My point is don’t dismiss or look down on the actions and policies which is what has a direct impact on the people. Also, take into consideration the history of that country and the fact that they were betrayed by the vanguard party(CPSU) until the collapse of the USSR.
Belarus maintaining their socialist system after the chaos of the 90s is not possible under a liberal or under an unprincipled “marxist” that actively supported Glasnost and Peretroiska(Gorbachevs).
That’s my opinion as well when the Communist Party of Belarus becomes the ruling party, then it can be declared a socialist state.
Which is definitely a possibility, considering that about 5% of Belarus’s population is in the Communist Party, and the younger generation may hopefully be exposed to Marxist-Leninist ideas.
This part from Cheng Enfu helps clear my past point:
Second, an efficient state governance system featured by “vertical management” should be established. There is no ruling party in Belarus, and parliamentary groups do not play any decisive role in parliamentary elections. As a “witness”
to the horrors accompanying the collapse of the Soviet Union, Lukashenko has a
novel and unique understanding of the role of political parties, arguing that political parties should be organized from the top down with generally clear political opinions and a complete organizational system, mainly engaged in political
struggles with their initial goal to gain power, and govern according to their programs. The differences between different political parties are mainly in the choice of the country’s development path and system. The establishment of state power
in Belarus makes it unnecessary to engage in tedious discussions on these issues,
as partisan arguments can only exacerbate political divisions and be of no benefit
to improve the efficiency of state institutions or ensure social justice. On this basis,
a system of “vertical management” has been established in Belarus, in which the
president can intervene in grass-roots work at any time. Lukashenko also advocates that government officials must have the experience of serving in local communities, the economy must be managed by economists, the health sector must be
administrated by medical experts, the Ministry of Education must be led by people
with university management experience, and all leaders must be professionals in
order to improve the level of management and governing efficiency.
Lukashenko has made it so that civil servants and public officials are forbidden to go into business. They must work in their own positions during their working hours and are
given no time to do business, otherwise conflicts of interest and corruption may
arise (Lukashenko 2006). Lukashenko also sets an example by applying these
rules to himself and those close to him. He says that he has been a member of the
Communist Party of the Soviet Union(…)
i have taken the time this morning to read the article. it doesn’t mention class relations even once. it seems to define socialism as “when government does stuff.” i don’t agree with this assessment. while government control over the economy is important for socialist development, it doesn’t automatically make an economy socialist.
for instance if you look at public sector size by % of employment, you will see that there are quite a few countries with higher percentages than Belarus, which are not socialist. And a lot of countries have similar public sector size, and are not socialist.
then, the article (in the paragraph that you quoted) talks about how there are no ruling parties because it maintains stability. to me it is completely revisionist to claim that you can have a dotp without a proletarian party. how else do you organise the working class? just on vibes?
is it your position that a working class party is unnecessary for dotp? because if so, then that is a major deviation from marxism leninism, and to me would need to be supported by a lot of evidence.
Thank you for keeping this conversation productive. Before we go to the basics and after rereading all of your comments again, it seems that our main disagreements are from the following comments(I paraphrase):
Belarus is not socialist because you don’t consider Lukashenko and his team to look like a Marxist Leninist Vanguard party. Due to this perception, you consider that Belarus has no vanguard party at all and no socialism.
Now, let’s go to the basics to have a common framework for both of us. With this, I will use “Critique of the Gotha Program” for my foundation:
Between capitalist and communist society there lies the period of the revolutionary transformation of the one into the other. Corresponding to this is also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat.
With this sentence, we know that the most important aspect for a country to be considered socialist is the dictatorship of the proletariat. This leads to the next question: “What form should DOTP take? How should this look like?”
A vanguard party is not what makes a country socialist but the entire workers being able to participate in their development. Just having a vanguard is not DOTP. Just ask yourself how can the teachers, the workers unions, students, the scientist be able to influence their material conditions? Are all these masses of people within the Vanguard party?
One example of a DOTP is China and they explain this when you take the task of investigating the National People’s Congress:
The Constitution describes China as a socialist country governed by a people’s democratic dictatorship that is led by the working class and based on an alliance of workers and peasants. The fundamental nature of the state is defined by the people’s democratic dictatorship.
China upholds the unity of democracy and dictatorship to ensure the people’s status as masters of the country. On the one hand, all power of the state belongs to the people to ensure that they administer state affairs and manage economic and cultural undertakings and social affairs through various channels and in various ways in accordance with the Constitution and laws; on the other hand, China takes resolute action against any attempt to subvert the country’s political power or endanger public or state security, to uphold the dignity and order of law and safeguard the interests of the people and the state.
