Today's Topics:
1. Czech, afed: LETS and Time Bank -- On the subject of
localization: experimenting with systems of local currency.
[machine translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
2. US, Black Rose Anarchist Federation: END THE MALE-STATE
VIOLENCE!: STATEMENT FROM ANARCHIST WOMEN ON
SEXUAL ABUSE LAW
(a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
3. Britain, class war: UVW Union appeal for support, dignity,
the Living Wage (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
4. Britain, afed: RISEUP'S CANARY NOT UPDATED; RISEUP *MIGHT*
BE COMPROMISED. BACKUP ALL THE THINGS. by alice fleabite
(a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
5. anarkismo.net: The Authoritarian Vision of Che Guevara by
Wayne Price (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
6. Rest In Power anarchist comrade Michael Israel, killed
fighting ‘Islamic State’ fascists in Rojava (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
7. Czech, afed: The new collective FNB -- In the south Bohemian
town of Strakonice began in the fall to work new collective Food
Not Bombs. [machine translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
LETS, a Local Exchange Trading Systems or local currency systems are based on the exchange
by the commodities or services for locally produced units that are to supplement or
substitute national currencies in the region. ---- Stephen Gudeman in his book The
Economy's Tension: The Dialectics of Community and Market (2008) describes LETS with an
emphasis on reciprocity, which provides a very local level of the system: "LETS defines
the market environment, prohibits the levying of interest, allows a specific range of
goods and often emphasizes community values and motives. " ---- The first system is the
local currency recorded in 1983, when the Briton Michael Linton introduced in Canada
Courtenay local currency in the form of so-called. Green Dollars . Linton emigrated to
Canada in the '70s. Here he sought to find out how to relate to each other the social
sphere, the environment and poverty. It concluded that in every area of the economy is
dependent on the amount of (government) money, while if and when this amount reflects
negatively on trading, rising unemployment and other social problems.
Linton seemed pointless to come for work, people who are productive, we would have worked
and traded, but due to lack of funds to them, this activity was inhibited. Linton This led
to the idea of a local complementary currency, which would be independent of government
financing, market prices. This local currency designated as green dollars. Seven years
after its creation numbered system has 600 members with an annual turnover of over $
300,000 (Canadian) and grew. The system of local currencies has shown that people can do
without government money at the local level well and live comfortably. In this sense, can
be considered a LETS system resistant to capitalism.
Linton idea gradually spread to other areas, including England, Holland, Australia and the
USA. LETS works on the principle of local production and distribution of goods and
services, solidarity and environmental awareness. The important point is the mutual
support of members, benefit from trading must all have. The main emphasis is on
self-sufficiency of the community.
LETS work normally so that it is appointed coordinator (or a group), which updates the
catalog of goods and services that individuals can give to others, and also takes care of
the management of their accounts. The catalog of goods and services, each member writes
what they can offer, and expressed here also cost you for such goods or services is expected.
This price is denominated in local currency. "This may reflect the amount of time that it
takes action, or may be approximate equivalent of 'normal' monetary value of the
operation." The products and services are listed check, which is then sent to the
coordinator. That once in a while sends members of LETS status of their accounts. There
are no commissions or interest yet. So if someone has an empty account accrues not made
him any penalties or other disadvantages. In case that in this system, so-called someone
only carries, or is simply the customer himself and the system does not return anything,
there is a pressure communities to this individual began to act in accordance with the
LETS. Otherwise it may exclude community.
For LETS can be considered the forerunner movement Freiwirtschaft (free economy), which is
rampant in Germany after the first world war and inspired the reformer S. Gasellem. This
movement responded to the society crisis, falling commodity prices and a lack of national
currencies - Reichsmarks. Members of the movement should print its own currency, called.
Waray . Its value roughly corresponds to the value Reichsmarks. The difference was that
they had a limited effect, usually a month. Before the expiration of the bill was
necessary to stick a stamp amounting to 2% of its value.
The positive aspect of this system is shown in 1931 in connection with the Bavarian
village Schwanenkirchen, which was closed several years the only source of livelihood for
local residents - mine. Movement liberal economists this mine bought, reopened, colluded
with local businesses to adopt the currency Wara and miners wage was paid in this
currency. Less than a year after the village began to flourish. This, however, did not
like the German government, which feared that this system will contribute to inflation.
Banning the use of currency Wara mine was forced to close down and the village again fell
into a deep economic depression.
However, this economic experiment has inspired many. An example might be the Tyrolean town
of Wörgl, whose mayor had modeled after Waray print local money. The principle was
identical to the Waray. Wörgelské money to enable people to pay off their debts, pay taxes
by municipalities, and increase employment, because the municipality could hire to
charitable work people who paid in local currency. But even this Tyrolean town suffered
the same fate as currency Waray, wörgelské money were banned state apparatus.
Other examples of so-functioning system of local currencies could be found in Switzerland
and other countries. Although the Swiss model works successfully continued, it is more of
an exception. LETS are usually sooner or later doomed. And even in cases where it turns
out that they can function well, at least locally and solve social problems in the form of
debt, unemployment and stagnation of trade. The state in their success sees threat. One of
the biggest sources of funds for banks and the state is in fact a system of loans and
interest. If not - thanks to the local currencies - favored residents, the local currency
becomes a threat. Then the only solution is to ban the local currency at the cost of
re-occurring social problems.
