From: GERALD LEVY (gerald_a_levy@MSN.COM)
Date: Wed Dec 05 2007 - 09:16:13 EST
>>> I agree wit everything you say. But I feel that there is a deeper problem here that needs to be addressed.Once again Venezuela experience shows that the change of political power must be accompanied by the change of property rights.And this in turn requires some radical political measures. This cannot be done without centralising the political power. Justifiably people expect some improvements in the material conditions of their lives. If political measures are delayed in that respect understandably people will get impatient and will not show any interests in what so ever is happening in the country. That almost half of the people did not go to vote is a sign of tiredness. In South Africa political power has changed. Black people got their citizen rights. But the material conditions of their lives have hardly changed. Just because the South African government did not touched property rights. <<< Hi Dogan: The change in property rights, though, requires a commitment and understanding on the part of the masses for such a change. History, I think, teaches us that revolutionary change can not be imposed (or, at least, sustained) from above by enlightened leaders. As Mike L recently put it, "Without workers' control, there can be no socialism". A corollary might be: without mass participation and consensus, there can be no genuine revolution. This is a message that should have been learned in Venezuela when the masses, following the brief CIA-inspired coup, took to the streets and put Chavez back in the President's office. Chavez owes everything - including his life - to that mass support. The challenge, thus, for the Bolivarians is to assist in the empowerment of the masses - the ones who will in the last analysis be the agents of revolutionary change. In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Dec 31 2007 - 00:00:04 EST