Hello Anthony B & Marv: I think that the factual details amassed by Roberts are clear and certainly beyond any potential for my contestation.
What I think is missing is the conceptual framework. The identity of Chavez in class terms is not clearly spelt out. At least in my opinion. When Roberts classifies Chavez as simply an 'anti-capitalist'. As for eg "The coming to power of Chavez had threatened capitalist interests in Venezuela and blocked US multi-national investment, unlike in Mexico". This is no more than to say he was a reformist, and confuses two seprate strands national capital and US capital interests. Personally I think the conceptual framework is far superior and clearer - when considering the Leninist strategy. That is as was articulated to the 2nd Congress (?I think it was the one) after the debate and acceptance of some of M.N.Roy's corrections. The basic conclusion recommended by Lenin was that in developing or colonial-type countries, a first stage of national democratic revolution should be supported, but with no "Chinese Wall" between that stage and the second stage being a socialist revolution. That basic strategic outline, or conceptual framework, has been dumped on by left-wingers since some perversions of its basic principles. I believe that these were led by highly placed revisionists in the Comintern such as Kuusinen. But it was shortly, to be particularly fueled by Mao and his followers. I believe that conceptual framework works for Chavez (-> https://ml-review.ca/aml/PAPER/JANUARY2003/chavez_Jan2003.htm ). In South America I believe this helps explain some key parts of the histories of several countries. For example Bolivia ( https://mlcurrents.net/2021/12/27/founding-document-communist-party-bolivia/) ; Peru ( https://mlcurrents.net/2021/10/08/on-the-death-of-abimael-guzman-a-k-a-chairman-gonzalo-1934-2021/ and later on: https://mlcurrents.net/2021/11/09/elections-2021-and-peruvian-reformist-politicians-promises-promises/ ). But the peculiar and key conceptual warping by revisionists in South America was from Cuba ( http://ml-review.ca/aml/CommunistLeague/Compass101-Cuba92.htm ) I am well aware that this conceptual analysis does not sit well with many here. But it is a rare time that I would have the temerity to 'correct' or disagree with Roberts usually impeccable analyses. Again, I do not dispute any of his factual matter that he lays out there. Best Regards, Be well, H -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#31328): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/31328 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/107582765/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. #4 Do not exceed five posts a day. -=-=- Group Owner: marxmail+ow...@groups.io Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/8674936/21656/1316126222/xyzzy [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
