Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 07:08:40 -0400
From: Louis Proyect <lnp3-AT-columbia.edu>
Subject: Re: M-I: Marx and Lenin


Rakesh:

>It's funny less than six months ago Doug and Louis P were enthusing about
>the resilience of capitalism and in particular how the Asian boom far
>exceeded anything in capitalist history, and me in ignorance counseled that
>we look at Louis Boudin's and William J Blake's critique of Tugan
>Baranowsky, a theoretical genius especially by current standards.  I knew I
>didn't understand the situation adequately (especially the idea of how
>capitalism can thrive for some time on waste before catastrophic declines,
>it just seemed so relevant, maybe a lucky guess, no?)

Capitalism is a cyclical system, Rakesh. I haven't read William J. Blake's
critique of Tugan Baranowsky, but doubt that it would reveal fresh
information on this. Two or so years ago you and all the Trotskyites were
crying chicken-little over the Buchanan candidacy, the militias and the
Million Man March. American capitalism was in the eleventh hour. It turned
out that this was nonsense, as an uptick in the American business cycle
pretty soon took a lot of the wind out the right-wing's sails.

Furthermore, I never pretended to be an expert in Marxist economics. I am
an expert in politics and history, and know enough about economics to
convince me that blanket statements about the immanent collapse of the
whole she-bang are usually wrong.

>
>By the way, Monday's WSJ shows that Bechtel is well on its way to achieving
>monopolies in strategic areas of Kabila's Zaire. Funny Louis P didn't
>download that one, but he is probably working on his apology of the
>rigidification of dollar apartheid in Cuba.
>

So Kabila is achieving monopoly in strategic areas of "Zaire". (Are you
using Mobutu's name for the country to make a political point, Rakesh? The
WSJ is nostalgic for Mobutu, are you?)  Big deal. What is your point? I
never claimed that Kabila was a revolutionary socialist, so what is the
point of this. I also explained months ago that he has *no choice* but to
conclude agreements with foreign corporations to exploit the minerals of
the Congo. The collapse of the Soviet Union has narrowed the range of
choices that exist for underdeveloped countries. I know that Rakesh's
state-capitalist vulgar Marxist understanding of the former Soviet Union
blinds him to this, but nevertheless it is a reality. With respect to the
"rigidification of dollar apartheid in Cuba", I have no idea why you should
make a point of this since you agreed with the unspeakable Communist
Voiders that Cuba was being exploited by Soviet imperialism. Does this mean
that you would be indifferent to an invasion launched by the Mas Canosa
gangs out of Florida? Perhaps they would be liberated by the gusano scum
who would free them from the "state capitalist" dictatorship. And then the
Cuban people could enjoy the plummeting standard of living that the rest of
former Soviet Union is now enjoying.

Louis Proyect 



     --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---