Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 23:19:00 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: the state redux & socialism



If you're going to ask for examples of noncapitalist liberal democracy, as
if that settles the possibility of that form of government, I'll ask you
for some examples of socialism. The nonexistence of these under anything
taht either of us would accept does not, we think, settle the question of
the possibility of socialism.

I remind you of the main elements of liberal democracy: universal
suffrage, extensive civil and political liberties, representativbe
government, and the rule of law. Now, Adam has rejected at least some of
these: he would deprive capitalists, defined who knows how, of all rights,
including the right to vote. But represenattive government and the rule of
law, at least for workers, evewn he would insist on. 

I would insist on the first two: universal suffrage, because practically I
see no sensible way that is fair to select which persons are to bee
deprived on the vote on the basis of their group membership rather than
their activities, and morally because I think taht even procpaitlists have
a right to be represented. I do not see their few votes as a serious
threat to a worker's state. I would incist on extensive political and
civil rights for these practical reasons, but far more findamentall
because if socialism is not democratic in respecting the basic freedoms of
sppech and association, among others, it is not worth having. Nor,a s
explained, do I see that extending these freedoms to ex-capitalists would
be a threat to aworker's state where the former bosses did not control the
means of productiona nd communication.

Whether or not these ideas are good, why on earth are they impossible
under socialism? Or do you agree with the right taht socialism is
incompatrible with freedom and democracy and must necessarily involve a
government that is a repressive dictatorship? This is Adam's view. Is it
yours too? He does not defend this view, by the way. He just asserts it.

As to whether it's paranoid of me to woory about my fate under Adam's
government, I doubt it. AFter all, this is a regime that deprives its
opponents, defined by no clear criteria, of all rights whatsoever and
views its task mainlya s the crushing of all opposition. I would
certainly be in the opposition to such a regime. As an officially state
pronounced social democratic reformist, defender of the rights of
capitalists, how could I escape being an enemy of the people? 

--Justin


On 27 Sep 1996, jc mullen wrote:

> I spent a couple of days not reading the mails and came back to find Justin
> convinced that someone wanted to shoot him. Fair enough : each to their
> fantasies. But this is a marxism list. I also found him explaining about
> "non-capitalist liberal democracry"... I'll just repeat that "non-capitalist
> liberal democracy". Ok, let's have examples of non-capitalist liberal democracy.
> if ther's no essential link between liberal democracy and capitalism, how come
> the feudals didn't get into it or the slaveists. 
> 	As for the argument about who would like to have you shot, it's really
> rather pathetic. I think you should change tactics : just hold your breath until
> you go red, that should show us.
> John Mullen
> SI France
> 
> 
> 
>      --- from list marxism2-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---





     --- from list marxism2-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---