There are other local economic models of functioning like LETS, eg. Bank time. This idea
first appeared in the US and later also spread to other sites. Time Bank works like green
dollars, but the tender is the amount of time spent. Again, the main idea of something to
give and something to gain. "Every hour spent in favor of someone else earns every penny
member one time (regardless of the type of work performed)." I find it works coordinator,
who recorded "money time". This system provides a meaningful recovery time for someone
else, while this individual or someone else pays back the same number of hours of us when
we need help. It creates a feeling of usefulness and promotes community spirit.
Additionally, it seems like an excellent antidote feeling of uselessness and uselessness
of job loss.
Time can be likened to bank volunteer with the difference that for the time they devote to
someone, someone else gaining time spent in our favor. The essential difference between
LETS and time bank is that LETS are more alternatives to the monetary economy, while time
bank acts as a complement already existing organizations, such as community centers,
schools, hospitals etc., which remains within the monetary economy.
In a similar vein it occurred in the years 1832-1834 in England, an interesting
experiment, whose author is Robert Owen and which involved several thousand artisans. In
practice, the idea was put labor exchanges , therefore, alternative currency, "in which
producers would trade among themselves and in which the value of goods determined by the
work done and material consumed." Of the profits they should be financed villages
cooperation. This experiment was too failed.
Also on the Slovak village of Lukavica in 1999 he took the local currency system. It was
the first system of this type in the Slovak Republic. The monetary unit was called. That
which corresponded to one hour of work. At that time there already existed for several
years, civic associations congregation for harmonious life (PHZ). It bought the Zaježová
economy and bring together enthusiasts who were trying to defy the way of life of the
consumer society favored recycling, frugality and living in a community based on equality
for all. But as with hindsight themselves admit that life in the community was rather
utopian dream theory, which in practice has brought problems, they were not prepared.
"However, problems did not stem from a lack uskromnovania civilizacných výdobytkov. We
underestimated the social side of coexistence and cooperation. "In 1999, however, visited
Slovakia Richard Douthwaite to find a lecture presented LETS. It inspired PHZ members to
try to create a system of local currency. And they also managed. Even here, however, they
encountered difficulties when a few individuals only, and nothing was carrying within LETS
did not contribute. This gradually cause frustration and apathy throughout LETS in
Zaježová, however, the system was able to survive this complication.
Currently works at the Slovak LETS via the internet. Anyone can register and advertise for
goods and services through the placement of advertisements in the database. At the same
time, this site works like a social network, people can find friends here. Although a
virtual LETS nonlocal works in a sense on the same principles. Payment means are called.
Barty . LETS in the Internet can continue to operate, however, it is the question of
whether we can still talk about LETS in the original sense.
Also, the Czech Republic, several people tried to implement LETS. One such case is the
Flight of Brno, which operated from the late 90s with a currency called summer flower .
Another Czech LETS operate at approximately the same time as Flight of, for example, in
the Czech Budejovice (annual ring, which consisted of local currency acorns) or Prague
Agency Gaia, whose currency has been jokingly called smiley . We can say that their part
of a strategy to help solve the precarious economic situation showed LETS especially
abroad. On the territory of the Czech Republic and Slovakia, these local currencies to pay
particular group of enthusiasts, not for the purpose of enhancing the existing economy in
a given locality.
Published in existence no. 1/2013 on the topic of localization.
https://www.afed.cz/text/6562/lets-a-casove-banky
------------------------------
Message: 2
Posted on November 25, 2016 - Federation Tags: anarcha-feminism, Devrimci Anarsist
Faaliyet, feminism, international, Turkey, women's liberation ---- Statement from the
organization Anarchist Women on the "sexual abuse" bill proposed by the governing AK Party
in Turkey, which was recently withdrawn after mass protests from women. Among other
things, the bill would have pardoned men who raped underage girls if the girls married
their rapists. As the AKP is currently ruling through de-facto dictatorship, having
started an internal war against the Kurdish population, declared a permanent "state of
emergency", fired thousands upon thousands of state workers, and arrested the leaders of
the leftist People's Democratic Party (HDP), any victory at all against the government is
significant. However, as Anarchist Women note, this is not a permanent victory, and the
strength that the government continues to hold as long as women are not organized means
that they will continue their attacks on women through other means.
Even though the "sexual abuse" bill prepared by 6 deputies of the AKP and proposed on
November 17 is now withdrawn, it's important to understand what it means for us women,
this proposal which has been confronted by the protests of women since it came up. The
prepared bill decreased the minimum age for sexual consent from 15 to 12 and aimed to lay
the groundwork for: impunity of harassment and rape perpetrators currently in court and in
the future criminal suits; exculpation of sex crimes; acquittal of harassment and rape
perpetrators in case they marry the children that they have abused; exposure of girls to
harassment and rape at the age of 12 and the existence of child brides. Withdrawal of the
bill this morning on one hand became one of the most solid examples showing that we women
become free by resisting, and on the other hand showing the state politics of stalling.
