User login

CAPTCHA
Этот вопрос задается для проверки того, не является ли обратная сторона программой-роботом (для предотвращения попыток автоматической регистрации).

Languages

Содержание

Счётчики

Рейтинг@Mail.ru

You are here

Information Bulletin No 4

English
Разделы: 

 

SOCIALISM-XXI

INTERNATIONAL INTERNET INSTITUTE

Information Bulletin No 4

November 2007- March 2009

 

Contents

International scientific conferences: 3

“The World Crisis of the XXI century: reasons, nature, alternatives of overcoming” (Russia in Global Context) 3

Post-Liberalism: What Can We Have After Crisis?. 4

ATTAC Germany International conference “The End of Capitalism?”. 5

“Zastoy”: harbinger of the collapse or the apogee of the Soviet “empire” (Conference Programme) 7

The International Meeting of Alterglobalists, 3 November 2007. 11

Theoretical Seminar:”Marxism and Postmodernism: methodological comparison”. 12 December 2008. 12

Theoretical Seminar: Economico-philosophical researches of the XX century: The dialectic method potential (to the 85 anniversary of E.V. Ilyenkov). 18 February 2009  15

The “Alternativy” Journal Library. 17

Articles’ Review.. 17

Books’ Review.. 21

Publications in Science Journals. 22

 

Information/News

International scientific conferences:

“The World Crisis of the XXI century: reasons, nature, alternatives of overcoming” (Russia in Global Context)

Date: 28-30 April 2009.

Time: 10.00 am. Registration: 9.15 am.

Site: Moscow, the Russia State Library (III entrance, III floor, Conference-Hall)

Organizer: The Centre of studying of Information society problems under the assistant of the Chief of the Committee of the State Duma on Education, the Russian State Library, The Institute of Economy and the Institute of Information on Social Science of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow financial and law academy, Fr. Ebert Foundation, “Alternativy” Foundation

Topics: The main aim of the conference is the complex analysis of the first world crisis of the XXI, its economical, social, political, humanitarian and ecological aftermaths, analysis and elaboration of alternative projects for its overcoming.

 

Main questions for discussion:

  • Phenomenology of the crisis in the world and in Russia;
  • Nature of the economical crisis of the new age: their unity and difference from crisis of the past century;
  • Reasons of the economical crisis: interdisciplinary context;
  • Social, humanitarian and ecological aspects of the crisis;
  • Intra- and geopolitical aspects and aftermaths of the crisis; will the enhancement of nationalism, authoritarianism and geopolitical interventionism become the sequences of the crisis;
  • Strategies for crisis overcoming: rehabilitation of the state regulation? “left turn”? back to market self-regulation?
  • 80 years of the Great Depression: to what it taught, to what it can and it can not teach?
  • The USSR lessons and perspectives of post-crisis development.

Deadline: 1st of March 2009

The abstracts of the reports should be sent to alternativy@tochka.ru (indicated as “to conference in April”)

Detail information: alternativy@tochka.ru

Coordinator: Professor Alexander Buzgalin.

 

 

Post-Liberalism: What Can We Have After Crisis?

(Looking for the Left Alternatives)

 Moscow

March 26-27 2009

 

Russian Academy of Science,   Rosa Luxemburg Foundation,   “Alternatives” Foundation

 

Conference will take place in Institute of Information on Social Science, Russian Academy of Science.

Scholars from Russian Academy of Science, Moscow State University, other scientific and education centers of Russia, Ukraine, East and West Europe will participate in the conference.

 

Main questions for discussion:

  • First crisis of the 21 century: does capitalism has potential of the further development?
  • After crisis: beginning of new social revolutions? new “left turn”? neo-conservative Impair(s)?
  • Re-actualization of Marxist theory: Does Marxists have the answers on the challenges of the crisis and post-crisis development?

 

If you want to participate in the conference, please, send us summary of your paper (100-200 words) and information about the author till March 1.

 

Organizational committee will help you to reserve the hotel and to receive the visa.

 

If you need financial support for your trip we’ll try to find resources for compensation of your air ticket and modest hotel (not more then 500 euro in total).

 

For contacts: alternativy@tochka.ru; tel: (7-495) 699-77-39

 

Alexander Buzgalin

 

ATTAC Germany International conference “The End of Capitalism?”

Berlin, March 6-8 2009

 

 

Panels, co-sponsored by “Alternatives”, Russia:

 

1. “Capitalism of the end.

