0
Where is Che now that we need him?
21 August 2005
Maybe it's simple nostalgia, but it seems to me the world was a lot better off when the Soviet Union was around.
When the USSR was the main enemy of our (allegedly) free and democratic society, we struggled to measure ourselves against its yardstick. If the USSR claimed to have the best chess players, we had to beat them with Bobby Fisher. If they claimed to have the best students in math or science, well we had to show we had the whizzes. If they claimed their medical system was better, their workers were better treated, their social services and their agricultural output was better, we had to show ours could beat theirs.
Of course, the USSR - and indeed most Communist nations past and present - were not the workers' paradise they alleged. Most were bleak, dreary and usually brutal dictatorships. They weren't run by idealogues seeking to craft a society for the betterment of the working class. They were generally run by an oligarchy of squabbling, irritable competitive sycophants and bullies who seemed to be in a race to see who would be last to face the firing squad.
Unlike the way the Communists portrayed the West, we weren't all imperialists, capitalists without a conscience, greedy, warmongering expansionists. At least Canada wasn't. They weren't entirely wrong about some of our other Western nations.
Both sides ignored the full reality of the other because it made for better propaganda campaigns. And it was much easier to justify wars, coups, and interference in other nations' business. The threat of the other side was often sufficient.
But at the same time, the competition between two opposing systems also brought out the best in both. It created the space race and some of the most important scientific and technical developments in a century. It spurred the Civil Rights movement. It created a half-century of exploration, achievement and science. It made chess headline news and the Fisher-Spassky match briefly put an intellectual pursuit ahead of the corporate sports news. The Soviets had to lighten up on dissidents and writers, allowing some to escape to the West. And both sides curbed their nuclear strategies for fear of mutual annihilation.
Thanks to the tug-of-war between the East and West blocs, we got socialized medicine in Canada and other civilized countries. Unions grew and their workers got benefits and rights. We got more rights and freedom of expression because we couldn't be seen as oppressive like the Commies.
The unbridled greed and aggressiveness of capitalism and corporations was sometimes held in abeyance or even muzzled as left-leaning countries nationalized resources, or overthrew brutal dictators and actually held free elections (true, thanks to the CIA and US involvement, many of these were bludgeoned back into violent feudalism, but some - like Cuba and Nicaragua managed to hold out against the imperialists for at least a while).
Communism wasn't good for anyone, except in that it provided a yardstick against which we had to measure ourselves. Communism, however, was widespread and a serious alternative to capitalism, so it challenged us to be better than it promised it would be. people and nations gravitated to Communism because there weren't many other choices.
No one wanted to say aloud the truth: that we could easily bury Communism by out-selling, out-marketing, out-producing and out-performing it. In capitalism's darkest hours - the Great Depression - it was still a more powerful economic engine than Communism in its best.
But we didn't tell people that - the US in particular preferred to use the excuse of the Red threat to arm itself, to conquer smaller nations, and to bully others. They could have more easily won by sending in Wal-Marts instead of troops. They could have built shopping malls, created pop radio stations, theme parks and opened SUV dealerships. People are more easily fooled by gaudy baubles and trinkets than ideological arguments. But that wouldn't have gone over well with the military.
Cuba is a good example: if the US administration really wanted to win Cuba to its side, it would invest in it. Cubans would shuck Castro like an old corn husk in a moment in exchange for a Wal-Mart and some junk-food outlets. But the US needs Castro because he gives candidates the Cuban-American vote and all its campaign dollars. So it's not in the politicians' interests to win over the Cubans by peaceful or economic means, as long as the exiles can still fork over the pork.
Popular mythology to the contrary, neither President Reagan nor the superiority of the American Way of Life defeated Communism. The Soviet Union didn't fall because Ronnie out-competed, out-armed or out-smiled them. That would be like crediting the pharaohs with the annual Nile floods. The USSR imploded of its own mass. It was in trouble from Lenin's day and never got better, let alone fixed. There were good ideas, even great ideas in the theory of Communism, but in reality the system was simply too inefficient, there were too many amateurs meddling in it at the top, and it was too often controlled by an inept but omnipotent leader.