The gender politics of the state are beyond ignoring the identity and body of women and
are shaped by the aim of creating the "conservative society". Bringing birth control to
the agenda by saying "it's a sin", banning abortion by saying "it's a massacre", are of
course population politics on their own. But beyond this, all these politics are related
to the aim of AKP authority: creating and growing a conservative society.
The state which is interested in "conserving" the woman who delivers "a lot" or the woman
who is compelled by the abortion ban to deliver after being pregnant by rape, on one side
conserves the "suppressed" identity of woman and one the other side conserves the
authority of man, through population and body politics against women.
The state which bans the streets today using the State of Emergency as an excuse, is
executing assault politics directly against women's struggle, by closing down women's
associations, arresting women who struggle against patriarchy and torturing women. The
state which bases its existence on its masculinity and the laws of the state becomes a
total attack on our life, the women's life.
Even though the state first proposed new laws to acquit harassment and rape perpetrators,
and then withdrew them later, it is attacking our lives by executing all its politics
about women. We Anarchist Women know that our emancipation is neither related to laws that
the state proposes and later withdraws, nor its punishments, nor its alleged justice. We
sure know that the "sexual abuse" bill will be revised and proposed some time later and be
brought to the agenda again with new proposals that aim to assault our lives.
Therefore we emphasize once again that the only way of our existence against the state,
which sustains its existence by destroying our lives, is through us being organized and
our struggle. Against the state with its laws, bans and alleged justice, which expects us
to beg him, we are resisting and becoming free to create a new life; we are calling all
women to struggle until we destroy patriarchy and state.
Long Live Our Struggle!
Long Live Solidarity Of Women!
ANARCHIST WOMEN
http://www.blackrosefed.org/end-male-state-violence-statement-anarchist-women-sexual-abuse-law/
------------------------------
Message: 3
UVW's monthly supporter scheme is live! Donate £10 a month (or whatever you can afford) to
help them increase their reach and make sure that the most oppressed and unrepresented,
predominantly migrant, workers get the representation they deserve and that miserly and
unscrupulous employers get their just deserts!
http://www.uvwunion.org.uk/supporter/
http://www.classwarparty.org.uk/uvw-union-appeal-support/
------------------------------
Message: 4
Riseup might be compromised. My advice is to keep using it for now but 1) backup
everything on it. 2) don't use it to discuss anything illegal or of potential interest to
usa government in a crack down on its internal dissidents. 3) keep organising and don't
let fear of something that may or may not have happened stop us from radical action. ----
Long version: ---- https://riseup.net/canary ---- Here is all that we know for sure: ----
1) Riseup use a canary system as a warning system that they have had a security order
placed on them including a gag component. They have stated that if such an order were
placed on them compromising their services, that they will not update their canary page.
---- 2) Their canary page was due updated last week, but has not. Due is slight
exaggeration - they state they will endeavour to update every quarter, and their last
update was 16th August. So we might expect them to have updated it on 16th November.
However they used language implying non specificity:
"Riseup intends to update this report approximately once per quarter"
3) Riseup are based in USA
4) Riseup are a collective of volunteers who have progressive politics and a long history
of providing pretty reliable, well regarded internet services to radical movements.
What does this mean? We don't know. There are lots of non-malignant reasons why the canary
has not been updated, such as internal political splits, incompetence, person responsible
having a fresh baby, passphrase getting forgotten. ***We do not know that riseup is
compromised*** And my personal opinion is that riseup would have taken the servers down
and somehow got word out in a more rigorous was than relying on canary expiring if they
had been placed under security/gag order.
However there is no point having an alarm system if we do not listen when it is triggered.
It probably is a false alarm, but lets not be too nonchalant. Also there's plenty of
things that we should do on a regular basis anyway that this should trigger us to do.
Namely BACKUPS!
So, here are my personal recommendations.
1) Back up everything you have on riseup.
If you run a list on there, do it via logging into the list on riseup, click (in left hand
menu) "Admin" and then "Manage Archives". Use shift and select all the months and then
download them. Also download all the list subscribers - click "review members" and then
"Dump" which is just above the "Remind all" button in the main frame.
Put a date in the name of the download files. Do this regularly (eg monthly). Make sure
you can open/read these two backup files.
Also "backup" your personal connections/contacts. If riseup suddenly vanished, what would
you lose/miss? Save all that to somewhere else too.
2) Do not discuss anything that could get you or another into legal bother on a riseup
list, email exchange or other forum. Do not say anything that could reveal the identity of
a dissident, particularly those based in USA. However post Snowden we know that USA
government does share info with UK government so we need to not be complacent.
3) Change your passwords on other sites, and don't use same password in different places.
Here's an explanation on how accessing riseup might have allowed malignant forces to
access your password even if riseup use best practices to protect your password. And if
riseup was compromised for any length of time its also trivial for the government to have
modified the code of the login page to save your password somewhere else when you submit it.
EFF have an excellent guide to generating and managing passwords across multiple sites.
And whilst you're there have a browse of the rest of their surveillance self-defence.
