History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

‘Democratic market neo-communism’: a path to ecological sanity

February 27th, 2018 · No Comments

Both our form of government and our economic system are throwing hurdles up between us and climate action, but while we can work to improve and transform politics, there is no possibility that capitalism can be made compatible with global climate mitigation and justice. We have to use what’s left of our democracy (inside and especially outside of electoral politics) to simultaneously fight the fascism that threatens humanity and the capitalism that threatens the Earth as a whole.

Source: As the Climate Melts, Democracy Must Be Rescued and Transformed; Capitalism Can’t Be | Green Social Thought

R48G: DMNC as a transitional vehicle toward ecological sanity //As the Climate Melts, Democracy Must Be Rescued and Transformed; Capitalism Can’t Be | Green Social Thought
Two Manifestos
Good article, and we might inject our perspective because it deals with both the issue of climate action and democracy at once in its proposals for ‘democratic market neo-communism’.

This formation can be an electoral or a revolutionary option. It proposes a new hybrid with a new form of democratic government: a strong revolutionary party, subject to a balance of powers, in a one party formation whose first task is to maintain the revolution, and this over a multiparty democracy in a Congress next to a set of legal bodies or courts: economic courts and ecological courts. This three sector system would have a planned sector a market sector (and in this context this is no longer pure capitalism) and an autonomous sector. The market sector could also allow global capital twilight access via trade and subject to strong regulation. The foundation of this system transforms it at once; property relations are brought under the aegis of The Commons, and all industrial combinations would finally enter that Commons. The overall system risks several dangers from its powerful executive, unless the balance of power is restrained in various ways even as it is strengthened in a narrow line of guarding the revolution.
But protecting the Commons is very different from an older version of the one party leninist state: it would not allow economic decisions to be cranked out by stalinist figures or bureaucracies of a narrow cadre. The planned sector must be regulated by economic and ecological courts.
This approach has a fighting chance on climate catastrophe and could both realize a foundational ‘social democratic’ variant under communist axioms and experimental versions of no-growth economics that nonetheless ensure a robust set of economic rights.
It is hard to say how this could be achieved short of a revolutionary transition, but in fact the electoral option should be given a parallel option, etc…
The issue here is that ‘protecting a democratic legacy’ is up in the air if the actual politics is not democracy! The american system isn’t democratic and in any case a revolutionary transition proceeds through a void that has no politics because it is about to refound a constitution. And this kind of system must revolutionize politics, viz. with absolute funding reform, etc…

Tags: General

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment