[FSFLA] Fwd: Re: Building alternatives to neoliberalism in Latin America today

[willi uebelherr]

Dear friends,

this is the answer from Michael. I send it to the two lists, because he 
is not a member.

Many thanks for your time, Michael. I have sent your answer as a comment 
to Links.org.au. I hope you agree. In the next days i will continue our 
discussion.

many greetings, willi


-------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht --------
Betreff: Re: Building alternatives to neoliberalism in Latin America today
Datum: Sun, 19 Jun 2016 15:18:13 -0700
Von: michael a. lebowitz <mlebowit at sfu.ca>
An: willi uebelherr <willi.uebelherr at riseup.net>
Kopie (CC): Marta Harnecker <mharnecker at gmail.com>, WSF discuss 
<WorldSocialForum-Discuss at openspaceforum.net>, fsfla discusion 
<discusion at fsfla.org>, links at dsp.org.au

Dear Willi,

Thank you for comments on the interview with me in Links.

      I think we agree on the goal. We desire a society which is marked 
by a profound democracy and popular protagonism in workplaces and 
communities. We clearly also see decentralisation of decision-making as 
a condition by which people can develop fully. In this respect, we 
reject the model of 'real socialism', that society characterised by a 
relation of 'conductor and conducted' which I described in my book, 
/Contradictions of 'Real Socialism': the Conductor and the Conducted. 
/In its place, we look to the society of associated producers that Marx 
described as the 'self-government of the producers', one based upon the 
workers councils and neighbourhood councils that Chavez called the 
'cells of a new socialist state' (but that you may wish to call the 
'Unstate', as I suggest in my essay on the State in /The Socialist 
Imperative: from Gotha to Now/).

      Our agreement (unless I am mistaken) about the goal  is important, 
As I often have repeated, if you don't know where you want to go, no 
road will take you there. However, that is only a starting point. The 
critical question, indeed the /real /question, is how do you get there? 
On this matter, there is a great difference between us.

      You say that I repeat several errors of the socialist movements of 
the last 150 years. Indeed, you propose that we need to abolish states, 
monetary systems, nations, gods. How? Apparently. for you these are the 
result of bad thoughts. The state, you declare, 'does not exist.' It 
exists only 'inside our heads. In our thinking.' And money and the 
monetary system? It is not part of the economy but only in the sphere of 
distribution: 'a virtual layer that does not exist in reality.' Free 
your heads. Free your heads and self-organise the economy. Free your 
heads and abolish the 'sphere of egoism and parasitism, organized 
stupidity, lies and silly chatter. All governmental organizations.' Is 
this the way you propose to get to the goal-- by explaining that what 
exists is a virtual layer? As you can see from /The Socialist 
Imperative, /I stress the need to take the existing state away from 
capital and to use it to nurture the cells of the new socialist state 
and the need for a political instrument that knows how to walk on both 
these two legs.

      Given your perspective, what you have to say about Venezuela or 
Chavez can not be a surprise, and in my view is not worth debating with 
respect to concrete matters (as, for example, 'Mision Vivenda', that 
programme so important in providing housing for all those people living 
in shacks, etc in the hills but which you dismiss as 'nonsense'. Far 
more interesting for me is to know what you are doing in Brazil, given 
the recent coup, and how this relates to your political perspective.

best wishes, michael