Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 21:39:50 -0500 (EST)
From: Louis N Proyect <lnp3-AT-columbia.edu>
Subject: The Nicaraguan working-class and socialism


Louis:

               Composition of Nicaraguan 
        "economically active population" in 1980

(Totals are expressed in thousands. Figures reflect portion 
of total working population excluding property owners, who 
numbered 213 thousand and 23.5 percent of the EAP. "-" 
indicates unavailable.)

Category     Govt    Employees of  Employees of  Total   Pct
          Employees  Large/Medium  Small Firms            of
                     Firms                             total

Salaried     65.2    26.4             -          91.6   10.1

Proletariat  73.1    108.4            -          181.5  20.0

Semi-Prol.   68.0    79.0             82.0       229.0  25.2

Sub-Prol.      -      -               192.9      192.9  21.2

Total        206.3   213.8            274.9      695.0  76.5

(Proletariat includes agricultural workers with permanent 
employement. Semi-proletariat refers to self-employed 
workers, artisans, etc. Sub-proletariat refers to domestic 
workers, unemployed, etc.)

Comments:

In Nicaragua, the working-class was only 20 percent of the 
economically active population. If you include the entire 
population of 4 million people, the percentage drops to 4 
percent. The semi-proletarian and sub-proletarian groups 
swamp the proletariat. These sectors were of course powerful 
components of the revolution but did not have the class 
consciousness typical of wage-earners. Union consciousness 
was weak also since only 6 percent held membership. The 
unions themselves had not been a dynamic arena of struggle 
against the Somoza dictatorship.

Socialism means the dictatorship of the proletariat. To call 
for socialism in Nicaragua in 1980 without having examined 
the class composition of the country is not the method of 
Marx, Lenin and Trotsky. When a country has a working-class 
that is such a small minority of the population, the call 
for it to rule society is not a call based on historical 
materialism but on faith.

To put the problem of "socialist revolution" in Nicaragua in 
proper perspective, let's compare Nicaragua and the USSR in 
1921, another country with a working-class that was a small 
percentage of the population.

1. Social and political development of working-class
   -------------------------------------------------
a) Nicaragua: Weak socialist parties, workers concentrated in light 
   industry.

b) USSR: Powerful socialist party, workers represented in soviets, 
   and employed in huge factories based on heavy industry.

2. Strategic position of working-class
   -----------------------------------
a) Nicaragua: Sandwiched between two states hosting counter-
   revolutionary armies; lacked strong class-based 
   international support.

b) USSR: Had defeated counter-revolutionary armies a year 
   earlier. Could depend on support from left socialist parties 
   in Europe and new Communist Parties.

3. Industrial/agricultural capacity
   --------------------------------
a) Nicaragua: Totally dependent on imported manufactured 
   goods; facing US embargo, its main trading partner; grew its 
   own food, but contra war impeded cultivation and harvest.

b) USSR: Industry devastated by civil war, but could produce 
   steel, chemicals, machine tools, etc. Agriculture resources 
   were immense.

4. Strength of enemy
   -----------------
a) Nicaragua: Faced Reagan administration bent on smashing 
   colonial revolution.

b) USSR: Faced a recently stabilized capitalist class, but a 
   class that had been thrown into crisis by WWI and postwar 
   revolutionary upsurge.

Given the comparative positions of the two countries, one 
might expect that the USSR's possibilities were much more 
auspicious. This clearly was not the case. By 1921, the 
effects of civil war and political and economic isolation 
began to undermine the fiber of the Soviet state. This led 
Lenin to state in July 1921 that, "Before the revolution, 
and even after it, we thought: either revolution breaks out 
in the other countries, in the developed capitalist 
countries, immediately, or at least very quickly, or we must 
perish."

Lenin said that a USSR at peace would *perish*. Nicaragua's 
war was just starting. This nation of 4 million, smaller 
than many American cities, with a working class that is 4 
percent of the entire population, confronted the most 
powerful capitalist country in the history of the world with 
a president who enjoyed bipartisan support for his 
anticommunist crusade. Our Trotskyists hold the Sandinistas 
in contempt for failing to accomplish what Lenin couldn't 
accomplish in much more favorable conditions. Perhaps these 
comrades could get a better handle on the problems of 
administering a state under siege if they ever managed to 
find themselves holding state power. I wouldn't hold my 
breath.



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

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