revolutionary convulsion,
      there must be some social want
      in the background, which is prevented, by outworn
      institutions, from
      satisfying itself. The want may not vet be felt
      as strongly, as generally,
      as might ensure immediate success; but every
      attempt at forcible repression
      will only bring it forth stronger and stronger,
      until it bursts its
      fetters."
      http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1852/germany/ch01.htm

      Crap about the mass uprisings in Haiti being the
      result of a few instigators
      paid by Bush is unsubstantiated balderdash! One
      is reminded of how, in the
      1960s the Black Civil Rights Movement was said by
      Racists to have been the
      work of "outside" (i.e. Jewish Communist)
      agitators.

      Whomsoever claim to "lead" the worker
      insurrection is not relevant. The fact
      is that tens or hundreds of Haitian workers have
      risen in rebellion, are
      attacking the State, freeing prisoners and
      burning down police stations.

      Of course the bourgeois elements that are
      positioning themselves as
      "leaders" want to displace the present bourgeois
      government personnel. and
      wants to exploit Haitian workers. This can
      succeed, however, only if the
      Haitian workers follow your advice and leave the
      productive forces and
      financial institutions in possession of the
      Haitian bourgeoisie and
      transnational corporations. That follows from
      your premises, and your
      support of the existing bourgeois regime.

      What I have argued on the contrary is that the
      Haitian proletariat must
      break with the existing wannabe "leaders" of the
      "revolt", by being
      self-organized into their own worker
      organizations struggling to expropriate
      the productive forces. That will make
      exploitation impossible.

      As to the Congressional Black Caucus [CBC] I have
      not "blamed" them for
      anything. They are not "powerless", however. The
      CBC is the Democratic
      Party in Blackface! The Democratic Party is not
      "powerless".

      Every member of the House of Representatives
      [save one] is either a Democrat
      or Republican; every member of the U.S. Senate is
      either a Democrat or
      Republican; every recent President has been
      either a Democrat or Republican;
      every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and
      every officer in the U.S.
      military and State National Guard is a Democrat
      or a Republican; every
      member of the State bureaucracy is a Democrat or
      Republican; every federal
      judge and member of the Supreme Court is a
      Democrat or Republican; every
      Governor of every State in the Union is a
      Democrat or Republican; every
      member of the Lower and Upper Chamber of every
      State is a Democrat or
      Republican: the Democratic Party is every bit as
      powerful as the Republican
      Party. Every member of the CBC is a Democrat!

      I have not "blamed" the "CBC" for anything. I
      have attacked the so-called
      American "Left" because they hide behind the
      colour of Democrats that are
      Black politicians putting forth the Democratic
      Party position as a "Black"
      position! I pointed out that the Democratic Party
      has supported -- if not
      having initiated -- every aggression of U.S.
      imperialism. The CBC is the
      Democratic Party's Negro cadre by which Blacks
      and Leftists are brought on
      board in support of the Democratic Party's
      domestic and foreign policies.
      The CBC does not speak FOR Black people but are
      the voices through which the
      Democratic Party speaks TO Black people.


      Art Clemons: I suspect that people who have in
      the past stolen, killed and
      performed the actions of thugs are still thugs
      whether they're supposedly
      doing the work of the middle and upper classes or
      not.

      Lil Joe: I never referred to political operatives
      as "thugs". Rather, I
      point out that party-partisans are class
      partisans. I never referred to
      classes as "the middle and upper classes".
      Rather, I present classes by
      their relations of production. The Democrats
      representatives of U.S.
      imperialism in government has not only robbed and
      killed "in the past". They
      are doing so presently.

      Art Clemons: Finally, have you noted that the
      middle class left in Haiti
      seems to be the source of opposition to Aristide
      rather than the peasants
      you seem to favor as a source of protest?

