Re: [OPE] England and Ireland

brbapuji@yahoo.com

While appreciating Paul Bullock's and Jerry's observations, let me specify a concrete example.
  In the province of Andhra Pradesh, India, there is a region called Telangana and there has been a 'movement' led by one section of the ruling class [composed of landlords, capitalists of all kinds] but supported by certain sections of the 'people': who demand 'fair' share in governmental employment, educational opportunities, river waters for irrigation. The demand is for a separate 'state' [= province] within the union of India. In fact a separate 'state' will not solve the problem of unemployment and other forms of inequality among the regions but it is like a temporary relief from some problems. But the leaders of the movement assure permanent solution for the regional imbalance and backwardness etc.
  Due to unevenness of development and many other aspects of bourgeois rule, there have been contradictions between the people [certain sections of the people] of Telangana region and other 'relatively' more 'developed' regions in the spheres of governmental employment, education and irrigation facilities etc. The leaders of both the leaders whip up regional chavenism and making all sorts of false promises. 
  In this context, a Maoist group is supporting the demand for a separate state, while the Communist Party of India: Marxist [popularly called CPM] opposing it on the grounds of unity of Telugu speaking people of the entire state. Another parliamentary party CPI is in dilemma whether to support or oppose: its leaders are split in to two opinions.
  For more information about Telangana movement, one may visit google search engine.
  Bapuji

paul bullock <paulbullock@ebms-ltd.co.uk> wrote:
    .hmmessage P {   PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px  }  BODY.hmmessage {   FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma  }        Bapuji... these are political questions that must be answered from the standpoint of aiming to overthrow existing state and so class relations...

  In your question we could ask what about the Sikhs, or the Basques etc.?.The answer must rest in the relation between workers of the immediately involved countries. Are the workers in the  poorer 'regions'  supported in their demands by those in the wealthier ? 

  This question can be complicated when national oppression is experienced by richer areas.  The Basque country is a wealthy area within Spain. If the Spanish workers as a whole supported full autonomy for the Basque country the Basques socialist parties could create a strategy that differs from the present, and raise  more effectively their socialist demands which would have a further impetus throughout Spain.That Spanish governments have systematically tried to crush any party that  won't compromise with market 'solutions', (ie no solutions), to national demands in Euskadi is only possible because the workers movement throughout Spain has been weakened and actually won't defend the right to exist of parties that won't conceed  to a monopoly of power to the Madrid government. That the entire Basque political leadership - and of different parties -  are thrown into prison in Spain for having some connection to neighbours, friends, etc who were at another time linked to
 previously banned parties, and that this is passively accepted by the majority of  Spanish workers is really shocking. (This is why the PP can be so close to power, and have been in power, when the level and extent of its narrow self interest and  blatant corruption in that party is SO well established, and its leaders so close to Bush, Uribé etc.)

  Such national movements are often called reactionary, and certainly the break up of countries can serve the interests of big imperialist powers. The 'break up' thus has to be shown to be a result of the failure of the workers in the rest of the state to actively support the progressive content of the 'local' demands, and form a common programme with them. This is a dynamic and creative process, based on the systematic development of a deepening of the internationalist democratic programme. The fight for unity between nations and support for equal development without exploitation is the touchstone.

  Paul B

    ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: GERALD LEVY 
  To: Outline on Political Economy mailing list 
  Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 7:00 PM
  Subject: RE: [OPE] England and Ireland

    > How do you explain or extend the same formulation to those instances where there are regional imbalances and as a result > struggle for separate provinces within the same bourgeois constitution?

  Hi Bapuji:

  Good question. The answer is yes, I believe.  For instance, one might
  say that the Mexican working class will never be free so long as
  the people of Oaxaca are subjugated.  Or, so long as there is caste
  oppression in India, the Indian working class will never be free.

  In US history, I think it would have been valid to claim that so long as
  there was slavery the US, wage working class would never be free.
  This did not mean that the end of slavery represented freedom for 
  wage-workers but it constituted a necessary, historical pre-requisite 
  for that eventuality.  

  One might also say that so long as women are oppressed, men will
  never be free. Yes? 

  ------

  Hi Dave Z:

  I agree, of course,  that US reaction does not have its roots in the
  occupation of Iraq. That should be clear since US reaction obviously
  pre-dated that occupation.  But, I think it is nonetheless true,
  paraphrasing Lenin, that "Reaction in the US is strengthened by
  the occupation of Iraq".  Yes, it's true, that Iraqis will free
  themselves from their occupiers yet class society in the US will
  persist but that would represent a defeat for US imperialism and a 
  victory for the international working class.

  In solidarity, Jerry

--------------------------------------------------------------
    .ExternalClass .EC_hmmessage P  {padding:0px;}  .ExternalClass EC_body.hmmessage  {font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;}    "The English working class will never accomplish anything until it
has got rid of Ireland. The English reaction has its roots in the
subjugation of Ireland"  - [Marx, December 10, 1869]

"The English working class will never be free until Ireland is
freed from the English yoke. Reaction in England is 
strengthened by the enslavement of Ireland (just as reaction 
in Russia is fostered by her enslavement of a number of nations)".
- [Lenin - 1915, _The Right of Nations to Self-Determination_,
Section 8: "The Utopian Karl Marx and the Practical Rosa 
Luxemburg"]

The same could be said in  relation to Iraq, couldn't it?
The US working class will never be free until Iraq is freed
from the US yoke?  What are some other contemporary 
extensions?

---------------------------------

_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope

B.R.Bapuji, Professor, 
Centre for Applied Linguistics & Translation Studies [CALTS],
University of Hyderabad, Central University post office, 
HYDERABAD-500 046. (Phone: 040-23133655,23133650 or 23010161). 
Residence address: 
76, Lake-side Colony, Near Durgam Cheruvu, [End of Road opp:Madapur Police Station], Jubilee Hills post, Hyderabad-500033. 
(Phone: 040-23117302)

---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.

_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope