From: MD575151-AT-aol.com
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 1996 18:21:03 -0500
Subject: The role of the developed and undeveloped capitalist nations in revolution.


Whoever cares,
     I have been doing quite a bit of thinking for the last few weeks.  I
recently began reading an interview of Castro and something he said
re-ignited my interest in the revolutionary theories.  Castro was commenting
that he does not think that revolution is at all likely in the US, Germany,
and other developed capitalist states because the objective and subjective
conditions that would make popular revolution likely do not exist there.  The
one place that conditions do point towards revolution are in the third world
areas.  
    Here is the conclusion that I reached after thinking and expanding on
what Castro said;
    Advanced capitalist states do not have rotten conditions.  The US worker
is still explioted and her/his labor is still alienated, but the working
class in the "west" has  reached a comfort zone.  Why would any worker want
to give up what we have in order to risk their life in a revolution?  The
objective (material conditions) conditions in the Capitalist states are
fairly decent and therefor the subjective conditions (the workers attitude)
is to not risk a revolution.
   So I would have to agree with the advocet of capitalism on this list that
US, French, German etc. workers have a fairly good deal under capitalism (at
least as good a deal as possable in a capitalist system).  So if revolution
cannot occur in the advanced nations does that mean that power will never be
passed to the working class (I am assuming that you all agree that the only
way power ever crosses class lines is through revolution of some sort.), will
capitalism remain static?  The answer is no.
   The only reason that the working class in the advanced nations are so well
off is due to the wealth created by imperialism.  Even though the working
class only sees a small fraction of this wealth, what they do see is enough
to make them semi-comfortable, therefor conservitive.
    There is one area where the objective conditions and subjective
conditions are ripe for revolution, the third world.  The working class of
the third world "has nothing to lose but their chains."  And increasingly we
are seeing the peasant mindset change from one of fear to one of revolution.
    Weather socialist revolution is possable in the third world or not is not
very important.  Any revolution against imperialism is what will lead to the
deterioration of the imperialist states.  Example, If most of the third world
revolts and refuses to sell their raw materials to the developed nations, the
developed nations will have to look elsewhere.  The only place to make profit
will be to increase the expliotation of domestic workers.  Remember that the
former third world has become either "communist", state capitalist, state
communist, fascist, whatever, the piont is is that these former third world
countries have now developed a working class of their own.  Their working
class will also feel the wrath of capitalism.  As workers all over the world
begin to develope class concscienceness we will finally begin to see the
formation of objective and subjective conditions which encourage revelution.
 I agree that it is very unlikely that the whole world will revolt at once.
 However, now their will be workingclass revolts in advanced nations,
something never before seen!  (Russia, China, Cuba etc. are traditionally
third world nations that had to deal with many problems of
industrializattion, resisting imperialist nations, and developing socialism
all at once)  Now the people that revolt will not face impossable odds.  I
call countries like cuba "socialism in waiting" because they are unable to
develope socialism completely in their hostile environment.  These "socialism
in waiting" nations that previously revolted will now form a center for
socialist construction.  Other third world nations that have not remained
socialist, like china, will probably side with the capitalist and will there
for see a second true socialist revelution.
   In short, as socialist we should all, first and foremost, support any
anti-imperialist revolution.  any and all.  Obviously, when given the choice,
we should support socialist revolutions over all others.  
  Here is a quick "timetable" of the process;
            Capitalist revolution (already happened)
            Imperialist age  (when advanced capitalist nations expliote
undeveloped areas)
            Self imperialist stage (When all third world areas defeate
imperialism, the only place for any capitalist power to exploit is it's owm
people.)
            Class struggle heated (people realize who's who)
            Begining of Socialist revolutions in developed areas.  (now REAL
socialist construction can begin)
 
Critiques and comment appreciated, 
           Mike Dean
           Mail MD575151-AT-aol.com


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

     ------------------