Date: Tue, 06 Jan 1998 21:54:47 +0000
From: Mark Jones <Jones_M-AT-netcomuk.co.uk>
Subject: Re: M-I: Prettifying Land theft


Louis R Godena wrote:

> *Any* government, socialist or capitalist or whatever, that turned over
> millions and millions of "unspoiled", "underpopulated", and "relatively
> pristine" acres to a single entity -- be it a near-vanished "tribe" or
> indefatigable individual -- would be a candidate for a well-deserved
> extinction.

Lenin did just this, in his decrees on Russian wildernesses, which Louis Proyect
posted on earlier. Some of Lenin's first laws, made in the duress of
interventionary war, were about preservation of wild places and indigenous
peoples. The reasons bear scrutiny. Subsequent Soviet policy concerning creation
of autonomous zones and republics bore the hallmarks of paranoia induced
by containment, but they were still results of Lenin's initiatives. 

What better thing could a government at the service of a socialist STATE do?
It was symbolic affirmation of immense psychological significance -- abolishing 
the rights of private property over wildernesses which happen to contain ore, 
oil etc. What better way than to reaffirm the denial of PRIVATE property than
to return wildernesses to the custodial care of the original gens, tribe, folk?

If a socialist 'government' did NOT "turn over millions and millions of 
"unspoiled", "underpopulated", and "relatively pristine" acres" to the 
people who lived there, we would be right to fight it on principle. 
SOCIALism means this or it means nothing.

Godena's perspective remains trapped within a capitulationist horizon, which
he seems psychologically unable to acknowledge. Forget "Today's
sophisticated political hustler ", forget ambulance-chasing theories of 
"compensation for the injustices" of "classes or individuals" . Class
actions? Or class actions?


Mark Jones


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