I would like to defend the notion that Chavez's referendum defeat is actually a victory for socialism, rather than a defeat.,”With the defeat of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's sweeping referendum, many are proclaiming a victory of democracy over socialism, freedom over totalitarianism and autocratic government.
I would like to defend the notion that Chavez's referendum defeat is actually a victory for socialism, rather than a defeat. This will provide us with several lessons about socialism.
Socialism is meant to introduce the apparatus for communism, which is the most difficult of any modern political task because communism is politics without a state. Chavez lost sight of this goal of holding socialism to be a medium for ridding politics of the intervention of bureaucracies and states.
Of course, thinking of politics without a state seems to be entirely counterintuitive. I would argue that this is actually the most important aspect of the challenge of socialism and communism: it will necessarily challenge our thinking about our own politics by conceiving of tactical measures to rid politics of the state.
This brings us to our second lesson. Socialism is not opposed to freedom. Socialism, as a conduit for communism, is meant to be one particular development or strand of freedom. Usually, in light of its developments in the 20th century, socialism is equated with totalitarianism and a state economy, in contrast to the freedom of democracy and some sort of market economy.
This line of thought is mistaken, however. Freedom is not limited to one type of regime and one type of economy.
Socialism is not limited to totalitarianism and state economies. To equate socialism with those functions is to simply equate socialism with one aspect of its political thrust, and forget that it serves a radical function of moving politics away from the state.
Chavez's defeat is a victory for socialism because it refrains him from developing economic reforms alongside increased bureaucratic developments, especially term limits.
Socialism should not be equated with totalitarianism, and opposed to freedom, because the tasks of socialism are ultimately oriented away from the state, and the totality of the state.
Our final lesson? As soon as we make the leap to equating one regime type with freedom and democracy, we will equally find ourselves en route to totalitarianism.
“