Crisis and Self-negation of the Capitalism in the Epoch of Global Transformations: view from Russia and the West”

 

Main problems for debates:

  • World crisis of 2008-2009: cyclic? systemic? global?
  • The “sunset” of (1) capitalism and (2) economic social formation (“Realm of economic necessity”): two or one process?
  • Transformation towards “global knowledge society”: new contradictions of capitalism and new prerequisites for socialism? New potential for capitalist development and strengthening of market and private property? Road to the dead end?
  • Socialism as the road towards “Realm of freedom”: challenge of dialectical negation of not only capitalist, but all forms of social alienation;
  • Is it possible to start socialist transformation on the basis of industrial society? (the case of the USSR in XX century, Venezuela in XXI and so on)
  • Who is more close to the socialism: North or South? (technological and economic prerequisites for socialism and the role of the social creativity of the people).

 

2. “Russia: Capitalism’s Jurassic Park of the XXI Century” in addition to the first panel.

 

Speakers, who will come to Berlin:

  • Dr. Liudmila Bulavka, leading researcher, Russian Institute of Culture, author of the books “Non-Conformism. Protest Labor Movement in Russia” (Moscow, 2003), ”Socialist realism: discontents of the Method” (Moscow, 2007) “Phenomenon of Soviet Culture” (Moscow, 2008), and more then 60 other publications
  • Dr. Andrey Kolganov,  leading researcher, Lomonosov Moscow state University, author and co-author of the books “Road Towards Socialism: Tragedy and Heroism” (Moscow, 1988), “Russia: New Threat from the East” (Berlin, in German, 1995, together with Buzgalin), “Transitional Economy” (Moscow, 2003, together with Buzgalin), “Global Capital” (Moscow, 2004, 2007, together with Buzgalin) and more then 250 other publications
  • Professor Alexander Buzgalin, Lomonosov Moscow state University, author and co-author of the books “Russia: New Threat from the East” (Berlin, in German, 1995, together with Kolganov), “Socialism for the XXI century” (Moscow, 1995, Tokyo, 1998, Caracas, 2006), “Transitional Economy” (Moscow, 2003, together with Kolganov), “Renessans of Socialism” (Moscow, 2003), “Global Capital” (Moscow, 2004, 2007, together with Kolganov) and more then 300 other publications.

 

               

 “Zastoy”: harbinger of the collapse or the apogee of the Soviet “empire” (Conference Programme)

Date: 5 — 6 November 2008

Time: 10.00 am. — 18.00 pm.

Organizer: The Centre of studying of Information society problems under the assistant of the Chief of the Committee of the State Duma on Education,  the Institute of Economy and the Institute of Information on Social Science of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow financial and law academy, Fr. Ebert Foundation, “Alternativy” Foundation

 

Seminar schedule

5 November 2008 г.

Site: Institute of Information on Social Science, the Small Conference Hall

 

10.30-10.45

 

The Opening session.

 

·         Crome R., Dr. of Philosophy, chief of the Moscow Bureau of  Fr. Ebert Foundation (Germany)

  • Buzgalin А., Dr. of Economy, President of the “Alternative Foundation

 

10.45 - 12.15

Session 1. “Zastoy” and the USSR collapse”: would it be possible to save the Brezhnev model?

Presentation of reports

  • Voeykov M.I., Dr. of Economy, Institute of Economy of the Russian Academy of Sciences “Zastoy” as socio-economical phenomenon”
  • Bulavka L. Dr. of Philosophy, Russian Institute of Culture “Soviet culture as the heritage and the future”
  • Shevchenko V.N., Dr. of Philosophy, RAGS, “Zastoy: dialectic of retrospective view”
  • Mezhuev V. M., Dr. of Philosophy, Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences “Zastoy” as a dead-end?”
  • Slavin B. Ph., Dr. of Philosophy, Gorbachev Foundation “Zastoy: the place in the soviet history”
  • Ushatzkaya N.A., “Democracy Foundation”, “Zastoy”, perestroika and….”

Discussion on the reports

12.15 — 12.30

Coffee-break

12.30 — 13.30

Speeches

Vodolazov G.G., professor, vice-president of Political Science Academy; Diko N.S., Association of people diplomacy, Kelle V. Zh., professor, Institute of Philosophy, Prigarin A.A., Association of marxist organization, Tikin V.S., doctor of economy, Mariysk state university.