      Lil Joe: I don't know what you mean by "middle
      class": it is the
      working-class that is in the streets fighting the
      bourgeois state: freeing
      workers from prisons as they move ahead to the
      capital. The American "Left",
      and the Black Left in particular are supporting
      the Aristid governments call
      for imperialist troops to halt the march of
      Haitian workers and suppress the
      rebellion.
    • mikelmn53
      ... into Iraq to liberate the Iraqis. Of course it was for self- interest and strategic gain. Similarly, I don t see anyone going to the rescue of Haitians
      Message 2 of 3 , Mar 1, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        --- Does anyone really think the 'Coalition of the Willing' went
        into Iraq to 'liberate' the Iraqis. Of course it was for self-
        interest and strategic gain. Similarly, I don't see anyone going to
        the rescue of Haitians without some carrot of gain for the mighty.
        Note that refugees were sent back while the Haitian leader's
        children were given sanctuary in the USA.

        -mikelmn

        In GreenLeft_discussion@yahoogroups.com, les evenchick
        <piratefish@y...> wrote:
        > I am interested in hearing response to this
        > discussion.
        >
        > Les
        >
        >
        > To: Africa-Politics@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: Re: [Africa-Politics] FW: Aristid
        > installed by U.S. imperialism
        > Art Clemons wrote:
        >
        > > Lil Joe: It is interesting how Americans, when
        > they want to support a
        > > person in power, intimate that their Boy has
        > been elected; when they
        > > oppose the one in power they denounce the
        > elections as "rigged". But,
        > > as I will post tomorrow, the issue is not
        > whether or not Aristd was
        > > "elected" but what class power he represents.
        > the Haitian State, however,
        > > and therefore the Aristid government
        > representsb the Haitian
        > > capitalist and transnational corporations. This
        > is the issue; not
        > > whether or not he was elected.
        >
        > Art Clemons: Using your logic, then almost nobody
        > who is elected can
        > represent folks but only represents capitalists
        > and transnational
        > corporations.
        >
        > Lil Joe: In one sense, that of immediacy in the
        > present that is correct.
        > "Representative democracy" in class society is
        > sham democracy. The only
        > genuine democracy is direct, participatory
        > democracy, which is impossible in
        > class society.
        >
        > The concept of representative democracy in
        > bourgeois society was first,
        > systematically developed by Thomas Hobbes in The
        > Leviathan: Hobbes argued
        > that in the "state of nature" human beings are in
        > a constant state of deadly
        > conflict: "bellum omnium contra omens" (war of
        > all against all). That
        > therefore to avoid mutual annihilation the
        > individuals yield their natural
        > right to kill in pursuit of self interests, and
        > passes this authority to the
        > State. Thus arose the concept of the Social
        > Contract.
        >
        > Locke further developed this, although on a
        > different socio-epistemological
        > basis in that he posited that human nature is not
        > "natural", but learned by
        > socialization, upbringing and education. John
        > Locke, and later Jeremy
        > Bentham developed the idea of enlightened
        > self-interests in which those
        > interests were subsumed in representative
        > democracy. From this evolved the
        > ideological illusion that members of parliament
        > represented
        > politico-geographical "constituents". Rousseau,
        > who posited that individuals
        > in parliament representing the interests of
        > constituents are collectively
        > transcendent of those individuals subsumed in the
        > General Will, further
        > developed this concept.
        >
        > Representing the interests of the nobility,
        > personified in the king Edmond
        > Burke and Frederick Hegel critiqued this
        > democratic "tyranny of the
        > majority". They argued that the nobility, based
        > on inherited wealth were
        > separated from the economic competition of
        > bourgeois society qua "bellum
        > omnium contra omens". Therefore it was argued
        > that nobles e.g. the House of
        > Lords and the King were economically positioned
        > to be politically above the
        > fray and above corruption.
        >
        > Hamilton et al made the same arguments in the
        > American Federalist Papers
        > about the necessity for property qualifications
        > to become members of
        > Congress, and even to vote. In the U.S., the myth
        > is that Judges, and
        > Justices appointed for life: not having to
        > compete for judicial office are
        > above the fray of party politics.
        >
        > Marx and Engels argued that the State presented,
        > as community of interests
        > of citizens is an illusory community in that in
        > class society class