4) Keep calm. Do not allow this to stop us organising and active otherwise the state has
immediately won, possibly without even doing anything but allowing us to fall prey to our
fears.
There might have been a security/gag order placed on riseup, and one reason might not so
much have been to do with information gathering as to do with attacking progressive
movements' infrastructure and therefore ability to organise ourselves.
5) Regardless of whether this turns out to be false alarm or not, we need to ensure our
infrastructure is decentralised, diverse, autonomous and many-headed. Most of us do
probably over rely on riseup to do everything. There are other services, however riseup
for years has been one of the best and most well-known progressive tech collectives. Even
still they have frequently struggled for money. Other collectives exist and still others
have died. This needs to be a bigger discussion but what is happening with the riseup
canary is in this wider context. And if this does turn out to be a false alarm, and you
use/value riseup and want them to be able to continue to provide valuable infrastructure
to progressive movements, donate to them!
https://afed.org.uk/riseups-canary-not-updated-riseup-might-be-compromised-backup-all-the-things/
------------------------------
Message: 5
Review of Samuel Farber, The Politics of Che Guevara (2016) ---- The recent death of Fidel
Castro makes it timely to review this account of how Che Guevara and Fidel Castro created
the ideology and social structure of "Communist" Cuba. ---- Ernesto (Che) Guevara has
become an international icon of the left. Pictures of the martyred revolutionary are
widely seen on tee-shirts and posters, not to mention coffee cups. Movies have been of his
life. He appears even in musicals and movies about unrelated people (for example,
"Evita"). He is admired by people who know little or nothing about him, including liberals
who would never advocate a revolution in their own country. He is also admired by people
who would like a revolution, one which would reorganize the U.S. to have the same system
as Castroite Cuba. There are those who condemn Che (and Castro's Cuba) in the name of
democracy and freedom, but they are mostly supporters of U.S. imperialism and Western
capitalism, with little appeal to radicals.
Aside from a few books by anarchists (see Dolgoff 1976; Fernandez 2001), it is rare, and
immensely valuable, to read a discussion of Che and Cuba from a viewpoint that is
anti-imperialist and anti-capitalist but also against authoritarian "socialism". (Farber
2011) Samuel Farber is a Cuban-born writer and activist who lives in the US. He has
described his politics as "revolutionary democratic socialist." (Farber 1976; xii) "My
political roots are in the classical Marxist tradition that preceded Stalinism....To be a
fully participatory democracy, socialism must be based on the self-mobilization and
organization of the people, and the rule of the majority has to be be complemented by
minority rights and civil liberties." (xvii-if I do not give the year, then I am citing
Farber 2016.) Although rooted in the Leninist and Trotskyist tradition, he has written
insightfully on the deficiencies in Lenin's outlook which contributed to the rise of
Stalinist totalitarianism, in a way in which anarchists would find much to agree. (Farber
1990) His radically democratic values do not prevent him from writing dispassionately and
objectively, even about individuals and social forces he is opposed to.
Che was born in 1928, into a progressive bohemian middle class family in Argentina. Before
and after becoming a physician, Che traveled around Latin America, becoming aware of the
poverty and suffering of the people and the domination of U.S. imperialism. He was living
in Guatemala in 1954, when soldiers backed by the CIA overthrew the democratically elected
liberal nationalist Jacobo Arbenz , killing his supporters. He participated in the Cuban
revolution (1956-1959), as one of the top supporters of Fidel Castro, and served at the
highest levels of the Cuban government for six years (1959-1965). In 1965, he attempted to
participate in revolutionary struggles in the eastern Congo, an effort he described as a
"failure." Then he tried to build a revolutionary movement in Bolivia, in 1966, another
failure. He was captured and then murdered by the Bolivian military.
The Choice of "Communism"
When Che became a revolutionary in the 1950s, he became a Marxist, of the sort which
admired the Soviet Union as a model of "socialism," including its one-party dictatorship
and nationalized, centralized, economy. In 1957 he wrote, "I belong to those who believe
that the solution to the world's problems are behind the so-called iron Curtain...." (27)
He admired the tyrant Joseph Stalin. Visiting the Soviet Union in 1960, he wanted to put
flowers on Stalin's grave. The Cuban ambassador advised against it (it was four years
since Khrushchev's speech denouncing Stalin's atrocities). But Che did it anyway.
Given the pressures of the Cold War, it was not surprising that many radicals turned
against the evil they knew (Western imperialism) toward the obvious alternative of the
Soviet Union and its "Communist" Parties. (See Price 2016) "Democracy" they knew only as
the corrupt and brutal politicking of pro-U.S. oligarchies. Yet this was still a choice,
not an inevitability.
Other revolutionaries made different choices. For example, one of the Cuban guerrillas,
"Daniel" (who was killed in the mountains) opposed both the policies of the U.S. and the
Soviet Union. He was described as a "radical workerist nationalist." (27) Inside the
loosely organized July 26th Movement, there was a trend which opposed the policies of the
U.S. and the USSR. It was anti-imperialist but in opposition to the old Cuban Communist
Party. They sought to create a revolutionary organization which was democratically
controlled, excluding the old Communists. This tendency was sometimes called "humanist."
