Donate to Links
Click on Links masthead to clear previous query from search box
- United States: The Rise of Trumpism
2 days 7 hours ago
- Join the petition campaign
2 days 20 hours ago
- Pakistan: Protests to continue if activists are not released
5 days 18 hours ago
- Wallerstein's view on a possible US-Russia deal against China
5 days 23 hours ago
- Misreading the real imperialists
6 days 4 min ago
- Moving on from Trotskyism
1 week 3 days ago
- Big thanks for your work
1 week 4 days ago
3 weeks 22 hours ago
- this is really encouraging
4 weeks 2 days ago
- First reply to your response
6 weeks 5 days ago
John Percy is the national secretary of the Democratic Socialist Party, which hosted the conference.
By Boris Kagarlitsky
A decade after the official dissolution of the Soviet Union, the question of the Soviet heritage remains the topic of heated discussions in Russia and other post-Communist countries. Some people explain all the problems and disagreements as survivals from the Soviet past, and dream of a time when the collective memory will be wiped clean of the last traces of the Soviet experience. Others carefully cherish Soviet traditions, saving whatever can still be saved and preserving it. Among sections of radical youth there is a half myth, half fairy tale about life in the USSR, a version that mixes the truth with the idealised recollections of grandfathers and grandmothers who take their grandchildren to Communist demonstrations. As the grandchildren grow up, they do not become admirers of Stalin, but feel a robust loathing for the people who destroyed the country and impoverished its people. Even without the grandparents, they would have thought exactly the same, since their own experience of life proves to the younger generation, on a daily basis, that present-day Russia, Ukraine and Kazakhstan are societies that are not so much creating the conditions for future development, as squandering and destroying the inheritance from Soviet times. The most important questions remain at a certain distance from all these disputes: What was it that made Soviet culture unique and attractive? What is its place in history, and what did it leave behind?
By Patrick Bond
Patrick Bond is the author of two recent books: Unsustainable South Africa: Environment, Development and Social Protest and Fanon's Warning: A Civil Society Reader on the New Partnership for Africa's Development. Both are available from Africa World Press (http://www.africanworld.com). His 2001 book Against Global Apartheid: South Africa meets the World Bank, IMF and International Finance, will be republished by Zed Press this year, as will a new edition of Elite Transition: From Apartheid to Neoliberalism in South Africa from Pluto Press.
By Munyaradzi Gwisai
Munyaradzi Gwisai is a leader of the International Socialist Organisation of Zimbabwe and a member of parliament. This article is extracted from Leo Zeilig (ed.), Class Struggle and Resistance in Africa, New Clarion Press, Cheltenham, UK, 2002, which can be purchased for £15.95, including shipping. For readers in Africa, there is a special discounted price of £12.95, including shipping. Order from New Clarion Press, 5 Church Row, Gretton, Cheltenham GL54 5HG, UK, or on line from Amazon.
By Michael Alexandros
- Vietnam: Behind the region?
- Post-war impoverishment and the Cambodian war
- ‘Doi Moi’ economic renovation
- Early 1990s
- The challenge of 1997
- Post-1997 economic changes
- Economic direction
- WB/IMF/WTO demands
- Reactions to World Bank agenda
- How socialist is the state sector?
- Political changes under the post-1997 leadership
- Party, state and masses
- Workers' struggles
How far have the Vietnamese people progressed along the road to socialism, the second goal of the historic leadership of the Vietnamese Communist Party (VCP), which led the unquestionably successful struggle for the country's national liberation?
This article is taken from the June 2002 international edition of Pembebasan, published by the People's Democratic Party (PRD) of Indonesia.
By Malik Miah, Barry Sheppard and Caroline Lund.
All are members of the US socialist organisation Solidarity.
- Collapse of the Soviet Union
- The enemy list is expanded
- The war at home
- How far will they go?
- Antiwar movement in the US
- Defeat of Venezuelan coup; Cuba
- The US working class
The criminal September 11, 2001, attacks were greeted by the Bush administration as a godsend. The shock and horror experienced by the US people were mobilised into support of a new, open-ended “War on Terrorism” designed to give a blank cheque to a new stage of US military aggression. This war represents a qualitative change in policy from one of containment to one of more active aggression to destroy enemies who stand in the way of greater US world domination.
Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense (War) Rumsfeld, Attorney General Ashcroft, Secretary of State Powell, and other advisers like Condoleezza Rice in a matter of weeks laid out the new policy, dubbed the “Bush Doctrine” by the White House:
by Dipankar Bhattacharya
Dipankar Bhattacharya is the General Secretary of the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist). This is the text of the keynote address delivered at the inaugural session of the Second Asia Pacific International Solidarity Conference held in Sydney from 29 March to 1 April, 2002.
Many of the articles in this issue relate to the US war drive and the changing politics of the post-September 11 world; two address the topic very directly. "A war to defeat, a world to win" was the first keynote speech at the second Asia Pacific International Solidarity Conference held in Sydney at the end of March and beginning of April.