13.30 — 14.30

Lunch

14.30 — 16.15

Session 2. «Zastoy»: reasons of nostalgia

Reports:

  • Pavlenko U.G, doctor of economy, Institute of Economy of the Russian Academy of Sciences “Some circumstances and features of the new period Russian development”
  • Kolganov A. I., doctor of economy, Moscow state University, “Socio-economical roots of the nostalgia for “zastoy” in the contemporary Russia.
  • Buzgalin A., professor, Moscow state University, “Empire and super-power tendencies of contemporary Russia and nostakgia for “zastoy”.
  • Abramson I.G., professor, Sankt-Petersburg state University, “Contradictions of the “zastoy” époque.
  • Markelov S.Y., Institute of the rule of law, “Myths of “zastoy” and law collisions of the contemporary Russia”.
  • Voronin D.V., director of Prokopyevsk department of Tomsk state university “Nostalgia for “zastoy”: Siberiancontext.

Discussion of the repots

16.15 - 16.30

Coffee-break

16.30 - 18.00

Reports:

Volkonsky V.A., professor of RAS, Ozhogina L., the scientific secretary of “Education for All”, Bogatyrev K.A., doctor of economy, Aristova M.V., doctor of technical sciences, Yarskay-Smirnova E.R., professor SGTU, Suslov I.V., post-graduate of SGTU, Borisova Y.S., student of SGTU, Rumyantzeva N.L., doctor, RGIIS, Valeeva E.I., student. Institute of law of BGU, Bogachev S.P., doctor of economy, Kaluzhsky department of RGAUR-MAA of K.A. Timiryasev, Kulikova O.B., doctor, IGEU, Rubinchik M.P., Syzganov V.V., Zhukov D.G., Institute of the rule of law, (Vladimir), Ivanov S.P., (Sevastopol), Kirilov G.V., Institute of the rule of law (Kostroma), Chapas R.V., “Alternatives”, Nougaeva S.U., Institute of the rule of law (Kaluga).

18.00

Supper

6 November 2008 г.,

Site: Institute of Economy, Conference-Hall, 4 Floor

10.30 - 12.15

Session 3. «Zastoy»:  lessons for contemporary Russia (socio-economical and political aspects)

Reports:

·         Klotzvog Ph.N., professor of Institute of economical forecasting of the Russian Academy of Sciences, “Does “zastoy exist in the Russian society? The ways of renaissance of the Russian economy “.

  • Kornyakov V.I., professor, “Zastoy as a period of disintegration of the soviet society basis”
  • Sobolev E., doctor of economy, Institute of economy of the Russian Academy of Sciences, “Policy of egalitarian of the late soviet period as the factor of deformation in labour payment in the contemporary Russia”
  • Maslova I.S., professor, Institute of economy of the Russian Academy of Sciences, “Comparative analysis of the new tendencies in the mechanism of employment ensuring in the contemporary Russia and of the “zastoy époque”.

 

Discussion of the reportsДискуссия по докладам

12.15 - 12.30

Coffee-break

12.30 - 13.30

Speeches:

Shutov A.S., Vyatsk department of Russian human society, Gorunov I.A., MFLI, Baranenkova T.A., doctor of economy, Institute of economy of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Mikhailichenko N.A., doctor of economy, VSEI (Kirov), Anisimova G.V., doctor of economy, Institute of economy of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Dunaiva N.I., doctor of economy, Institute of economy of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Popaduk N., professor VGNA of Ministry of Finance, Kamyshnikov V.S., post-graduate, YGTU, Ermolaeva M.G., doctor of economy, MAI, Bikbov A., Institute of sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences

13.30 - 14.30

Lunch

14.30 - 15.45

«Round table»

Nostalgia for “zastoy” and the perspectives of democracy and social justice in Russia

15.45 — 16.00 - Coffee-break

16.00 - 17.00

Book presentation of “Fr. Ebert” Foundation and “Democracy” Foundation

 

The International Meeting of Alterglobalists, 3 November 2007

 

The meeting of left from Ukraine, Byelorussia, Kazakhstan, Germany and  from 30 Russian cities held on in Moscow on 3rd of November of 2007. All of them was working one day: there were 5 seminars and 2 plenary sessions.

The spirit of the meeting consisted of creative intentions of participants in the Bilingua club. It could be called as the mini-forum of the Commonwealth countries.

The chief aims were:

  • to mark the differences of beliefs and approaches;
  • to argue with those who was wrong or didn’t understand one’s stances;
  • to prove that discussion problems (e.g. culture and alterglobalism) show deeper contradictions than our beliefs about them;
  • to understand to what kind of challenges of the contemporary reality the new social movements can response, and to what — not and why;
  • to exchange with ideas about the new concrete initiatives;
  • to discuss problems of common projects that have already been carried out.