Now, going back to Belarus, they have a similar structure to the NPC of above called “Belarusian People’s Congress”:
The Belarusian People’s Congress has become a special form of grassroots democracy. It is a democratic institution that allows Belarus citizens to more broadly exercise their right to take part in national affairs – not only via elections of various levels and referendums, the operation of the parliament and municipal councils of deputies, through communication with people’s deputies.
The nationwide forum gathered delegates from every region of the country: representatives of all the branches of power, all spheres of the production sector, the private sector, science and education sectors, healthcare and culture, university students and veterans. These respected people – professionals, leaders, who are ready to speak up on topical affairs and make their own proposals – were nominated and elected in labor collectives and during public meetings.
In 2021, Belarus began a large-scale work to introduce amendments and additions to the Basic Law of the country. The Constitutional Commission was set up to prepare the draft. It consisted of 36 people – representatives of government bodies, legal science, public associations, various branches of economy and social sector - honored and prominent people with an active civic position.
In December 2021, the draft of amendments and additions to the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus was made public for the national discussion: within three and a half weeks, over 8,900 opinions and proposals were submitted by Belarusians.
If the workers are in power and have the means to control the state, then we can safely conclude that they have socialism. As China usually says:
Democracy is not a decorative ornament, but an instrument for addressing the issues that concern the people. Whether a country is democratic depends on whether its people are truly the masters of the country; whether the people have the right to vote, and more importantly, the right to participate extensively; whether they have been given verbal promises in elections, and more importantly, how many of these promises are fulfilled after elections; whether there are set political procedures and rules in state systems and laws, and more importantly, whether these systems and laws are truly enforced; whether the rules and procedures for the exercise of power are democratic, and more importantly, whether the exercise of power is genuinely subject to public scrutiny and checks.
That explanation above should take care of the DOTP aspect.
Now, let’s go back to Lukashenko. Belarusian communists support Alexander Lukashenko. In fact, the Communist Party was legalized thanks to Alexander Lukashenko as explained in this interview to the First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Belarus, Sergei Syrankov. Even though aesthetically he might not be to the liking of Europeans or Western marxists, he did what a Marxist Leninist Vanguard party should have done and for that he has the total support of the Belarus Communist Party and the workers in Belarus. For Belarussians, he and his leadership apply perfectly to what you were requesting from a vanguard working class party. He and his leadership are completely in sync with the policies that the communist party support.
If you know spanish, you can listen to the following timestamps where they go through Lukashenko: 12:10 to 18.
Anyway, hope this clears our disagreements. Take care and cheers.
Yeah I think your position is more clear to me. I don’t particularly think the comparison to China is useful since China actually had a communist party in government. I am just really specific about the party aspect of a socialist state and I don’t think it can be brushed off so easily. Even if lukashenka is supported by the CPB, he is not part of their structure and discipline.
A vanguard party is not what makes a country socialist but the entire workers being able to participate in their development. Just having a vanguard is not DOTP. Just ask yourself how can the teachers, the workers unions, students, the scientist be able to influence their material conditions? Are all these masses of people within the Vanguard party?
A bit provocative question to this may be, can a liberal democratic system be socialist? Because most people (even working class) technically would consider that they influence their conditions by voting. Or participating in local government etc.
Belarus does not claim to be a socialist state but it sometimes behaves like a socialist state. I don’t see any contradiction here. No matter how socialist Belarus behaves you can’t call Belarus a socialist state if they themselves deny it.
Hmmm, maybe there is a disconnect with the english audience but the Belarussian communist(active militant), Albert Santin, that I follow do consider themselves the last european socialist country. He even goes way beyond to explain Belarus to the spanish speaking audience in his youtube channel.
5). The first People’s Assembly of Belarus was held on October 19-20, 1996, in Minsk. The President then decided to consult with the people on the most important issues of state building and to determine the strategy and tactics of development.
6). The main outcome was the discussion of the key provisions of the country’s five-year plan and the draft Constitution. According to the organizers, the Assembly eliminated the opposition from several political forces and also determined the state’s socialist course.
Still there’s a difference between what Belarusian people think and the official communication. I don’t think most people are familiar with their politics so people here would believe the official communication out of respect.
one comment about a textbook doesn’t prove that belarus is ruled by a communist party
In what other country have you heard of putting Marxism-Leninism as the first and most important place on political economy for university students?
If that is not an enough clue, there are more actions that they have taken such as:
Edit. For anyone that want a thorough break down of Belarus DOTP, I wrote more about it here -> https://lemmygrad.ml/post/9576137
Is your argument that belaya rus is secretly an ML party? I don’t really understand where you’re going with this
My point is don’t dismiss or look down on the actions and policies which is what has a direct impact on the people. Also, take into consideration the history of that country and the fact that they were betrayed by the vanguard party(CPSU) until the collapse of the USSR.
Belarus maintaining their socialist system after the chaos of the 90s is not possible under a liberal or under an unprincipled “marxist” that actively supported Glasnost and Peretroiska(Gorbachevs).
I don’t disagree with you on these points. I just think it’s a stretch to claim that a country is socialist / ML without a socialist party in power.
That’s my opinion as well when the Communist Party of Belarus becomes the ruling party, then it can be declared a socialist state.
Which is definitely a possibility, considering that about 5% of Belarus’s population is in the Communist Party, and the younger generation may hopefully be exposed to Marxist-Leninist ideas.
A country is socialist if they have DOTP. I wrote more about it here -> https://lemmygrad.ml/post/9576137/7219414
This part from Cheng Enfu helps clear my past point:
Second, an efficient state governance system featured by “vertical management” should be established. There is no ruling party in Belarus, and parliamentary groups do not play any decisive role in parliamentary elections. As a “witness” to the horrors accompanying the collapse of the Soviet Union, Lukashenko has a novel and unique understanding of the role of political parties, arguing that political parties should be organized from the top down with generally clear political opinions and a complete organizational system, mainly engaged in political struggles with their initial goal to gain power, and govern according to their programs. The differences between different political parties are mainly in the choice of the country’s development path and system. The establishment of state power in Belarus makes it unnecessary to engage in tedious discussions on these issues, as partisan arguments can only exacerbate political divisions and be of no benefit to improve the efficiency of state institutions or ensure social justice. On this basis, a system of “vertical management” has been established in Belarus, in which the president can intervene in grass-roots work at any time. Lukashenko also advocates that government officials must have the experience of serving in local communities, the economy must be managed by economists, the health sector must be administrated by medical experts, the Ministry of Education must be led by people with university management experience, and all leaders must be professionals in order to improve the level of management and governing efficiency.
Lukashenko has made it so that civil servants and public officials are forbidden to go into business. They must work in their own positions during their working hours and are given no time to do business, otherwise conflicts of interest and corruption may arise (Lukashenko 2006). Lukashenko also sets an example by applying these rules to himself and those close to him. He says that he has been a member of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union(…)
Source -> https://www.scienceopen.com/hosted-document?doi=10.13169%2Fworlrevipoliecon.11.4.0428 (Must read. The marxist economist Cheng Enfu did a good job with this study)
How is this an argument against anything I’ve said? Belarus is not a socialist state
Read Cheng Enfu’s study. The result of their system was due to the grave crisis during that time. Otherwise, they would have been a neoliberal state.
Belarus is a socialist state. Please, once again, read.
i have taken the time this morning to read the article. it doesn’t mention class relations even once. it seems to define socialism as “when government does stuff.” i don’t agree with this assessment. while government control over the economy is important for socialist development, it doesn’t automatically make an economy socialist.
for instance if you look at public sector size by % of employment, you will see that there are quite a few countries with higher percentages than Belarus, which are not socialist. And a lot of countries have similar public sector size, and are not socialist.
then, the article (in the paragraph that you quoted) talks about how there are no ruling parties because it maintains stability. to me it is completely revisionist to claim that you can have a dotp without a proletarian party. how else do you organise the working class? just on vibes?
is it your position that a working class party is unnecessary for dotp? because if so, then that is a major deviation from marxism leninism, and to me would need to be supported by a lot of evidence.
Thank you for keeping this conversation productive. Before we go to the basics and after rereading all of your comments again, it seems that our main disagreements are from the following comments(I paraphrase):
Now, let’s go to the basics to have a common framework for both of us. With this, I will use “Critique of the Gotha Program” for my foundation:
With this sentence, we know that the most important aspect for a country to be considered socialist is the dictatorship of the proletariat. This leads to the next question: “What form should DOTP take? How should this look like?”
