Charles' way

[calbert at tiac.net]

Weaver:

> Um,
>          Hate to inform you Charles, but Lenin never fell out of
>          favour, he 
> had a stroke or two. Stalin is who you are talking about. 

You are literally correct......It is difficult to determine exactly what 
was happening in that dascha as Lenin was stroking out under the 
close supervision of Stalin. But by the time Lenin was struck down, 
his partial privatization efforts were "paying off", both in increased 
availability of goods, but also in creating some socio/economic 
stratification. In the 20's things were extremely hard for the USSR, 
so any such differences were even more stark. As I recall, Lenin 
struggled with elements of the party over such policies and they 
provided ammo for his opponents.....but yes, I mis-spoke by 
implying that he had lost favor with the population at large.....



Sure, Lenin
> was an opportunist, but he was also a dedicated uncorrupt leader and
> opportunism with that combination adds up to "seizing the time".

True to a large degree......though I would suggest that he had 
difficulties reconciling his "purpose" and humanity, as his complex 
relationship with the two women in his life might suggest. I would 
also argue that the murder of Trotsky (across the ATLANTIC, not the 
pacific, as I had it yesterday) was hardly an example of benevolent 
leadership or tolerance of dissent.....

> Please read Late Victorian Holocausts before you say much more about 
> the capital v commie death score.

You would still be off by an order of magnitude and a factor or two. 
...and again, I have not included the tolls from wars internal and 
external. THe famines, in Russia, of the late 19th cent. were 
systemic and man made, but still did not approach the astonishing 
devastation which followed Stalins campaign against the Kulaks.

 As I recall, in the last 50 years,
> outside the horn of Africa,  the Soviet bloc - in contrast with PRC
> and capitalist blocs - has lost very few lives to famine and epidemic.

I am not aware of any famines or epidemics (ex AIDS) in first world 
countries in the last 50 years. I don't recall the comparative numbers 
of Bhopal and Sverdlovsk, but would guess that they are roughly 
equal.
> >Worker's resistance is a necessary element of such a
> >process, and I am all for it........
> 
> As long as the workers stop short of abolishing private control of the
> economy.

I say, give them a stake of their own.....

> I wish I had time to answer you point for point, but I don't. Since
> you have the free time to rattle off regular replies could you answer
> this one for me?

the last one, I want this thread to die, and my arm is bad.....and only 
if you accept the notion that I respect your readiness to fight though 
I may disagree with strategy and premise....


> In  capitalist democracy  the population has no way to directly affect
> economic development via the ballot box.

Not directly......but indirectly through their votes for those charged 
with managing the nations policies......

 They do not elect the
> captains of industry. 

Accepted for the purpose of argument ( I would suggest that share-
holders CAN effect that process)

These emerge by a evolutionary route, natural
> selection according to the current economic laws. The strategic
> development of capitalism is controlled by the interests of
> shareholders, a small minority of the system's population.

Currently, in the US, it is estimated that more than half of its 
households have a stake in the US equity market. This number has 
grown appreciably in the last 10-15 years. WHen I was on Wall 
Street back in the mid 80s, the markets were controlled by the 
activities of "institutional investors"......Wall Street "sages" are being 
driven insane as Joe six pack persists in thwarting their analyses 
and projections - this is a very beautiful thing, something I would like 
to share with the rest of the world....this is a very effective means of 
disintermediating power and ownership.....

> In Cuban democracy, the population  has no way to directly affect
> economic development via the ballot box. They do not elect the
> captains of industry (department ministers). These emerge by a
> evolutionary route, natural selection according to the current
> political laws i.e  indirectly elected and appointed, just like our
> political executives. 

In spite of every effort to insulate themselves from the concept, our 
political and economic leaders are, to some degree, 
"accountable".....(I am not blind to the revolving door of dolts, the 
lazy susan of incompetents and legacies which clutter the stage)
and this is where I think your amusing comparison falls short.....


The strategic development of Cuban economy is
> controlled by an interplay between larger expediences represented by
> those political leaders and local government, which is directly
> elected by the population.

OK. Let's grant that as well........my beef remains that ideology as 
defined by, well, let's not mince here, Fidle Castro, is the ultimate 
determinant. Other intersts are suborned. If one could figure out a 
way to level that field, then Cuba would stand a better chance at 
becoming an example for the rest of us.......

> Capitalism is not and could never be economically democratic, there
> have to be losers for the system to work. How come you claim
> capitalist nations to be democratic and Cuba not?

Yes, the pyramid is an essential element of a "capitalist" structure - 
my main concern is that anyone on the bottom NOT be denied 
access to the means by which they may improve their lot, and that 
such "means" be abundant........

But Cuba too has a pyramid, its just very broad based with a narrow 
peak, and I would argue that the means to climb that peak are 
artificially manipulated and that the "ropes" are in very short supply. 
As much as the reference grates on you, I can't shake the irony of 
teaching an entire population to read, only to restrict the reading list, 
and this remains a symbol of what is wrong with Cuba....and 
represents a paradigm difference with "the west"....

I don't expect that the above will influence your thinking, but hey, 
any dialogue beats none at all  (only in the context of P-list, of 
course)

be good.

love,
cfa 
>