The meeting wasn’t regular. There were different organizations that can hardly understand each other (e.g. “The Organisation of Marxists” and “New Lefts from Ukraine”), radical communists and “neutral to ideologies” human rights defenders. Despite of the political, stylistic and other differences of participants the meeting spirit was aimed at dialog but not arguing about the measure: who more adherent to socialist ideas; at the searching of the ways how to carry out the work. As a result the atmosphere became friendly and festive.

Hardly since the First Russian Social Forum (April 2005) this meeting in Bilingua was penetrated with the spirit of generated optimism and opening of common searching potential.

The each person participation was the principal feature of that meeting and simultaneously defined its new quality showing that the orientation to mass participation for that kind of format is the criteria of nomenclature alterglobalism.

Theoretical Seminar:”Marxism and Postmodernism: methodological comparison”. 12 December 2008

 

Lyudmila Bulavka,

Dr. of philosophy, leading researcher, Russian Institute of Culture

 

Did postmodernism solve this Hamlet’s contradiction (to be or not to be)? Not. Precisely it offered but namely the semblance settlement. It means that the contradiction between the present existence of a man (thesis) and nothing (neant) as an idea of rejection from the idea of the man (antithesis) postmodernism settled by maintaining of the idea of the man existence as nothing (antisyntheses ). Postmodernism is the ideal of the present nonexistence (nothing) of the man. What is this presently nonexistent man, a man presently asserting the presence of one’s absence? This is the corpse. The corpse is not the absence of the man this is the presence of one’s absence. That’s why in postmodernism culture there is the domination of the theme even not a death but the very process of a “man killing”.

 

Alexey Penzin,

PhD of philosophy, Institute of philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences

I consider the postmodernism is the invention of the American academy that was linked with adoption that very French philosophy, avant-garde, to my mind, and not tedious that had been forming during 1950-1960 s. The “umbrella” consists of that under this notion which isn’t defined and most people without knowing Foucailt’s, Deleuze’s works understand all the bad against all the good. I’ m against such a position. I think lefts, Marxists should not forget there are different contextual applications of the word “postmodernism”. I suppose these contexts should be critically reduced.

 

Alexander Buzgalin,

Professor, Lomonosov Moscow state University

Nobody loves a postmodernist and a postmodernist doesn’t love anybody. In general Good, Truth and Beauty are forbidden (actually they love, or want to love; but philosophically it’s under prohibition). In a such world all are not comfortly-tasty but conformistly-indifferently, wrongly, imagely. The Truth doesn’t exist, philosophical great narratives are deconstructed; there aren’t structures; the basis doesn’t exist too. Postmodernism doesn’t like systematical approach, ignore the system marking that have the commencement, the end, the system quality; they emerge, disappear, replace each other etc. If you ask postmodernist what the most valuable is in the art, one answers that the question is not legitimate.

 

Dmitry Cherny,

writer, Institute of globalization problems.

If to analyze the contemporary writers who can call themselves as postmodernist, who boasts of that today, are there such ones except Sorokin and Pelevin. Possibly, not. Postmodernism have become telling in vulgar language as an object of critic, not only among the critics but even among the readers who are the main critics. The period of reality fear of 1990s have changed vice versa with the attention to the reality, returning to the reality. It was linked with marxism for me and even for the society. Since explaining this reality by direct speech  it had to use the marxist thesaurus. But still there left certain optical moments from postmodern but it was like that on the new period.

 

Victor Arslanov,

Professor, Russian Academy of Arts

The act of suicide of art is silence. There are situations when actually it’s necessary to keep silent. Vasiliy Terkin of Tvardovscky in some situations really desperate keeps silent. But a liberal intellectual-modernist in a tragically situation of the XX century begins to hysterically to shout, makes noise: one generates the panic. That the contemporary art makes: declarating the silence it hysterically yells and spreads insanity. The great sin of postmodernism that I think inevitably will lead to the practice to which aforementioned manifesto-parody come. If there is really nothing to say, so keep silent, gentlemen, but not hysterically shout spreading the insanity around yourself.

 

Ilzar Gumargaliev

PhD of economy, Lomonosov Moscow state University

The theory of simulacra I think should be revised or analyzed in a way insofar the simulacra is positive. Is it  a creator of the positive theory of senses, does it have any perspective to predict the future; and also is it linked with such theory, methodological technique as model construction.

 

Andrey Kolganov

Dr. of economy, Lomonosov Moscow state University

Postmodernity in the postmodernism variant is actually not an age arisisng from the modernity époque, it is not the époque continuing the modernity époque on a defined new stage. This is the age of leaving with the modernity, the pure leaving. Postmodernism is the destructed or collapsed modernity. I consider that the modernity age haven’t come to the end; structures, senses and the great narratives exist and act in human society. So in that sense  postmodernism is wrong.

