|
Comment by Salvatore Engel-Di
Mauro
Hanecker’s initiative is very
important and agreeable on many points. It is a laudable effort and there needs
to be more such efforts at proposing strategies. There are, however, some
matters that seem in need of clarification, elaboration, or discussion:
1. It would be useful towards the
development of actualisable strategic actions to spell out what the desired
short and long-term goals are, to show how they relate to proposed strategies
and methods, and to clarify who is the "we" referred to in the document.
2. How will ecological
destruction be avoided once the struggle succeeds and socialism is achieved, or
even during the struggle for socialism?
3. What steps can be
developed to avoid bureaucratic centralism when taking of power? Relatedly, how
is the taking of power envisioned? Is it through the state, through wider social
institutions (e.g., trade unions, NGOs, etc.), or through even wider bottom-up
social diffusion? What would such taking of power look like?
5.What is the role of antiracism
and decolonisation (especially to overcome settler colonialism) in the overall
struggle?
6. It could be helpful to
contextualise the matter of centralism vs consensus as a function of the balance
of forces, in addition to the factors Harnecker stresses. She does this
implicitly, as when pointing to organisational and decision-making processes
specific to war time (yet what of Rojava and the roles of the PYD and PKK?). It
would be better, it seems to me, to be explicit about the contingent nature of
decision-making processes and structure more generally.
* * * * *
* * * * *
Pete Dolack on his Blog "Systemic Disorder" |