The USSR started to topple in 1917 and its fall was inevitable. The fact that it took more than 70 years is remarkable. It might have been a different story - had Trotsky ousted Stalin, not vice-versa, or had Lenin's will been acted upon, or had any of a number of vicious psychopaths like Beria or Yezhov not come to power, or had a capable economist been given authority. But these are all what-if games.
Ronnie Reagan just happened to be in the White House when the Soviet house of cards collapsed. He had no more to do with its fall than King Canute had to do with the movement of the tides.
When the USSR fell, Communism - as a world force - died. Yes, the Chinese are Communists, and there are more of them than all the rest of the former East Bloc combined. But since Mao died, they've been Communists in name only. The PRC Politburo has been eager to sell their workers' souls as slave labour for any Western corporation that would buy them. They're not ideologues like the USSR: they don't want to create a world revolution. The Chinese will take over by stealth, by winning over all the industrial jobs until all of the West is subservient. And most western governments are eager allies in seeing their own economies dismantled. And it's working. They don't give a rat's ass about Marx or Lenin or any ideological claptrap. They want limos, cell phones, indoor swimming pools and laptops.
Since the USSR fell, capitalism has been unleashed and the West has fallen victim to a far greater evil than any Communist ideology ever threatened. We're now at the mercy of the corporate interests, the so-called shareholders and their profits (in reality shareholders are a convenient prevarication: it's the CEOs and their executives who hold the reins of power). We're losing jobs, benefits, rights and freedom at an escalating rate because the corporate interests have to be protected. And some of those corporations have a big vested interest in making sure the military is active and aggressive.
At least when the USSR was still around we had the pretence of a free society, a good life and a competitive economy. And we were willing to defend our society and our nations to keep those freedoms.
Now we're merely wage slaves, or worse, unemployed, buying cheap Chinese-made knock-offs because that's all we can afford since our employers closed the factory and shipped all the jobs overseas. While the CEOs get another yacht or mansion. Or we could be fighting and dying in Iraq to protect the fiscal interests and oil deals of the US administration and their cronies.
Sadly, there's no opposition, no protest movement, no alternatives. We can't threaten to turn to the Communists if we're not treated right because they're long gone. But maybe not entirely forgotten. Surely there are still some leaders out there with a conscience who, haven't been completely bought by the corporations, who will help tame these pit bulls. Hasta la victoria siempre, albeit mas despacio...
When the USSR was the main enemy of our (allegedly) free and democratic society, we struggled to measure ourselves against its yardstick. If the USSR claimed to have the best chess players, we had to beat them with Bobby Fisher. If they claimed to have the best students in math or science, well we had to show we had the whizzes. If they claimed their medical system was better, their workers were better treated, their social services and their agricultural output was better, we had to show ours could beat theirs.
Of course, the USSR - and indeed most Communist nations past and present - were not the workers' paradise they alleged. Most were bleak, dreary and usually brutal dictatorships. They weren't run by idealogues seeking to craft a society for the betterment of the working class. They were generally run by an oligarchy of squabbling, irritable competitive sycophants and bullies who seemed to be in a race to see who would be last to face the firing squad.
Unlike the way the Communists portrayed the West, we weren't all imperialists, capitalists without a conscience, greedy, warmongering expansionists. At least Canada wasn't. They weren't entirely wrong about some of our other Western nations.
Both sides ignored the full reality of the other because it made for better propaganda campaigns. And it was much easier to justify wars, coups, and interference in other nations' business. The threat of the other side was often sufficient.
But at the same time, the competition between two opposing systems also brought out the best in both. It created the space race and some of the most important scientific and technical developments in a century. It spurred the Civil Rights movement. It created a half-century of exploration, achievement and science. It made chess headline news and the Fisher-Spassky match briefly put an intellectual pursuit ahead of the corporate sports news. The Soviets had to lighten up on dissidents and writers, allowing some to escape to the West. And both sides curbed their nuclear strategies for fear of mutual annihilation.
Thanks to the tug-of-war between the East and West blocs, we got socialized medicine in Canada and other civilized countries. Unions grew and their workers got benefits and rights. We got more rights and freedom of expression because we couldn't be seen as oppressive like the Commies.
The unbridled greed and aggressiveness of capitalism and corporations was sometimes held in abeyance or even muzzled as left-leaning countries nationalized resources, or overthrew brutal dictators and actually held free elections (true, thanks to the CIA and US involvement, many of these were bludgeoned back into violent feudalism, but some - like Cuba and Nicaragua managed to hold out against the imperialists for at least a while).
Communism wasn't good for anyone, except in that it provided a yardstick against which we had to measure ourselves. Communism, however, was widespread and a serious alternative to capitalism, so it challenged us to be better than it promised it would be. people and nations gravitated to Communism because there weren't many other choices.
No one wanted to say aloud the truth: that we could easily bury Communism by out-selling, out-marketing, out-producing and out-performing it. In capitalism's darkest hours - the Great Depression - it was still a more powerful economic engine than Communism in its best.
But we didn't tell people that - the US in particular preferred to use the excuse of the Red threat to arm itself, to conquer smaller nations, and to bully others. They could have more easily won by sending in Wal-Marts instead of troops. They could have built shopping malls, created pop radio stations, theme parks and opened SUV dealerships. People are more easily fooled by gaudy baubles and trinkets than ideological arguments. But that wouldn't have gone over well with the military.
Cuba is a good example: if the US administration really wanted to win Cuba to its side, it would invest in it. Cubans would shuck Castro like an old corn husk in a moment in exchange for a Wal-Mart and some junk-food outlets. But the US needs Castro because he gives candidates the Cuban-American vote and all its campaign dollars. So it's not in the politicians' interests to win over the Cubans by peaceful or economic means, as long as the exiles can still fork over the pork.
Popular mythology to the contrary, neither President Reagan nor the superiority of the American Way of Life defeated Communism. The Soviet Union didn't fall because Ronnie out-competed, out-armed or out-smiled them. That would be like crediting the pharaohs with the annual Nile floods. The USSR imploded of its own mass. It was in trouble from Lenin's day and never got better, let alone fixed. There were good ideas, even great ideas in the theory of Communism, but in reality the system was simply too inefficient, there were too many amateurs meddling in it at the top, and it was too often controlled by an inept but omnipotent leader.
The USSR started to topple in 1917 and its fall was inevitable. The fact that it took more than 70 years is remarkable. It might have been a different story - had Trotsky ousted Stalin, not vice-versa, or had Lenin's will been acted upon, or had any of a number of vicious psychopaths like Beria or Yezhov not come to power, or had a capable economist been given authority. But these are all what-if games.
Ronnie Reagan just happened to be in the White House when the Soviet house of cards collapsed. He had no more to do with its fall than King Canute had to do with the movement of the tides.
When the USSR fell, Communism - as a world force - died. Yes, the Chinese are Communists, and there are more of them than all the rest of the former East Bloc combined. But since Mao died, they've been Communists in name only. The PRC Politburo has been eager to sell their workers' souls as slave labour for any Western corporation that would buy them. They're not ideologues like the USSR: they don't want to create a world revolution. The Chinese will take over by stealth, by winning over all the industrial jobs until all of the West is subservient. And most western governments are eager allies in seeing their own economies dismantled. And it's working. They don't give a rat's ass about Marx or Lenin or any ideological claptrap. They want limos, cell phones, indoor swimming pools and laptops.
Since the USSR fell, capitalism has been unleashed and the West has fallen victim to a far greater evil than any Communist ideology ever threatened. We're now at the mercy of the corporate interests, the so-called shareholders and their profits (in reality shareholders are a convenient prevarication: it's the CEOs and their executives who hold the reins of power). We're losing jobs, benefits, rights and freedom at an escalating rate because the corporate interests have to be protected. And some of those corporations have a big vested interest in making sure the military is active and aggressive.
At least when the USSR was still around we had the pretence of a free society, a good life and a competitive economy. And we were willing to defend our society and our nations to keep those freedoms.
Now we're merely wage slaves, or worse, unemployed, buying cheap Chinese-made knock-offs because that's all we can afford since our employers closed the factory and shipped all the jobs overseas. While the CEOs get another yacht or mansion. Or we could be fighting and dying in Iraq to protect the fiscal interests and oil deals of the US administration and their cronies.
Sadly, there's no opposition, no protest movement, no alternatives. We can't threaten to turn to the Communists if we're not treated right because they're long gone. But maybe not entirely forgotten. Surely there are still some leaders out there with a conscience who, haven't been completely bought by the corporations, who will help tame these pit bulls. Hasta la victoria siempre, albeit mas despacio...