A vanguard party is not what makes a country socialist but the entire workers being able to participate in their development. Just having a vanguard is not DOTP. Just ask yourself how can the teachers, the workers unions, students, the scientist be able to influence their material conditions? Are all these masses of people within the Vanguard party?
One example of a DOTP is China and they explain this when you take the task of investigating the National People’s Congress:
The Constitution describes China as a socialist country governed by a people’s democratic dictatorship that is led by the working class and based on an alliance of workers and peasants. The fundamental nature of the state is defined by the people’s democratic dictatorship.
China upholds the unity of democracy and dictatorship to ensure the people’s status as masters of the country. On the one hand, all power of the state belongs to the people to ensure that they administer state affairs and manage economic and cultural undertakings and social affairs through various channels and in various ways in accordance with the Constitution and laws; on the other hand, China takes resolute action against any attempt to subvert the country’s political power or endanger public or state security, to uphold the dignity and order of law and safeguard the interests of the people and the state.
Now, going back to Belarus, they have a similar structure to the NPC of above called “Belarusian People’s Congress”:
The Belarusian People’s Congress has become a special form of grassroots democracy. It is a democratic institution that allows Belarus citizens to more broadly exercise their right to take part in national affairs – not only via elections of various levels and referendums, the operation of the parliament and municipal councils of deputies, through communication with people’s deputies.
The nationwide forum gathered delegates from every region of the country: representatives of all the branches of power, all spheres of the production sector, the private sector, science and education sectors, healthcare and culture, university students and veterans. These respected people – professionals, leaders, who are ready to speak up on topical affairs and make their own proposals – were nominated and elected in labor collectives and during public meetings.
In 2021, Belarus began a large-scale work to introduce amendments and additions to the Basic Law of the country. The Constitutional Commission was set up to prepare the draft. It consisted of 36 people – representatives of government bodies, legal science, public associations, various branches of economy and social sector - honored and prominent people with an active civic position.
In December 2021, the draft of amendments and additions to the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus was made public for the national discussion: within three and a half weeks, over 8,900 opinions and proposals were submitted by Belarusians.
If the workers are in power and have the means to control the state, then we can safely conclude that they have socialism. As China usually says:
That explanation above should take care of the DOTP aspect.
Now, let’s go back to Lukashenko. Belarusian communists support Alexander Lukashenko. In fact, the Communist Party was legalized thanks to Alexander Lukashenko as explained in this interview to the First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Belarus, Sergei Syrankov. Even though aesthetically he might not be to the liking of Europeans or Western marxists, he did what a Marxist Leninist Vanguard party should have done and for that he has the total support of the Belarus Communist Party and the workers in Belarus. For Belarussians, he and his leadership apply perfectly to what you were requesting from a vanguard working class party. He and his leadership are completely in sync with the policies that the communist party support.
If you know spanish, you can listen to the following timestamps where they go through Lukashenko: 12:10 to 18.
Anyway, hope this clears our disagreements. Take care and cheers.
Yeah I think your position is more clear to me. I don’t particularly think the comparison to China is useful since China actually had a communist party in government. I am just really specific about the party aspect of a socialist state and I don’t think it can be brushed off so easily. Even if lukashenka is supported by the CPB, he is not part of their structure and discipline.
A bit provocative question to this may be, can a liberal democratic system be socialist? Because most people (even working class) technically would consider that they influence their conditions by voting. Or participating in local government etc.
Belarus does not claim to be a socialist state but it sometimes behaves like a socialist state. I don’t see any contradiction here. No matter how socialist Belarus behaves you can’t call Belarus a socialist state if they themselves deny it.
Hmmm, maybe there is a disconnect with the english audience but the Belarussian communist(active militant), Albert Santin, that I follow do consider themselves the last european socialist country. He even goes way beyond to explain Belarus to the spanish speaking audience in his youtube channel.
They have plenty of interviews with Marxists from Latin America and Spain. He also has his X account where he explains in detail how DOTP works there -> https://xcancel.com/albersantin/status/1947288122326233327#m
5). The first People’s Assembly of Belarus was held on October 19-20, 1996, in Minsk. The President then decided to consult with the people on the most important issues of state building and to determine the strategy and tactics of development.
6). The main outcome was the discussion of the key provisions of the country’s five-year plan and the draft Constitution. According to the organizers, the Assembly eliminated the opposition from several political forces and also determined the state’s socialist course.
Btw, sending you a nice pic from Belarus:
Still there’s a difference between what Belarusian people think and the official communication. I don’t think most people are familiar with their politics so people here would believe the official communication out of respect.