From: "Harald Beyer-Arnesen" <haraldba-AT-online.no>
Subject: Re: AUT: Tariq Ali: change the world by taking power
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:04:46 +0100



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard Singer" <chardsinger-AT-lycos.com>
To: <aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 5:47 AM
Subject: Re: AUT: Tariq Ali: change the world by taking power

Richard, I posted another mail adressing some of the questions
you posed, if not doubt in a limited way, before receiving this
reply to an earlier post. So I will not repeat myself. But find the
discussion is getting interesting and constructive. 

Apart from that, I never have been been opposed to social reforms.
The more the better. Even if that has to be qualified, as often
they have contradictory nature. If there are many strings
attached, they may also have the opposite effect in a some-
what longer perspective.

As a rule -- and certainly in a longer term perspective -- I do not
think however that social reforms depends on the the ideology of
the government in power ...  but to degree there exist a autonomous
working class movement of some strenght. It is some more
complex than this, but you get my point.
         Social reforms have been implemented by conservative,
social-liberal, and even fascist governments ... and not only
declared social democratic or 'socialist' ones. Somewhat ironically,
many of the workers struggles in Spain in the last decades
has revolved around defending or getting back some of the
labour laws from the Franco period. The Nedtherlands at
least used to have soem of the most 'generous' social benfits
laws in the world. But unlike in Scandinavia, they never had
as far as I know a majority social-democratic government. 
(Colation governments have been the rule.) 
        The eight-hour law was introduced here long before
the social democrats came to power, and was strongly
supported by the employers-association, due to were experiencing
that workers were taking the matter in their own hands.
So for them the law was importantant to restore the respect
for law-and order.

If Chavez delievers what he has promised, it will have the
support of many business people and conservative
politicians around the world.  They are likely see it as a much
needed modernisation. If it turns into an ineffective
state-corruption model, it will not meet their approval.
What the more enlightend kind want is however more
likely someone like Lula. Chavez coming over more as
somone belonging to the past. The 'hawks' in the White
House may look at these things differently. Partially
due to the obsession with Cuba, more fundmentally
because the concern fro petroleum resources. But the
government of Chavez are no less dependent on the
multinational petroleum companies than the former
one. He may however for instance opt more for European
controlled ones; and even follow such a 'revolutionary'
policies as countries as Norway, and if not mistaken,
also Mexico have, at least in the past.
I'm not updated.

I am a bit puzzled to where the Zapatistas enters into
all this. Should Marcos have run as a presidential
candiadate in Mexico, is that the idea? I know that it
was not you who brought that in. But it none the less
forms an important part of the background for this
discussion.
        Anyway, I think such a move would be long step
towards resignation, and business as usual. If we are
to have any hope of bringing fundamental and long
term changes into this world, it must be from the
grown up. This even if speaking within the framework
of capitalist relations.

Not that I think you disagree. I might be far more
sceptical towards the Bolivarian circles than you, although
I am relative ignorant on the topic. But we agree on that
this is the interesting thing to look at Most depends in
my opinion if they develop towards greater autonomy
from the state or not. I am heavily inclined to believe
that a more fundamental break is needed. But at the
present moment others can speak with greater 'authority'
on that matter than I can. I speak here more out of
'instinct' than on the basis of knowledge. But unfortu-
nately my 'instincts' have never failed me on such
matters before. There tends to be a certain pattern
or logic to such things, wherein the Bolivarian circles -- 
as far as I can judge from my point of ignorance --
seem to fit all too well. But I sincerly hope they
will bring me some surprises.
         
Harald


     --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---