 

Markelov S.,

President of Institute of the rule of law

The second half oа the XX century created the damned questions for Marxist ideology, there are Marxist predictions, ideological foundations that haven’t justified by reality. The emergency ways were given to postmodernism. Using these emergency ways most Marxist ideologists went to the “rear”, saved their ideas having applicated this methodology because tendencies of conforming to reality is not the substantiality, it is the umbrella. It’s adopted to justify, conform to reality because all of them speak so.  Why were Marxists иду to counter different ideological schools in the XIX century but now nothing achieved? On that accountте they will be “behind bars” if they don’t speak on the postmodernist language. I don’t believe in it lastly stalinists does not use it.

 

Boris Slavin,

Professor, Gorbachev Foundation

How I understand the postmodernism ideology more exactly the postmodernist’s world view? No doubt I consider it as an ideological movement of the capitalism generation age and ruining of the soviet model of the real socialism. The classical capitalism of the modernity époque collapsed, socialism in its totalitarian forms didn’t exist long. In the whole everything was “mixed” “turned” in the new global home. This mixture generated the respective ideology, it become postmodernism. In that sense postmodernism is the reaction to current capitalism where the borders of good and ill, truth and error, beauty and ugly were destroyed.

Theoretical Seminar: Economico-philosophical researches of the XX century: The dialectic method potential (to the 85 anniversary of E.V. Ilyenkov). 18 February 2009

 (Review the core reports)

 

Victor Arslanov, Professor, Russian Academy of Arts

The critic by D. Lukach the Stalinism for domination tactics upon strategy. The philosophical core of that method paradoxically coincides with the idealistic dialectics that constructs the result coming from self-development of the primary pure intellectual content (abstractly). The materialistic dialectic of Marx and  Lenin directly is contrary to the idealistic one that is founded on movement to the concrete result as a product of the concrete reality whose the necessary active part in society is consciousness activity of a human.

The question of domination the tactics upon the strategy in the contemporary left movement (e.g. the alterglobalist movement). 

 

Lyudmila Bulavka, Dr. of philosophy, leading researcher, Russian Institute of Culture

 

In the report the genesis of the soviet cultute was presented, particularly that the soviet culture is the result of the dialectic negation of the revolunary social creativity of 1920s, its ideal.

Moreover, the author showed as inalienability (the principe of active overcoming of alienability ) is not only the coming relation of the soviet culture but has become its concrete universal defining:

  • The content (contradictions) of the social ideal,
  • The art method of liberalization tendency — socialist realism,
  • The essence of New man.

Besides in the report the dialectic of wrong forms of the soviet culture was showen as the result of the refusal from dialectic.

 

Alexander Buzgalin, Professor, Lomonosov Moscow state University

In the report it was emphasized the necessity of usage the method of ascent from abstract to the  concrete in investigation of social process. Following the essential regularly forming and settling contradictions of the social system it can be marked the regularities of the genesis, the development and  the end, the dialectic ogf generation and negation. That method is not today applicated but namely the elaboration of the important achievements of E.V. Ilyenkov can and should be actively used in the XX century.

 

Grigoryi Vodolasov, Professor of the Political Sciences Academy

In the report professor G. Vodolasov characterized the particularities that system of education which he called “Ilyenkov’s school”.

“Iа the spread today the type of education, — he said, — can be characterized as “obrasovanshina” (simple education) that forms uncreative persons, functionaries taught to act according to pattern, the Ilyenkov school following the Socrates’ traditions can be called “myslilnya” (thinking) where the man-creator is formed.  The lessons of Ilyenkov can be called the lessons of creativity, morality and freedom.

 

Boris Slavin, Professor, Gorbachev Foundation

The dialectic was always the revolutionary theory. Today they are afraid of  Marxism because of that revolutionarity. The dialectic again confirms by the contemporary crisis.

Lenin told about the materialistic reading of the dialectic. For example, the notion of “freedom” can not be understood as only the known necessity founded on cognition but as also the overcoming of obstacles, the power under circumstances and relations. The practical overcoming of obstacles appears in the concrete. Lenin was able to see in the single experience universal.

Unfortunately, we do not study the dialectic according to Lenin that’ why today we can not analyse the situation. The lefts does not have such a theory. 

 

 

 

 

 

The “Alternativy” Journal Library

Articles’ Review

 

“Alternativy”. N2. 2008.