After Batista fled, these revolutionary humanists won the leadership of most of the Cuban
unions, throwing out the corrupt allies of Batista and beating the Communists in
elections. The Castro government maneuvered to get rid of these democratic radicals, using
both Castro's prestige among the workers (which was very high at that point) as well as
state power. The humanist anti-imperialists were effectively purged, union democracy
undermined, and the old (and unpopular) Communists put into union offices. (56-58)
Eventually the Castroites merged with the old Communists, as Che had been advocating.
Besides this, Cuba has a long history of revolutionary anarcho-syndicalist unions and
activists. "Anarchist influence was strong in working class circles in Cuba in the first
twenty-five or thirty years of this century." (Farber 1976; 65; see also Fernandez 2001;
Shaffer 2010)
Fidel, Che, and Raul Castro insisted on a strategy which made the guerrilla struggle the
center of the revolutionary struggle, and the guerrilla leader the overall boss. The
organization in the cities, in the unions, the work places, and the schools, was
subordinated to the guerrilla leadership, and was limited to being basically a support
structure. Farber asks, "Was guerrilla warfare as a military strategy inherently
incompatible with an orientation to the working class?...A guerrilla strategy is
compatible with many different political ideologies and class commitments....A large and
well-organized labor or multi-class urban movement in a prerevolutionary period might have
its own fighting units and military commands both in urban and rural areas." (49) This is
consistent with the experience of anarchist-led guerrilla armies, such as Makhno in the
Ukraine during the Russian revolution.
The point is that Che and the other Cuban leaders did not turn to the authoritarian state
"Communism" because they had to-although there were great pressures on them-but as a
deliberate political choice.
Che's Authoritarian Views
In the Sierra mountains, Che insisted that the guerrilla army be organized in a top-down,
undemocratic, fashion-even in matters such as managing the base camps. "Revolutionary
democracy has never been applied to the running of armies...." (quoted on 36) In industry
under "socialism", Che did not feel that union officials should defend their workers from
management. "[It is]necessary to change the way of thinking of labor union leaders. Their
function is not to shout louder than the boss or to impose absurd measures within the
production system such as getting wages for people that do not work." (quoted on 67) Rene'
Dumont, the French radical agronomist, tried to persuade Che to support workers' democracy
in agricultural cooperatives, to promote their sense of "ownership." He responded, "It is
not a sense of ownership that they[the workers]should be given, but rather a sense of
responsibility." (quoted on 68) Farber summarizes, "He never considered the possibility of
developing democratic mechanisms to integrate local workplaces with higher national levels
of decision-making." (101)
Che believed in equality but not in individuality (although he himself was quite a
distinctive individual). In 1960 he stated, "One has to constantly think on behalf of
masses and not of individuals....The needs of the individual becomes completely weakened
in the face of the needs of the human conglomeration." In 1964, he declared that the
individual "becomes happy to feel himself a cog in the wheel, a cog that has its own
characteristics and is necessary, though not indispensable, to the production
process...that consciously tries to push itself harder and harder to carry[on]...the
construction of socialism...." (quoted on 18) This is quite different from Marx and
Engels' goal, in the Communist Manifesto, of "an association in which the free development
of each is the condition for the free development of all." (1955; 32)
Che's views meshed with those of Fidel Castro. Castro did not begin as a Marxist-Leninist
ideologue, unlike Che (and Raul). It is Farber's opinion that Fidel might have taken
another road than "Communism" as such. But from the earliest days he had a personally
authoritarian approach, which was congruent with Che's Stalinist Marxism. In short, Fidel
believed that he should be boss. As early as 1954, Fidel wrote to a close friend,
"Conditions which are indispensable for the integration of a truly civic
movement[are]ideology, discipline, and chieftainship....Chieftainship is basic....A
movement cannot be organized where everyone believes he has the right to issue public
statements without consulting anyone else...." (quoted in Farber 1976; 197) There is no
big jump from that to Fidel's 1965 statement, "Educating and orienting the revolutionary
masses is an unrenounceable prerogative of our party, and we will be very jealous
defenders of that right." (in same; xiii)
This is a direct rejection of the goal of the democratic self-organization of the working
class and its allies. Anarchists want to establish the most radical, participatory,
democracy of all, replacing the bureaucratic-military state with the self-organization of
the working class and all oppressed people-through federations and networks of workplace
and neighborhood councils, assemblies, and democratic militias.
What Was Cuban "Socialism"?
The economic system first established in the Soviet Union had collectivized, state-owned,
industry, without stocks or other share-holding, run by an oligarchy of managers. In Cuba,
as in the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, China, and elsewhere, the system vacillated
between two poles. One pole-perhaps the ideal vision of what its supporters wanted
"socialism" to look like-was of a totally coordinated economy, run from one center by
bureaucrats, carrying out a conscious, integrated, plan. It would look something like a
single capitalist corporation or even a single factory. The overall goal was to accumulate
and grow as a total system. In the 60s, Che wrote, "...Centralized planning is the way of
life of a socialist society." (quoted in 107)
The other pole was of a lot of distinct (but state-owned) enterprises, competing with each
other on the market, buying and selling with each other, each trying to make its own
profit-under the overall supervision and regulation of the central planners.
