I don’t think we should be surprised when a succdem does succdem things. Maduro has been increasingly liberalizing the economy and making moves to allow in U.S. capital. I sympathize with his position, as expecting a hardline communist stance ala Cuba in the face of U.S. opposition is incredibly unlikely, given the lack of direct invasion history with the U.S.
However, if the PSUV continues down this line without attempting to ally itself with either Brazil or China, it will actually set itself up for a capitalist coup d’etat. You give the capitalists an inch and they will always take a mile, and Venezuela is no exception, party for socialism or not.
I will admit not knowing enough info to be sure but I’d really like to know more. I’ve seen some of the things Maduro has said, and it wasn’t long ago that he was explicitly stating that they were building socialism, and he seemed very explicit that he meant marxist socialism not social democracy.
With that in my mind I have to wonder whether this is really socdem bullshit or whether this is his attempt at a “reform and opening up” approach to development of socialism? And the conflict that caused in China at the time was not dissimilar no? Hardliners and reformers.
“Leaders who have advocated for this form of socialism include Hugo Chávez of Venezuela, Rafael Correa of Ecuador, Evo Morales of Bolivia, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of Brazil and Michelle Bachelet of Chile.[3] Because of the local unique historical conditions, socialism of the 21st century is often contrasted with previous applications of socialism in other countries, with a major difference being the effort towards a more effective economic planning process.”
the project that got closest to aiming for a socialist transition was bolivia (i’m saying “was” because afaik they’ve been dealing some internal dissent within MAS since the coup, which has actually been hurting linera, their most important marxist and the most vocal one about the idea of transition)
chávez by the end of his life was actually becoming a revolutionary given the changes in discourse in the early 2010s, but he never managed to do anything more than a modest social democratic plan
lula is a soclib centrist, so was rafael correa; bachelet was to the right of them, she’s basically chile’s warren if i’m being very generous
corbyn shouldn’t really be trusted in this, he has called even lula a socialist before, which is a joke at best as he’s an austerity lib who likes food stamps and public universities (which is good, even great for me personally as because of him i’m finally getting a cool undergrad scholarship, but it’s still just lib shit)
so yea the label doesn’t really work when it’s associated with these vastly different leaders
Maduro says a lot of things, but he is no Chavez. He is ultimately pragmatic, and while he will do what he has to do to protect his political power, the legitimacy of his elections, and keeping the U.S. from directly interfering with government operations, sticking towards a particular ideological plan for economic development is probably not high on his list of agenda items.
We will see what actually happens. Ultimately, much like with China, it is not my country nor my party and therefore not within my capacity to truely judge the true nature of the socialist project taking place there. I hope whatever reforms they do take achieve the general prosperity they are looking for.
I’m actually perfectly ok with pragmatism, Deng was pragmatic, and while he made mistakes he also set China up for where it is today.
My point here is ultimately whether Maduro is securing socialist control of the state so that these reforms can’t result in a liberal takeover. I am ok with allowing some investment in if proletarian control of the state is maintained. China has shown that as long as you maintain the DOTP you can do this, the structure and approach is what matters. The 4 cardinal principles combined with the hierarchical structure of China’s electoral system protected China long enough for Xi to clear out the corruption that built up over time.
I don’t think we should be surprised when a succdem does succdem things. Maduro has been increasingly liberalizing the economy and making moves to allow in U.S. capital. I sympathize with his position, as expecting a hardline communist stance ala Cuba in the face of U.S. opposition is incredibly unlikely, given the lack of direct invasion history with the U.S.
However, if the PSUV continues down this line without attempting to ally itself with either Brazil or China, it will actually set itself up for a capitalist coup d’etat. You give the capitalists an inch and they will always take a mile, and Venezuela is no exception, party for socialism or not.
I will admit not knowing enough info to be sure but I’d really like to know more. I’ve seen some of the things Maduro has said, and it wasn’t long ago that he was explicitly stating that they were building socialism, and he seemed very explicit that he meant marxist socialism not social democracy.
With that in my mind I have to wonder whether this is really socdem bullshit or whether this is his attempt at a “reform and opening up” approach to development of socialism? And the conflict that caused in China at the time was not dissimilar no? Hardliners and reformers.
Venezuela implemented Socialism of the 21st century.
“Leaders who have advocated for this form of socialism include Hugo Chávez of Venezuela, Rafael Correa of Ecuador, Evo Morales of Bolivia, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of Brazil and Michelle Bachelet of Chile.[3] Because of the local unique historical conditions, socialism of the 21st century is often contrasted with previous applications of socialism in other countries, with a major difference being the effort towards a more effective economic planning process.”
that label is pretty useless, all those leaders differ greatly in ideology
Tourists flock not to the beaches, but the slums to see ‘21st-century socialism’ From a trickle a few years ago there are now thousands, travelling individually and on package tours, exploring a leftwing mecca which promises to build social justice in the form of “21st century socialism”.
Jeremy Corbyn said: “Chavez … showed us that there is a different, and a better way of doing things. It’s called socialism”.
Bill Ayers (Obama’s mentor, former member of Weathermen organization) addresses Venezuela, praises socialist system.
it’s still pretty meaningless in practical terms
the project that got closest to aiming for a socialist transition was bolivia (i’m saying “was” because afaik they’ve been dealing some internal dissent within MAS since the coup, which has actually been hurting linera, their most important marxist and the most vocal one about the idea of transition)
chávez by the end of his life was actually becoming a revolutionary given the changes in discourse in the early 2010s, but he never managed to do anything more than a modest social democratic plan
lula is a soclib centrist, so was rafael correa; bachelet was to the right of them, she’s basically chile’s warren if i’m being very generous
corbyn shouldn’t really be trusted in this, he has called even lula a socialist before, which is a joke at best as he’s an austerity lib who likes food stamps and public universities (which is good, even great for me personally as because of him i’m finally getting a cool undergrad scholarship, but it’s still just lib shit)
so yea the label doesn’t really work when it’s associated with these vastly different leaders
Maduro says a lot of things, but he is no Chavez. He is ultimately pragmatic, and while he will do what he has to do to protect his political power, the legitimacy of his elections, and keeping the U.S. from directly interfering with government operations, sticking towards a particular ideological plan for economic development is probably not high on his list of agenda items.
We will see what actually happens. Ultimately, much like with China, it is not my country nor my party and therefore not within my capacity to truely judge the true nature of the socialist project taking place there. I hope whatever reforms they do take achieve the general prosperity they are looking for.
I’m actually perfectly ok with pragmatism, Deng was pragmatic, and while he made mistakes he also set China up for where it is today.
My point here is ultimately whether Maduro is securing socialist control of the state so that these reforms can’t result in a liberal takeover. I am ok with allowing some investment in if proletarian control of the state is maintained. China has shown that as long as you maintain the DOTP you can do this, the structure and approach is what matters. The 4 cardinal principles combined with the hierarchical structure of China’s electoral system protected China long enough for Xi to clear out the corruption that built up over time.