1.     Haug, Wolfgang. The Globalization, High-Tech-Capitalism and the Future of Marxism.

The article comes from the question: “What kind of society does give us a computer on the basis of capitalism?” The article aim is to bring together and systemize the important particular features generated by this combination results and the following tendencies under the rubric high-tech-capitalism. The author presents the distinguished signs of the high-tech-capitalism. Here it’s noted that the new factor for transnational corporations’ domination has become the high-tech infrastructure of digital goods circulation. As a result the competition sense has substantially changed. In addition transnationalization on the high-tech basis modified the productive relations, that is relations among labour hiring and capital. On the one hand, the high-tech today is regarded as a conductor of industrialization and urbanization of earlier rural societies stimulated the development of national and international infrastructures of communication. On the other hand, globalization without establishing of global institutes is a contradiction that will challenge a lot of hard problems and crisis. Concerning the future of Marxism the author considers that the marxist theory is appeared as dialectical and historical materialistic world view, as philosophy of practice and as critical theory of capitalism. However, it’s emphasized that theoretical force is accompanied with the practical weakness. The forces generated be processes of flexibility increasing and production displacement, discharge of “labour” due to high-tech in cooperation with capital flow towards cheap  work force crushed the classical work class and weakened the work movement.

 

2.     Shubin, Alexander[1]. The Long Way to Socialism. Three Challenges to Marxist Tradition.

The article reveals those problems that should solved by the marxist theory taking into consideration the failure of the communist project in the USSR, the crisis of industrial society and social state. The author endeavors to widen the methodological field till the socialist theory in the whole. The first challenge comes from the Great October Revolution of 1917. This event is regarded as the complicated impact that had generated the controversial soviet society where the communist regime was obliged to achieve the consensus of the modernization project and the communist idea with the country tradition accounting the peoples’ reaction that was developed either in support, or in riots. It’s emphasized that most left should study to distinguish the temporary totalitarian framework on whose basis the soviet culture formulated and the human achievements. The second challenge composes the ideas of narodniki. Here it’s indicated that the Mikhailovsky’s concepts of history that opposite to marxist philosophy of history shows that there are a lot variants of development that could emerge different estimation. The third challenge refers to the problems of XXI century. The author thinks that if contemporary system of globalism collapses so the way to the future, to the principally new society can only offer socialism. The mankind development can not be sustainable if it stays on the narrow specter of ideas between liberal globalism and ethnocratic nationalism.  Since society should make steps to the future, it needs the model of post-capitalist society, here it is difficult to go without the socialist thoughts heritage.

 

 

“Alternativy”. N3. 2008.

1.     Amin, Samir[2]. Socialism-XXI.

In this article the author gives the foundations of the progressive fight against capitalist domination in the world. Here it’s noted that the radicalization of the fight is not a radicalization of speech rhetoric but the part of the radicalization of the alternative project supposed the substitute of the existed social power system: formulation of the social majority as an alternative to social hegemony of ruling capital alliance and imperialism. Rapprochement and radicalization of fight as the row of not exact periods will supply the leading forces of associated (not associated) democracy the possibility to achieve the real results in sphere of social progress, enhancement of state sovereignty, nations and peoples, democratic determination of the world trade  forms (in contrary to their imposement unilaterally by capitalism and imperialism).

Moreover, the author pays attention to democracy item that plays an essential role in reinforcement of social movements. As such the notion “democratization” is defined as process that lead to the democracy development but not according to the western model of representative democracy. In socialist perspective the forms of social progress and democratical practices will be constructed by the peoples themselves. Therefore the author emphasizes that the association of forces isn’t possible on the world or regional levels if it doesn’t happen on the national one. Since the nation defines the concrete problems, correlation on that level of social and political forces will (or not) “swing” in favor of people’s mass. The insolvency of regionalization of problems is shown in the European “case”. The author claims that the European project was primarily conceived as undemocratic, directed at putting on the authority places that are elected the undemocratic powers that are under “umbrella” of “technocrats” but in reality they are obeyed to the ruling capital requirements. In the whole the article answers the question that the socialism of the XXI century will become the convergence of progressive forces of the South and the North that will allow to win the total logic of capital accumulation, the social exclusion and the plans of construction of “multipolar” lobalization.

 

“Alternativy”. N4. 2008.

1.     Kolganov, Andrey[3]. The “fork” of the history: Where did Russia go after the 1993 year.

In this article the author analyses the changes that have passed in the Russian society  after October 1993. Here the author not only makes comparison these two starting points — 1993 and 2008 — but endeavors to understand what happened in 2008 due to the impact which had been done in 1993. Especially the article gives the socio-economical background of the October events and their reasons; the analysis of how the Eltzin’s order of  №1400 and the following events played their own role in the development of the current problems. The core hypothesis of the article consists of that the established in 1992 and finally enhanced on October 1993 the economy and political course led to emerging the socio-economical and political system that doesn’t possess the potential for progressive development neither in economy, or in politics, although till now it has demonstrated the ability of avoiding and postponing of the urgent problems solving.