Both approaches had inherent weaknesses. The first one worked to squeeze a surplus out of
workers through brute force, as in the early days of Stalin's Russia. But it lacked
incentives to keep the workers producing when more sophisticated methods were needed. And
the central planners lacked accurate feedback from the lower levels-since they had ruled
out workers' democratic participation. The central plans were never fulfilled. The
Stalinist planners kept on turning toward the other pole to improve production.
But the more decentralized, pluralistic, method still lacked workers' participation (so it
could not benefit from the workers' creativity, nor get accurate information from below
upwards). The overall system became chaotic and deeply conflictual, at every level. The
plans were still not fulfilled. The ultimate logic of the system was the eventual
restoration of traditional, stock-holding, capitalism.
In Cuba in 1963-65, this was argued out in terms of a "centralized budgetary system of
finance", which Che had carried out in his Ministry of Industry, versus "enterprise
self-finance," which was supported in Cuba by Soviet advisors. (I say it was "argued out,"
but the debate was limited to a small layer of officials.)
This was tied up with a debate over "moral" versus "material" incentives for the workers.
Che was for "moral" incentives, which fit his ascetic personal values (he often went for
weeks without changing shirts or taking baths). Since the workers had no control over
production, locally or nationally, then "moral" incentives meant that they were encouraged
to work harder without an increase in pay.
Che condemned the Soviet Union for its use of "enterprise self-finance," regarding it as
recreating commodity production and the "law of value." (Which means that an economy is
dominated by the exchange of commodities on the market, commodities being bought and sold
for money, including the ability of the workers to work[the commodity of labor power]-and
that the price of these commodities is ultimately determined by the socially necessary
amount of labor which goes into them; without a conscious plan, the economy is determined
by the exchange of labor-created commodities produced separately.)
In my opinion, the Soviet Union (and Cuba) was not moving toward capitalism (and the law
of value) but was already capitalist-state capitalist. (For state capitalist theory, see
Daum 1990; Hobson & Tabor 1988) In a distorted form, it already was dominated by the laws
of capitalism. Even the totalitarian, completely merged, model which Che wanted would
still be capitalist. The state would still have bought the workers' labor power as
commodities (for money), worked them as hard as possible, made them produce more value
than they are paid, made them produce consumer goods as commodities, and sold the
commodities (for money) to the workers. That is, there was a capital/labor exchange in the
process of production as well as on the market. As under traditional capitalism, the goal
of the system would be ever greater accumulation of wealth. And even if Cuba was regarded
as one enterprise (Cuba Inc.), it still was enormously dependent on the world market,
buying and selling commodities.
"Guevara also recognized that the law of value had to operate[in Cuba], if only partially,
because of Cuba's highly developed foreign trade sector....[Also]Che cited the type of
exchange that took place between the state as a supplier and the individual consumer." (108)
Farber does not agree with me that either Cuba or the Soviet Union, in the 60s, was state
capitalist. Instead of capitalism, he feels that they "represented instead another form of
class society, albeit one not organized on the basis of private capitalist property." (95)
"Such bureaucratic societies are characterized by the production of use values....The
state apparatus appropriates this surplus through the mechanisms of planning and
control-by determining what, how much, and where goods are produced." (119) I think he
overestimates how much real control the bureaucratic ruling class had over the production
process as an overall system; to repeat, national plans were never fulfilled. "The
surplus...goes first to fund accumulation and investment, defense, and other forms of
spending as decided by the bureaucracy, and as the capitalists and the capitalist market
do under capitalism." (119) I agree that the bureaucratic class played a similar function
as the traditional capitalists and the market. However, this analysis underplays the
element of competition, inside the system and between the national system and other states
and corporations. And it does not really analyze the relation between the accumulating
state and the exploited working class, which (I believe) is in essence the same as
traditional capitalism.
In 1988, Fidel Castro told a group of Mexican businesspeople, whom he wanted to invest in
Cuba, "We are capitalists, but state capitalists. We are not private capitalists." (quoted
in Daum 1990; 232)
In any case, Farber concludes that, "under Raul Castro's leadership, the Cuban government
has been striving...toward...a form of state capitalism calling for the development of
Cuban and especially foreign private enterprise while the state, under the exclusive
control of the Communist Party, retains the commanding heights of the economy, a far cry
from Guevara's model of state control of the whole economy." (xv-xvi)
Looking Backward
Che liked science fiction and he had read the U.S. utopian novel, Looking Backward.
(Bellamy 1960) This was written by Edward Bellamy in the late 19th century. It presented
an imaginary future socialist society, organized cooperatively and producing for use, not
profit. The collectivized economy is merged with the state. The workers are organized into
labor armies, modeled on the military, and, to an extent, on the biggest corporations.