        > interests are mutually exclusive and the
        > economically most powerful is the
        > politically dominant class. Political parties are
        > based on class power, and
        > represent class interests rather than
        > politico-geographical
        > "constituencies". Governments therefore represent
        > class interests, which are
        > written into Constitutions and legislation.
        >
        > I am not say that whomsoever is elected "only
        > represents capitalists and
        > transnational corporations", however. No! I am
        > saying that the
        > working-class must self-organize politically, and
        > contend for State Power.
        > Just as the Conservative Party Members of
        > Parliament represent the Class
        > interests of Capitalists so the Labour Party
        > Members of Parliament represent
        > the Working-Class.
        >
        > Be that as it may what we learn from observation
        > of the trade unioned based
        > Social-Democratic, Socialist, Communist and
        > Labour Party Parliamentary
        > Majority, and therefore governments in Germany,
        > France, Italy and Britain,
        > respectively over the past decade is that where
        > the productive forces remain
        > the property of the capitalist class thses
        > Social-Democratic, Socialist,
        > Communist and Labour Party dominated Parliaments
        > and governments inevitably
        > represent the interests of Capital, not Labour.
        >
        > The only way the Proletariat can win the battle
        > of democracy, and not
        > represent capitalists and transnational
        > corporations is that the workers
        > government expropriate capital, that is transfer
        > the productive forces and
        > financial institutions from private property of
        > capitalists to public
        > property of the worker's state. Insomuch as the
        > economically dominate class
        > dominates state politics, the working-class
        > becomes the economically
        > dominate class but by expropriating the
        > productive forces from capitalist
        > ownership, thus workers self-management of
        > production and distribution.
        >
        >
        > Art Clemons: In fact, one of Haiti's problems is
        > precisely that Haitians
        > have neither jobs nor resources sufficient to
        > provide for the people, and
        > corporations in general don't even bother hiring
        > Haitians or locating plants
        > in Haiti.
        >
        > Lil Joe: If you re-read my post you will notice
        > that I argue that the
        > Haitian workers revolution can be successful only
        > in context of a World
        > Proletarian Revolution. I indicated that the
        > French and Haitian workers are
        > one class. The expropriation of the productive
        > forces by the Haitian
        > proletariat, placing production and distribution
        > of the Haitian workers
        > themselves supported by Socialist, Communist and
        > Labour Party governments in
        > Europe is the only way that Haitian workers in a
        > Haitian workers government,
        > managing production and distribution in the
        > interests of Haitian
        > proletarians can and in fact will legislate and
        > implement full employment.
        >
        >
        > Art Clemons: Haiti under present terms can't
        > support all of its
        > people regardless of the system of government
        > without other countries
        > either offering aid or employment.
        >
        > Lil Joe: I have already dealt with this. However,
        > as an aside, you have
        > illusions as to the motivations of Capital,
        > transnational or domestic, and
        > the Governments of Capital domination if you
        > think that international
        > capitalists and their governments will "offer aid
        > or employment" to Haitian
        > workers out of some altruistic sentiment. The
        > workers internationally are
        > the only source that will support Haitian
        > workers.
        >
        > > Art: 2nd, comparing Cuba to Haiti is not a
        > reasonable comparison,
        > > Haiti never has been a wealthy country...
        > >
        > > Lil Joe: The 1% Haitian bourgeoisie IS wealthy!
        > The issue is whether
        > > or not, like the Cuban communists, the Haitian
        > workers and peasants
        > > ought to expropriate capitalist and foreign
        > investment capital.
        >
        > Art Clemons: It would not do Haitians any good to
        > claim what wealth still in
        > Haiti.
        >
        > Lil Joe: Need I say more?
        >
        > Clemons has just exposed himself and proved that
        > there is no basis for
        > cross-class "race unity". Clemons represents the
        > political thinking of the
        > Black bourgeoisie in Haiti in that he is opposed
        > to Haitian workers
        > expropriating bourgeois wealth and placing it at
        > the disposal of the Haitian
        > proletariat by proletarian expropriation.
        >
        > The bourgeoisie mealy-mouths its class interests
        > in rhetoric of "national
        > interests", "racial interests" and so on.
        >
        > Clemons asserts in classic bourgeois