 

2.     Buzgalin, Aleksandr[4]. XXI century: in what Karl Marx was right and in what was wrong.

The author presents the analysis of the chief achievements of Karl Marx’s theory and its lacks in the view of the challenges of XXI century. The article underlines the regularities that were opened by K. Marx in investigation of industrial classical capitalism. They include that market is a historically limited system of social relations of people but not a certain “natural” and eternal “mechanism” of agents’ interaction and exchange of information in economy. The author shows the essence of such notions as exploitation, market development that leads to differentiation of its agents, the current specific of labour class conditions. It is noted the welfare of the part world labour class increased not due to the good will of bourgeoisie but as a result of class and social struggle of anticapitalist forces whose theory was opened by marxists.

Meanwhile, the author considers that several items of Marx require not only development without which they become outdated but the direct critic. Concerning development there left the question: how much tens of talented works of marxists of the XX century and the beginning of current age which underlined the nature of contemporary “late” capitalism can be served as “Capital of XX century”. According to the author’s stances Marx was really not right in that measure in what he reflected not only about the possibility but the necessity of the socialistic revolution as a result of classical industrial capitalism. The marxist methodology and theory can and should be used for the constructive critic some hasty Marx’s conclusions.

 

3.     Krausz, Tamas[5]. 1968 — The diversity of the historical heritage. The East European “case”.

Here the author analyses the contradictions of 1968. There were a lot of “political earthquakes”, student demonstrations in Warsaw and Paris, “Prague” spring, the war intervention to the Czechoslovakia and the introduction of the new economic mechanism in Hungary, the war in Vietnam and the American movement for peace protested against it. In the article the 1968 is not regarded only as the list of local flashes. It became as the “riot” in the world politics against stipulated by “two world systems” new hierarchies, against new forms of dependency in the economy and in the world politics, against limited by the great powers scanty possibilities. The author considers that the support of existed world order corresponded to the US interests. The article pays attention to the fact that the West did not undertake any concrete steps for counteraction of the military intervention of the Warsaw Pact armed forces. Occasionally enough that the soviet part considered the demonstrations in Western Europe and America as the regular “student protests” meanwhile they were the really social movements. As such the article shows that the declaration of values and ideals of 1968 rapidly “turned into” the logical substantiation of neoliberal capitalism, global system of consumer society having satisfied the market capitals requirements. On the other hand, in opposition to its primary aims 1968 having broken down the belief in a “omnipotent state” hadn’t paved the way for “destruction of bourgeoisie state, there were happened the inversely process. The author holds the position that the revolutionaries of 1968 didn’t have the independent economy policy and the economy concept which they could hand over to the future generation. Despite their positive example that was able to put the system “in the whole” under the question, the derived lesson consists of that the “whole” without its parts can turns into nothing. Nowadays the bourgeoisie particularization destroys the ability to see the wholeness, the totality of theoretical thinking.

 

Books’ Review

 

Here, we continue the presentation of books published in the scholarly and publicistic series The “Alternativy” Journal Library. See Information Bulletin No 3.

 

1.                      October 1917: Challenges for the XXI century / Ed. By A. Sorokin. M.: LENAND, 2009. — 384 p.

Decades that passed after the October revolution of 1917 haven’t removed the pungency of a question about the nature of that event and its influence on the fate of our Fatherland and the world. Had the gust of the hundred millions of people to the new society that begun in October been casual? To what results did it bring in the XXI? What lessons should we derive from this history in the new century?

The well-known scientists of the Russian academy of sciences, Moscow state university, other scientific and education centers of Russia, the scientists from Germany and Hungary reflect and argue about these problems in the given book. The basis of the texts constitute the participants reports in the international scientific conference “October 1917: challenges for the XXI century” organized by the Rosa Luxembourg Foundation, the “Alternativy” Foundation and the Contemporary humanitarian academy.

For all of those who aren’t indifferent to problems of the future world and our Fatherland. 

 

Socialism-21. 14 texts of the post-soviet school of critical marxism. M., Cultural revolution, 2009. 720 p.

The authors of the collection show how social creativity can help the mankind in searching of alternatives to threats of ecological and financial crisis, pandemic of asymmetrical wars, political, ideological and mass-cultural manipulation. This book — the quintessence of the long period works of the well-known scientists inherited and developing the classical tradition of the post-soviet school of critical marxism.