Democracy is almost nonexistent; the worker-soldiers do not vote. Society is run by a
benevolent bureaucracy. According to a friend of Che's, he very much admired this book,
declaring that "it coincided with what we are proposing." (quoted on 110)
In his "Foreward" to the 1960 edition of Looking Backward, Erich Fromm notes that the main
criticism it has received is about its "hierarchical bureaucratic principle of
administration....Bellamy's state is a highly centralized one, in which the state not only
owns the means of production, but also regulates all public activities....Bellamy did not
see the dangers of a managerial society....He did not recognize that the bureaucrat is a
man[or woman-WP]who administers things and people and who relates to people as to things.
...Man loses his individuality and initiative;...the bureaucratic system eventually tends
to produce machines that act like men and men who act like machines." (Fromm 1960; xi-xii;
also see Lipow 1982)
But Che admired this vision, it was "what we are proposing."
As Farber shows, Che hated poverty, U.S. imperialism (the Soviet Union's imperialism was
more-or-less acceptable), capitalism (at least traditional capitalism), and other evils of
this oppressive, bloody, system. That is what he was against. But what he was for was an
authoritarian-if not totalitarian-vision of "socialism."
Opposing Castroite authoritarianism, Farber is in solidarity with the Cuban people against
U.S. imperialism. That is, he supports their right to national self-determination. It is
for the Cuban workers and oppressed to decide the fate of the ruling bureaucracy, not the
U.S. imperialists. Supporting self-determination does not at all mean political support
for the Communist Party government. It means solidarity with the Cuban people (mostly
workers and peasants) against the U.S. The U.S. continues (even now) to embargo Cuban
travel and trade; it tries-one way or another-to dominate the Cuban state and economy; and
it still holds Guantanamo as a U.S. military base and prison on Cuban soil. As can be
seen, this opinion does not lessen Farber's revolutionary opposition to the Cuban state
oligarchy.
This is a brilliant and insightful book. Despite its small size, I have not been able to
cover all the topics it raises. Samuel Farber is on the side of the working class and the
oppressed. He is not an anarchist. Unfortunately he believes that there can be a
revolutionary democratic state of some sort. Yet he wants a society where "workers have
the power to decide; that is self-management at the workplace and decision-making in
society at large by the whole working class and population....But workers' control at the
workplace entails a degree of local decision-making-and therefore of decentralization-that
is contrary to Guevara's approach." (98-99)
Anarchists can agree on this much, and more. Farber concludes that anticapitalist radicals
"who may have been inspired by the intransigent revolutionary spirit represented by
Guevara's iconic image may attain their goals...only through a process that brings
together the politics of socialism, democracy, and revolution." (119-120)
References
Bellamy, Edward (1960). Looking Backward; 2000-1887. NY: New American Library/Signet.
Daum, Walter (1990). The Life and Death of Stalinism; A Resurrection of Marxist Theory.
NY: Socialist Voice Publishing.
Dolgoff, Sam (1976). The Cuban Revolution: A Critical Perspective. Montreal: Black Rose Books.
http://www.iww.org/history/library/Dolgoff/cuba
Farber, Samuel (2016). The Politics of Che Guevara: Theory and Practice. Chicago IL:
Haymarket Books.
Farber, Samuel (2011). Cuba Since the Revolution of 1959; A Critical Assessment. Chicago
IL: Haymarket Books.
Farber, Samuel (1990). Before Stalinism: The Rise and Fall of Soviet Democracy. London/NY:
Verso.
Farber, Samuel (1976). Revolution and Reaction in Cuba, 1933-1960; A Political Sociology
from Macao to Castro. Middletown CN: Wesleyan University Press.
Fernandez, Frank (2001). Cuban Anarchism: The History of a Movement. Phoenix AZ: See Sharp
Press.
https://libcom.org/library/cuba-anarchism-history-of-mo...andez
Fromm, Erich (1960). "Foreward." In Bellamy (1960). Pp. v-xx.
Hobson, Christopher Z., & Tabor, Ronald D. (1988). Trotskyism and the Dilemma of
Socialism. NY/Westport CN/ London: Greenwood Press.
Lipow, Arthur (1982). Authoritarian Socialism in America; Edward Bellamy and the
Nationalist Movement. Berkeley CA/ London: University of California Press.
Marx, Karl, & Engels, Friedrich (1955). The Communist Manifesto (S. Beer, ed.). Northbrook
IL: AHM Publishing.
Price (2016). "The Attempted ‘Rehabilitation' of the Communist Party USA: An Anarchist
Perspective on the History of US Communism."
Anarkismo. http://www.anarkismo.net/article/29126
Shaffer, Kirk (2010). "Tropical Libertarians: Anarchist Movements and Networks in the
Caribbean, Southern United States, and Mexico, 1890s-1920s." In Hirsch, Steven, & van der
Walt, Lucien (eds.). Anarchism and Syndicalism in the Colonial and Post-Colonial World,
1870-1940. Leiden/Boston: Brill. Pp. 273-320.
originally published in Anarcho-Syndicalist Review
http://www.anarkismo.net/article/29795
------------------------------
Message: 6
People’s Protection Units (YPG) volunteers, American Michael Israel (27) from Colorado and
German Anton Neshek (Zana Ciwan), were killed by Turkish warplanes on 29 November
according to another international volunteer fighting alongside the pair against the
Islamic State group (IS/ISIS/ISIL), north of Raqqa. [updated]. ---- On his Facebook page,
the international volunteer, who was amongst the group killed by Turkish warplanes wrote:
---- “We were taking a small village when we got hit by Turkish jets in the night. Two of
my friends, Anton and Michael were killed among many others. I’m staying to finish out my
six months. Fuck Erdogan and Fuck Turkey.” ---- The YPG have informed both men’s families.