        > nationalistic rhetoric: "it would not
        > do 'Haitians' any good" to expropriate capital.
        > Conversely, this intimates
        > that the Haitian bourgeoisie of 1% of the Haitian
        > population in possession
        > of 50% of national wealth along with dismal
        > poverty of the Haitian
        > proletariat acerbated by 70% unemployment in an
        > economy wherein the average
        > wage of labour is $1.00 per workday is okay!
        >
        > Clemons' point of view is the class perspective
        > of the bourgeoisie.
        > The politico-ideologists of transnational
        > corporations and the Haitian
        > capitalists exhort Haitian workers that they
        > should not expropriate capital
        > because it wouldn't "do any good" to do so!
        >
        > The communistic proletariat argues to the
        > contrary that worker expropriation
        > of the productive forces, and the initial
        > redistribution of bourgeois wealth
        > is good for the working-class. What good it will
        > do is that the workers
        > themselves would owning the productive forces as
        > proletarian social property
        > will end capitalist commodity production by
        > wage-labor, and subsequently end
        > the extremes of the wealth and poverty engendered
        > by capitalist commodity
        > production and wage-labour.
        >
        >
        > Art Clemons: Cuba is large enough to feed itself,
        > what it can't do is offer
        > an improved way of life without foreigners buying
        > produce, goods or services
        > from Cubans.
        >
        > Lil Joe: Clemons has erected and is knocking down
        > a straw man. I have never
        > presented Cuban as a model of proletarian
        > communism.
        >
        > Rather, I have consistently argued to the
        > contrary that it is not possible
        > to have Socialism in One Country -- still less in
        > an agrarian based island
        > economy.
        >
        > The working-class internationally, especially in
        > the highly industrially
        > developed and technologically advanced countries
        > must by winning the battle
        > of democracy legislating the transfer of the
        > productive forces from
        > capitalist class property to proletarian public
        > property end the capitalist
        > mode of production and appropriation: the
        > overthrow of the market economy.
        >
        > Ending capitalist commodity production and
        > wage-labour in the most
        > industrially developed and technologically
        > advanced countries, by worker's
        > power internationally economic relations between
        > regions will no longer be
        > based on market mechanisms. On the basis of
        > industrial social production
        > and mechanized agriculture Proletarians in power
        > will distribute technology
        > and produce from each region according to its
        > natural means of production
        > and to each region according to its needs. With
        > the abolition of the market,
        > domestically and internationally, with the end of
        > commodity production and
        > bourgeois nation-states such bourgeois
        > abstractions as "comparative
        > advantage" and "terms of trade" will be no more.
        >
        > By Communism the species being of our common
        > humanity dominates production
        > and distribution with workers contributing to the
        > labour process from each
        > according to his/her ability and freely
        > appropriates by each according to
        > his/her needs and desires. This doesn't exist in
        > Cuba and can't exist in
        > Haiti separate and apart from the cosmopolitan
        > proletariat expropriating the
        > productive forces in the most industrialized
        > countries. It is in this
        > global context of proletarian international
        > communism that relations between
        > nations, and island nations will produce and
        > distribute goods and services
        > freely. Such anachronisms as "foreigners buying
        > produce, goods or services
        > from Cubans" or Haitians will become a thing of
        > the Past.
        >
        > Capital-Globalization is already in the economic
        > process making political
        > geography impossible. Geographical distinctions
        > are already becoming
        > irrelevant in countries where the productive
        > forces and advanced technology
        > and mechanized capitalist agriculture is/or has
        > overthrown microstates: e.g.
        > the European Union which is compelling the United
        > States to do the same --
        > via: NAFTA and FTAA.
        >
        > A South American Union including Central America
        > and the Caribbean Union is
        > inevitable. That's right: Haiti, and Jamaica are
        > American economies and not
        > in Africa. Not Pan-Africanism based on colour but
        > Pan-American communism is
        > the destiny of the Caribbean economic union. The
        > Caribbean island economies
        > including Cuba and Haiti are part of the South
        > American -Central
        > American-Caribbean economic and political
        > structure. In this regard the