Addressed to researchers, students and professors, for all who are interested in problems of the contemporary social existence and in searching the ways of solving of its global contradictions. 

 

Publications in Science Journals

 

Alexander Buzgalin and Andrey Kolganov.

Three articles on dialectic// The Philosophy of Economy. 2009. N 1.

Summary

Article is devoted to the positive critique and development of dialectical method. Firstly we shows, that orthodox anti-Marxist (and sometimes postmodernist “Marxist”) critique of dialectic as apology of Stalinist ideas (growth of class struggle; class contradictions as prerequisite for GULAG and so on) has NOTHING in common with dialectical method of Das Capital, developed by Marxists in XX century both in Soviet Union and in the West. This article is attempt to develop this results in the following directions:

1. Dialectical method opens space for the investigation of the economic systems as historically limited, concrete systems of production relations. In particular, authors shows that so called “market” is only form of concrete system of commodity production relations, that this system has the starting point, logic of development, the period of “sunset”, the end.

2. On this basis we give critique of positivism and pragmatism as methods, which are oriented on the reflection of only mechanisms of function of economy, based on the not proved teethes, that market economy is universal form of any economy. Positivism gives only quantitive analysis of this “universal” mechanisms, and can not give the answer on the question about objective laws of development, historical and logical limits of market economy as specific economic system.

3. Authors formulate and proves 3 “theorems” of dialectic, which shows potential of dialectical investigation of concrete economic systems.

4. Only dialectical investigation open us the nature of this system and shows the difference between the essence and deformed (turned, transformed, irrational) forms, created by fetishism of commodities and reflected by positivists and pragmatists. Authors shows reasons of appearance of such deformed forms and mechanism of their genesis.

5. Our critique of postmodernism is based on the analysis of 21 century life as either world of simulacra, which are reflected by scholars as the only real world, or on the total and in the same time abstract negation of this world (“deconstruction”). Dialectic gives more fruitful method of  investigation of this world of “deconstructions” and “simulacra”. And this is not “megatheory”, but negation of negation: “old” dialectic, which pretended to be the only universal form of  methodology — postmodernism — “new” dialectic as open for dialog, critique and self-critique method.

6. The final chapter is devoted to the hypothesis of new dialectic of net-work world, world of creativity, permanently flexible, open relations of dialog between subjects; transformation of dialectical logic into the dia[log]logic.

A.Buzgalin, A.Kolganov

World Economic Crisis and scenarios of post-crisis development// Questions of economy. 2009. №1.

Implication of the modern Marxist theory create opportunity to show the inevitability of appearance, the reasons and main features of the first world crisis of the XXI century. It was generated by not only de-regulation and de-socialization of economy, which open the space for the ‘classical’ crisis of overproduction, but also by new contradictions of late capitalism, in particular: chronicle over accumulation of the capital and dominant development of the transactional sector, overdevelopment of the virtual fictitious financial capital and its gap from real sector, which destroys the mechanisms of market self-regulation. Marxist analysis of social interests and contradictions shows, that anti-crisis measures requires not only increasing of state regulation, but also determination on behalf of whom and in the interests of what social groups this regulation will be realized. Authors propose to do this on behalf of the financial capital and in the interests of citizens.

Keywords: crisis, Marxist theory, over-accumulation of the capital, virtual fictitious financial capital, social interests, anti-crisis regulation, but also predict possible scenario of neo-conservative, neo-impair shift..

 

Buzgalin, Alexander. Russia in the society of knowledge: concept of cultural leadership// Political Class.

Summary

The article shows, that Russia has some chances to solve contradictions of modern evolution and realize the strategy  of development of social relations, which provide priority of the creativity, culture and free, harmonic development of personality. This is trajectory of the cultural leadership of Russia and it’s the alternative to the popular in modern Russia imperial intentions. Author shows, that these intentions will lead the country to the dead-end of periphery “petty” -impair.

 

Key words:

Russia; Impair; periphery “petty”-impair; knowledge revolution; global; problems; creativity; free, harmonic development of personality; concept of cultural leadership.

 

 


[1] Doctor of History, the Institute of the Universal History of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

[2] President of the World Forum of the Alternatives, Director of the Third World Forum (Senegal).

[3]Leading researcher of Moscow state University, Member of Central Council of Russian social movement  “Alternatives”

[4] Professor of Moscow State University, Coordinator of Russian social movement  “Alternatives”

[5] Professor of Budapest University, Hungary

 

vote_story: 
Vote up!
Vote down!

Points: 0

You voted ‘up’