If '[the 'rational' planning of production] cannot depend on [decisions of] a workers' assembly or the outlook of a worker' how, in any important way, does this then differ from, 'the top-down administrative centralization identified with the Stalin era'?
Needless to say we're not really interested in the advice of some Stalinist fucker on the recreation of human society.
If '[the 'rational' planning of production] cannot depend on [decisions of] a workers' assembly or the outlook of a worker' how, in any important way, does this then differ from, 'the top-down administrative centralization identified with the Stalin era'?
it doesn't of course.
Needless to say we're not really interested in the advice of some Stalinist fucker on the recreation of human society.
i haven't read these stalinist fuckers thoughts on worker's assemblies, etc., only basic trotsky stuff on the soviets and lenin on 'trade union consciousness'.. i thought it was interesting and shows how small his vision was. plus i'm interested in the history of working class struggles and the different "players" on all camps. his talk of moving beyond material incentives just sounds like empty idealism w/o the substantive self-management part.. but i guess its substituted by stalinist state-power fetish.
Schoolteachers and teachers in training have occupied the electoral institute's state offices in Chilpancingo, Guerrero and are threatening to destroy the ballots of today's statewide municipal elections.
A history of the people's militias who fought Italy's fascists covering the birth, growth and decline of the world's first anti-fascist group, the Arditi del Popolo.
With updates in 2001, this article outlines the story of the widespread resistance and near-mutiny within the US Army, Navy and Air Force during the Vietnam War. This resistance was a major factor in the eventual withdrawal of US troops.
First issue of an irregular workers' bulletin put together by users of the website, libcom.org. This issue focuses on the 2008 pay dispute over sub-inflation pay offers.
From a review of his thoughts on late soviet economy (http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/riddell120608.html).
Pretty vague stuff:
"This is the nub of the question. In our opinion it is an error to propose that the workers manage the enterprises . . . as representatives of the enterprise in an antagonistic relationship to the state." Each worker should manage the enterprise "as one among many, as a representative of all the others [in society]."
Che's concept of worker management based on revolutionary consciousness rather than material incentives is a decisive advance. It contrasts strikingly with all the models of economic management then current in the USSR and its allies, including both the top-down administrative centralization identified with the Stalin era and the profit-seeking self-managed enterprises of Yugoslavia.
Yet Che leaves his suggestion tantalizingly undeveloped. His text concludes on a note of puzzlement at the unresolved nature of the issues he is addressing -- a tone reminiscent in some ways of Lenin's final writings.
Che endorses the widely held view that a centralized plan must utilize each element of production in a rational fashion, "and this cannot depend on [decisions of] a workers' assembly or the outlook of a worker." Still, he concedes, "when the central apparatus and intermediary levels have little knowledge, action by the workers is more useful, from a practical point of view." One suspects that Che, in his practical experience, must often have found rank-and-file workers to have had more knowledge and better judgment than administrative cadres."