        > present worker uprising in Haiti is the same as,
        > and part and parcel of the
        > worker rebellion in Argentina.
        >
        > The capital is social production in conflict with
        > the anarchy engendered by
        > the capitalistic mode of appropriation.
        > Proletarian class-consciousness is
        > social consciousness engendered by social
        > production in conflict with
        > private [i.e. market] appropriation. Proletarian
        > class-consciousness is
        > individual self-awareness of social beings being
        > fragmented by an
        > historically limited economic mode of
        > appropriation.
        >
        > Art Clemons: Most of what you term "bourgeoisie"
        > has left the
        > country already and the effect of said folk is
        > minimal. It should also
        > be noted that despite their income, there was not
        > enough in the way of
        > resources to support the people of Haiti.
        >
        >
        > Lil Joe: This petty-bourgeois mentality is not
        > what I have argued. What I
        > have argued, daily and on many separate threads
        > is the capitalistic mode of
        > production and appropriation is global, a
        > cosmopolitan mode of production
        > and exchange and that therefore the cosmopolitan
        > bourgeoisie can be, must be
        > fought by the cosmopolitan proletariat.
        >
        > The fact that large sectors capitalists "has left
        > the country already and
        > the effect of said folk is minimal" only supports
        > my argument that the
        > Haitian proletariat has to take the productive
        > forces along with workers in
        > every country doing same.
        >
        > > Art: 3rd, are you truthfully claiming that a
        > bunch of thugs
        > > from Haiti's former army are a better form of
        > government than
        > > that offered by Aristide?
        > >
        > > Lil Joe: I never said that, nor have I ever
        > advocated the political
        > > cult of individual. What I wrote is that the
        > Haitian workers
        > > revolts is legitimate. Precisly because it is a
        > mass revolt by
        > > workers against the bourgeois state. I reject
        > you - together with
        > > CNN, Bush. NBC. &C. reverting to demogogy by
        > denouncing Haitian
        > > insurrectionists as "thugs". Do you also think
        > that Bush, and the
        > > CBC are also "thugs"?
        >
        > Art Clemons: The revolt in Haiti isn't a revolt
        > of the people or of
        > leftists. It's sad that you think so. Instead
        > leadership is being provided
        > by a group of what can only be termed right wing
        > former army members, folks
        > who had no hesitation exploiting other Haitians
        > in the recent past. As for
        > Bush being a thug if the brass knuckles fit, he
        > can badly use them. I do
        > wonder though why you want to blame the
        > relatively powerless CBC for Bush
        > when he has ignored said group since 2001.
        >
        >
        > Lil Joe: This demagogic rhetoric about
        > "right-wing"/"left-wing" is pure
        > bullshit! I never referred to the "leaders of the
        > revolt" as "leftists".
        > Nor have I referred to the workers insurrection
        > as a "revolt of the people".
        >
        > "The times of that superstition which attributed
        > revolutions to the ill-will
        > of a few agitators have long passed away.
        > Everyone knows nowadays that
        > wherever there is a revolutionary convulsion,
        > there must be some social want
        > in the background, which is prevented, by outworn
        > institutions, from
        > satisfying itself. The want may not vet be felt
        > as strongly, as generally,
        > as might ensure immediate success; but every
        > attempt at forcible repression
        > will only bring it forth stronger and stronger,
        > until it bursts its
        > fetters."
        > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1852/germany/ch01.htm
        >
        > Crap about the mass uprisings in Haiti being the
        > result of a few instigators
        > paid by Bush is unsubstantiated balderdash! One
        > is reminded of how, in the
        > 1960s the Black Civil Rights Movement was said by
        > Racists to have been the
        > work of "outside" (i.e. Jewish Communist)
        > agitators.
        >
        > Whomsoever claim to "lead" the worker
        > insurrection is not relevant. The fact
        > is that tens or hundreds of Haitian workers have
        > risen in rebellion, are
        > attacking the State, freeing prisoners and
        > burning down police stations.
        >
        > Of course the bourgeois elements that are
        > positioning themselves as
        > "leaders" want to displace the present bourgeois
        > government personnel. and
        > wants to exploit Haitian workers. This can
        > succeed, however, only if the
        > Haitian workers follow your advice and leave the
        > productive forces and
        > financial institutions in possession of the
        > Haitian bourgeoisie and
        > transnational corporations. That follows from
        > your premises, and your
