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"