Every social system is defined by the form of property of means of production. Every system after Socialism is supported by the non-social property. The form of property is important because around it is a specific culture that justifies it, reproduces it and perpetuates it. Then, culture and property constitute a set, a system.
The change in the form of property is a main matter for Revolution, it only does possible the new culture, spirituality and a Socialist conscious.
In Venezuela, a country with a renter economy and oil dependent, the great challenge to Revolution is: What to do with the oil income? How to transform it in a Socialist crowbar?
The income was used to stimulate a parasitic bourgeoisie, non-productive, mendicant population with a great dissociation between effort and success. Summarily, oil created a culture that corresponded to a country doped by the income, missed from work, spendthrift and facile. So, it facilitated and distracted the predation of nationwide wealth by “gringos”, who took it to despicable prices.
When the Bolivarian Revolution took control over oil, it used it primarily to solve the huge social debt, the materialistic and spiritual. Food programs and educational programs are an example. Like this, people perceived a loving government.
That first stage was necessary, but it rapidly bumped into the crucial question of any Revolution: How can we change relations of property of means of production, the supporters of culture? Or, when, we remember The Miserable, which frequently Chavez quotes: How to demolish the mill and the wind that moves it?
The answers emerge from ideological positions, it is a fight for the process domination, it is the principal scenery of the inevitable confrontation that every Revolution has, along with restoring reformism.
It is not the first time that restoring reformists propose create a neo-bourgeoisie with the income, and strengthen the traditional bourgeoisie by saying that they now will produce, and that they will have a human face to construct what they call “productive nation.”
They create ghosts and strangle the Socialist possibility justified during the emergencies. For example: they deprive the lack of houses and pretend to make it a mere technical problem. It is a trap to Socialism…Construct houses and simultaneously build bourgeoisie means a pretext to construct houses, smuggle the conditions to plunge humans into the spiritual and material misery which are Capitalism.
Those faces will cost expensive to this society; they are a way to transfer the income to bourgeoisie, that way it will gain resources and political benefit, we raise crows, they will cost us hope. Bourgeoisie will never solve a problem to Socialism.
The challenge is to create Socialist awareness and at the same time build houses so the humble understand that the working power is collective and in society, to reinforce the link effort-success and to rescue the value of voluntary work; that would be an invaluable step towards Socialism.
With Chavez, all!
Without him, nothing!!
Socialism and houses!!
The change in the form of property is a main matter for Revolution, it only does possible the new culture, spirituality and a Socialist conscious.
In Venezuela, a country with a renter economy and oil dependent, the great challenge to Revolution is: What to do with the oil income? How to transform it in a Socialist crowbar?
The income was used to stimulate a parasitic bourgeoisie, non-productive, mendicant population with a great dissociation between effort and success. Summarily, oil created a culture that corresponded to a country doped by the income, missed from work, spendthrift and facile. So, it facilitated and distracted the predation of nationwide wealth by “gringos”, who took it to despicable prices.
When the Bolivarian Revolution took control over oil, it used it primarily to solve the huge social debt, the materialistic and spiritual. Food programs and educational programs are an example. Like this, people perceived a loving government.
That first stage was necessary, but it rapidly bumped into the crucial question of any Revolution: How can we change relations of property of means of production, the supporters of culture? Or, when, we remember The Miserable, which frequently Chavez quotes: How to demolish the mill and the wind that moves it?
The answers emerge from ideological positions, it is a fight for the process domination, it is the principal scenery of the inevitable confrontation that every Revolution has, along with restoring reformism.
It is not the first time that restoring reformists propose create a neo-bourgeoisie with the income, and strengthen the traditional bourgeoisie by saying that they now will produce, and that they will have a human face to construct what they call “productive nation.”
They create ghosts and strangle the Socialist possibility justified during the emergencies. For example: they deprive the lack of houses and pretend to make it a mere technical problem. It is a trap to Socialism…Construct houses and simultaneously build bourgeoisie means a pretext to construct houses, smuggle the conditions to plunge humans into the spiritual and material misery which are Capitalism.
Those faces will cost expensive to this society; they are a way to transfer the income to bourgeoisie, that way it will gain resources and political benefit, we raise crows, they will cost us hope. Bourgeoisie will never solve a problem to Socialism.
The challenge is to create Socialist awareness and at the same time build houses so the humble understand that the working power is collective and in society, to reinforce the link effort-success and to rescue the value of voluntary work; that would be an invaluable step towards Socialism.
With Chavez, all!
Without him, nothing!!
Socialism and houses!!
No comments:
Post a Comment