        > support of the existing bourgeois regime.
        >
        > What I have argued on the contrary is that the
        > Haitian proletariat must
        > break with the existing wannabe "leaders" of the
        > "revolt", by being
        > self-organized into their own worker
        > organizations struggling to expropriate
        > the productive forces. That will make
        > exploitation impossible.
        >
        > As to the Congressional Black Caucus [CBC] I have
        > not "blamed" them for
        > anything. They are not "powerless", however. The
        > CBC is the Democratic
        > Party in Blackface! The Democratic Party is not
        > "powerless".
        >
        > Every member of the House of Representatives
        > [save one] is either a Democrat
        > or Republican; every member of the U.S. Senate is
        > either a Democrat or
        > Republican; every recent President has been
        > either a Democrat or Republican;
        > every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and
        > every officer in the U.S.
        > military and State National Guard is a Democrat
        > or a Republican; every
        > member of the State bureaucracy is a Democrat or
        > Republican; every federal
        > judge and member of the Supreme Court is a
        > Democrat or Republican; every
        > Governor of every State in the Union is a
        > Democrat or Republican; every
        > member of the Lower and Upper Chamber of every
        > State is a Democrat or
        > Republican: the Democratic Party is every bit as
        > powerful as the Republican
        > Party. Every member of the CBC is a Democrat!
        >
        > I have not "blamed" the "CBC" for anything. I
        > have attacked the so-called
        > American "Left" because they hide behind the
        > colour of Democrats that are
        > Black politicians putting forth the Democratic
        > Party position as a "Black"
        > position! I pointed out that the Democratic Party
        > has supported -- if not
        > having initiated -- every aggression of U.S.
        > imperialism. The CBC is the
        > Democratic Party's Negro cadre by which Blacks
        > and Leftists are brought on
        > board in support of the Democratic Party's
        > domestic and foreign policies.
        > The CBC does not speak FOR Black people but are
        > the voices through which the
        > Democratic Party speaks TO Black people.
        >
        >
        > Art Clemons: I suspect that people who have in
        > the past stolen, killed and
        > performed the actions of thugs are still thugs
        > whether they're supposedly
        > doing the work of the middle and upper classes or
        > not.
        >
        > Lil Joe: I never referred to political operatives
        > as "thugs". Rather, I
        > point out that party-partisans are class
        > partisans. I never referred to
        > classes as "the middle and upper classes".
        > Rather, I present classes by
        > their relations of production. The Democrats
        > representatives of U.S.
        > imperialism in government has not only robbed and
        > killed "in the past". They
        > are doing so presently.
        >
        > Art Clemons: Finally, have you noted that the
        > middle class left in Haiti
        > seems to be the source of opposition to Aristide
        > rather than the peasants
        > you seem to favor as a source of protest?
        >
        > Lil Joe: I don't know what you mean by "middle
        > class": it is the
        > working-class that is in the streets fighting the
        > bourgeois state: freeing
        > workers from prisons as they move ahead to the
        > capital. The American "Left",
        > and the Black Left in particular are supporting
        > the Aristid governments call
        > for imperialist troops to halt the march of
        > Haitian workers and suppress the
        > rebellion.
      • Connexions
        ... Any adjectical democracy is a sham. There is only Democracy and it s absence. ... The concept of representation, abstractly considered by Hobbes, was
        Message 3 of 3 , Mar 1, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          >I am interested in hearing response to this
          >discussion.
          >
          > Les
          >
          >"Representative democracy" in class society is sham democracy. The only
          >genuine democracy is direct, participatory democracy, which is impossible
          >in class society."

          Any adjectical "democracy" is a sham. There is only Democracy and it's absence.


          >"The concept of representative democracy in bourgeois society was first,
          >systematically developed by Thomas Hobbes in The Leviathan"

          The concept of representation, abstractly considered by Hobbes, was
          systematically developed by numerous societies. "Various laws and
          immemorial custom ordain that 18 cities and towns of these kingdoms, and no
          more, have the right to be represented by procuradores" asserted the
          Castillian Cortes over 80 years before Hobbes was born.

          I leave Marxological matters to others but the block diagram of political
          thought seems to have been borrowed from Mortimer Adler.
          CJ
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.