---- Another of Micheal Israel’s comrades posted the following message on his Facebook page:
“It’s with a heavy heart that I learn today heval [friend] Michael Israel has passed away
fighting ISIS as a volunteer with the YPG in Rojava. Michael was a man of extremely
powerful convictions; an inspiring, idealistic fighter who struggled unlike any other for
a better world, not just for a better Kurdistan and a better America. He spent his whole
life fighting systems of injustice that deny peace, and trekked the states spreading
awareness against the Iraq war. He conferred his experiences and lessons from both Syria
and the states with everyone. He died the very way he lived, and his legacy is an example
of how a true revolutionary should be. History will exalt him as one of the greatest of
our generation, like many others. He taught me a lot, I’ll never forget him. Rest in power
heval”
According to reports Michael Israel was an anarchist and member of IWW (Industrial Workers
of the World).
In a Facebook post on 11 August 2016, Israel, who had spent two stints in Rojava wrote:
“I am back in Rojava again and will be here for the next several months to do my part in
defending the revolution.
The Rojava struggle is the most dynamic and ground breaking revolutionary movement of our
time. I am determined that it is the job of leftist allies and internationalists to rally
behind this movement, to help build it up and learn from it. Things that we may have only
dreamed of in theoretical writing are acted upon in Rojava, modified and adapted to their
struggle and made real. Rojava is doing this all and reorganizing society despite the
chaos and destruction of 5 years of civil war. The gains of the revolution under such
austere and harsh conditions is truly remarkable.
Now that I am back in Rojava, I know all my needs will be met. Here I will never be in
want of basic necessities for lack of money. I, like all others in Rojava, will never go
without food and water, clothing or a place to rest my head at night. The movement takes
care of people here.
That is not to say though that Rojava and the rest of Syria do not need help though.
I’m calling on all of my friends and comrades to learn about the Rojava revolution and how
they have been leading the charge in the war against ISIS fascists. I’m calling on all of
you who are able, to do your part in helping or sending donations so that this revolution
may become stronger with the aid of the international community.”
Michael Israel becomes the 5th American YPG volunteer to be killed in battle against the
Islamic State in Rojava but the first to be killed by Turkish fire.
Anton Neshek is the 4th German to be killed in the ranks of the Kurdish forces.
It is not known how many other fighters of the YPG, a leading force in the multi-ethnic
SDF which launched the ‘Wrath of Euphrates’ operation to liberate Raqqa from IS, were
killed in the aerial attack.
01.12.16:
Anarchist comrade and member of the IWW (Industrial Workers of the World) Michael Israel
from the US has been killed in action fighting alongside YPG / YPJ forces against ‘Islamic
State’ fascists in Rojava, Northern Syria. Full details of the circumstances surrounding
the comrades death have not been released yet.
Here is part of a message Michael posted to his Facebook page on August 11, 2016:
Hey everyone,
I am back in Rojava again and will be here for the next several months to do my part in
defending the revolution.
The Rojava struggle is the most dynamic and ground breaking revolutionary movement of our
time. I am determined that it is the job of leftist allies and internationalists to rally
behind this movement, to help build it up and learn from it. Things that we may have only
dreamed of in theoretical writing are acted upon in Rojava, modified and adapted to their
struggle and made real. Rojava is doing this all and reorganizing society despite the
chaos and destruction of 5 years of civil war. The gains of the revolution under such
austere and harsh conditions is truly remarkable.
Now that I am back in Rojava, I know all my needs will be met. Here I will never be in
want of basic necessities for lack of money. I, like all others in Rojava, will never go
without food and water, clothing or a place to rest my head at night. The movement takes
care of people here.
That is not to say though that Rojava and the rest of Syria do not need help though.
I’m calling on all of my friends and comrades to learn about the Rojava revolution and how
they have been leading the charge in the war against ISIS fascists. I’m calling on all of
you who are able, to do your part in helping or sending donations so that this revolution
may become stronger with the aid of the international community.
Mike
------------------------------
Message: 7
Its activists, John and Michael, described the first event: "On Sunday 20 November, we
first Strakonice provided for free vegan food to people without a roof over your head. We
met at the gazebo behind the Priorat and food from us took eight newcomers. This resulted
in a second cell Bohemian organization Food Not Bombs. For now, we are preparing this
activity once every 14 days (Sundays) and negotiations are covered space for the handover
meals. When this activity runs around, we would like to implement further the idea of the
movement - the use of foods that are unnecessarily discarded. " ---- If you're from
Strakonice or around the city and would like to join a new team FNB get in touch with
them. https://www.facebook.com/Food-not-bombs-Strakonice-1665556240441745
https://www.afed.cz/text/6563/novy-kolektiv-fnb
------------------------------
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten