“A country decided to have a socialist experiment and as a Western leftist it wasn’t AES.”
surely, I must take what you say as serious. What socialist experiments have you done? Are you a part of a successful vanguard, socialist party or organization that has done anything?
Also taking what you said at face value, the communal system was never existing socialism? Yeah, sure. My grandma in her chair was a car, ya know.
You know what, if we’re using the “academic” (lack of a better word) term for AES; sure, you are correct. Colloquially, a few nations are considered AES without having DOTP. For example, these terms would be used differently if I was arguing with someone who is not a socialist, vs a M-L, vs a leftist. Talking to an M-L in a strict debate setting, yes, Venezuela is strictly not AES according to sources and information provided by ProleWiki. Plenty of M-Ls refer to Burkina Faso as “AES” outside of the strictest definition of the term, however, likely because they had CDRs which could be interpreted as a “vanguard” and were on the pathway to DOTP. Even at the time, strict hoxhaists in the nation disavowed this and refused to work with the government. Venezuela is very much the same here in that regard (no Volta hoxhaists in Venezuela, however.)
This is because it is colloquially used to refer to existing socialism, talking to a non-socialist or a leftist, Venezuela is AES as “AES” has connotations outside of just being a DOTP because it is used as a comparison for “existing socialism” vs idealism championed by western leftists. Simply, it’s easier to use that than writing a 4 paragraph statement about “Actually, it’s not Actually Existing Socialism and it originally comes from Brezhnev’s writings originally adopted from Lenin that the term was used, adopted and modified over the years in modern discourse to refer to nations with a DOTP so instead we should use ES as the proper term…”
Even in the writings in his letter to Schmidt the term has changed showcasing what intention Brezhnev had in mind using the source from Prolewiki and other writings he had:
“It is self-evident that a mature socialist society must rest on highly developed productive forces, on a powerful, advanced industry, on a large-scale, highly mechanized agriculture built on collectivist principles. Such today is the Soviet economy which, both in scale and technical capability, differs fundamentally…”
Not that you’re wrong, Prolewiki isn’t wrong, etc. Venezuela fits this description (At least in comparison to pre-Chavez and in the same letter Brezhnev compares the Soviet Union to 40 years ago) and in conversation with others I will likely refer it to AES unless I’m having a strict debate against another M-L to which then, yes, I am wrong.
Even regardless of all of this, Venezuela needs our support. It’s fine to be critical (I don’t like communalism at all), but abandoning the socialist experiment entirely and admonishing it while under the screws of the largest imperialist power while debating the strictest definitions of “AES” is just seems absurd to me.
“A country decided to have a socialist experiment and as a Western leftist it wasn’t AES.”
surely, I must take what you say as serious. What socialist experiments have you done? Are you a part of a successful vanguard, socialist party or organization that has done anything?
Also taking what you said at face value, the communal system was never existing socialism? Yeah, sure. My grandma in her chair was a car, ya know.
Venezueala was never a dictatorship of the proletariat. That is what makes an AES.
You know what, if we’re using the “academic” (lack of a better word) term for AES; sure, you are correct. Colloquially, a few nations are considered AES without having DOTP. For example, these terms would be used differently if I was arguing with someone who is not a socialist, vs a M-L, vs a leftist. Talking to an M-L in a strict debate setting, yes, Venezuela is strictly not AES according to sources and information provided by ProleWiki. Plenty of M-Ls refer to Burkina Faso as “AES” outside of the strictest definition of the term, however, likely because they had CDRs which could be interpreted as a “vanguard” and were on the pathway to DOTP. Even at the time, strict hoxhaists in the nation disavowed this and refused to work with the government. Venezuela is very much the same here in that regard (no Volta hoxhaists in Venezuela, however.)
This is because it is colloquially used to refer to existing socialism, talking to a non-socialist or a leftist, Venezuela is AES as “AES” has connotations outside of just being a DOTP because it is used as a comparison for “existing socialism” vs idealism championed by western leftists. Simply, it’s easier to use that than writing a 4 paragraph statement about “Actually, it’s not Actually Existing Socialism and it originally comes from Brezhnev’s writings originally adopted from Lenin that the term was used, adopted and modified over the years in modern discourse to refer to nations with a DOTP so instead we should use ES as the proper term…”
Even in the writings in his letter to Schmidt the term has changed showcasing what intention Brezhnev had in mind using the source from Prolewiki and other writings he had:
“It is self-evident that a mature socialist society must rest on highly developed productive forces, on a powerful, advanced industry, on a large-scale, highly mechanized agriculture built on collectivist principles. Such today is the Soviet economy which, both in scale and technical capability, differs fundamentally…”
Not that you’re wrong, Prolewiki isn’t wrong, etc. Venezuela fits this description (At least in comparison to pre-Chavez and in the same letter Brezhnev compares the Soviet Union to 40 years ago) and in conversation with others I will likely refer it to AES unless I’m having a strict debate against another M-L to which then, yes, I am wrong.
Even regardless of all of this, Venezuela needs our support. It’s fine to be critical (I don’t like communalism at all), but abandoning the socialist experiment entirely and admonishing it while under the screws of the largest imperialist power while debating the strictest definitions of “AES” is just seems absurd to me.