What do you think?
Rate this book
A World to Build: New Paths toward Twenty-first Century Socialism
Over the last few decades Marta Harnecker has emerged as one of Latin America’s most incisive socialist thinkers. In A World to Build, she grapples with the question that has bedeviled every movement for radical social change: how do you construct a new world within the framework of the old? Harnecker draws on lessons from socialist movements in Latin America, especially Venezuela, where she served as an advisor to the Chávez administration and was a director of the Centro Internacional Miranda.
A World to Build begins with the struggle for socialism today. Harnecker offers a useful overview of the changing political map in Latin America, examining the trajectories of several progressive Latin American governments as they work to develop alternative models to capitalism. She combines analysis of concrete events with a refined theoretical understanding of grassroots democracy, the state, and the barriers imposed by capital. For Harnecker, twenty-first century socialism is a historical process as well as a theoretical project, one that requires imagination no less than courage. She is a lucid guide to the movements that are fighting, right now, to build a better world, and an important voice for those who wish to follow that path.
A World to Build begins with the struggle for socialism today. Harnecker offers a useful overview of the changing political map in Latin America, examining the trajectories of several progressive Latin American governments as they work to develop alternative models to capitalism. She combines analysis of concrete events with a refined theoretical understanding of grassroots democracy, the state, and the barriers imposed by capital. For Harnecker, twenty-first century socialism is a historical process as well as a theoretical project, one that requires imagination no less than courage. She is a lucid guide to the movements that are fighting, right now, to build a better world, and an important voice for those who wish to follow that path.
- GenresNonfictionPhilosophy
265 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 2013
15 people are currently reading
244 people want to read
About the author
Marta Harnecker
78 books48 followersMarta Harnecker (b. 1937) was a Chilean sociologist, political scientist, journalist and activist.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
November 24, 2023
این کتاب با عنوان «جهانی برای ساختن: سوسیالیسم قرن بیست و یکم»، با ترجمهی علیرضا جباری، در نشر افکار (۱۳۹۷) منتشر شده.
بخشی از کتاب صرف این شده که بگوید در کشورهای آمریکای لاتین، تا حالا چه اقدامات ضدسرمایهداری آمریکایی انجام شده. و بخش زیادی هم به طرحهای سوسیالیسم برای قرن بیست و یکم میپردازد؛ خصوصا بعد از ریاستجمهوری هوگو چاوز (۱۹۹۸).
ایدههایی مثل اینکه در ساعات کار کارگران، بهشان آموزشهای مدیریتی و اقتصادی بدهیم تا خودشان عنان کار را در دست بگیرند بجای طبقهی نخبه، و اینگونه انگیزهشان بیشتر شود. نویسنده میپذیرد که بازده چنین کارخانههایی از تولیدیهای سرمایهداری کمتر است، ولی در عوض اجتماع سالمتر است و کارگر ازخودبیگانه نشده است.
مشکل اینجاست که چنین شعارهایی واقعا دلنشین هستند، ولی کتابی که در سال ۲۰۱۵ چاپ میشود باید کاملا مصداقی بگوید که این طرحها کجای دنیا موفق شدهاند. یعنی نویسنده اکثرا خیلی آرمانی و مجازی صحبت میکند.
موضع نویسنده دوگانه و متناقض است. از طرفی معتقد است در سوسیالیسم مطلوب، امور باید به دست مردم باشد و تا میشود تمرکززدایی کرد، برخلاف حرف لنین.
و از طرفی تعریف و تمجید میکند از اقدامات مثلا اکوادر، که نفت خصوصیسازیشدهاش را ملی کرد و «سلطهی دولت» را هرچه بیشتر پدید آورد.
نویسنده اقدامات مشارکتی و سوسیالیستی کشورهای آمریکای لاتین را لیست میکند. ولی چون با آمار (میزان موفقیت این طرحها) و مدارک و شواهد همراهشان نکرده، حاصل کار بیشتر شبیه گزارشهای تلویزیون یک دولت از گل و بلبل بودن سرزمینش شده.
خانم مارتا هارنکر واقعا باید به سوالات اساسی سوسیالیسم جواب دهد در حالی که از آنها طفره میرود. مثلا اینکه اگر برنامهریزی متمرکز شوروی جواب نداد، پس چه کنیم؟
نویسنده از تشکیل یک سری کمونهایی حرف میزند که نیازهای اقتصادی و غیرهی کارگران و مردم منطقهاش را مستقلا برآورده میکنند. اما این رویا، تنها منجر میشود که ما شرکتهای پیشرفتهی گستردهی ملی نداشته باشیم و در سطح یک کارگاه شلواردوزی باقی بمانیم؛ که ایدهی چندان جالبی برای مقابله با امپریالیسم نیست.
نکتهای دیگر که من متوجه نمیشوم، این مخالفت چپها با نخبهگرایی است. خب هرکاری کنیم، در هر جامعه افراد کمی هستند که باهوشتر یا خلاقتر از بقیه اند، و این ارتباط چندان مستقیمی با آموزش بقیهی اقشار ندارد.
بخشی از کتاب صرف این شده که بگوید در کشورهای آمریکای لاتین، تا حالا چه اقدامات ضدسرمایهداری آمریکایی انجام شده. و بخش زیادی هم به طرحهای سوسیالیسم برای قرن بیست و یکم میپردازد؛ خصوصا بعد از ریاستجمهوری هوگو چاوز (۱۹۹۸).
ایدههایی مثل اینکه در ساعات کار کارگران، بهشان آموزشهای مدیریتی و اقتصادی بدهیم تا خودشان عنان کار را در دست بگیرند بجای طبقهی نخبه، و اینگونه انگیزهشان بیشتر شود. نویسنده میپذیرد که بازده چنین کارخانههایی از تولیدیهای سرمایهداری کمتر است، ولی در عوض اجتماع سالمتر است و کارگر ازخودبیگانه نشده است.
مشکل اینجاست که چنین شعارهایی واقعا دلنشین هستند، ولی کتابی که در سال ۲۰۱۵ چاپ میشود باید کاملا مصداقی بگوید که این طرحها کجای دنیا موفق شدهاند. یعنی نویسنده اکثرا خیلی آرمانی و مجازی صحبت میکند.
موضع نویسنده دوگانه و متناقض است. از طرفی معتقد است در سوسیالیسم مطلوب، امور باید به دست مردم باشد و تا میشود تمرکززدایی کرد، برخلاف حرف لنین.
و از طرفی تعریف و تمجید میکند از اقدامات مثلا اکوادر، که نفت خصوصیسازیشدهاش را ملی کرد و «سلطهی دولت» را هرچه بیشتر پدید آورد.
نویسنده اقدامات مشارکتی و سوسیالیستی کشورهای آمریکای لاتین را لیست میکند. ولی چون با آمار (میزان موفقیت این طرحها) و مدارک و شواهد همراهشان نکرده، حاصل کار بیشتر شبیه گزارشهای تلویزیون یک دولت از گل و بلبل بودن سرزمینش شده.
خانم مارتا هارنکر واقعا باید به سوالات اساسی سوسیالیسم جواب دهد در حالی که از آنها طفره میرود. مثلا اینکه اگر برنامهریزی متمرکز شوروی جواب نداد، پس چه کنیم؟
نویسنده از تشکیل یک سری کمونهایی حرف میزند که نیازهای اقتصادی و غیرهی کارگران و مردم منطقهاش را مستقلا برآورده میکنند. اما این رویا، تنها منجر میشود که ما شرکتهای پیشرفتهی گستردهی ملی نداشته باشیم و در سطح یک کارگاه شلواردوزی باقی بمانیم؛ که ایدهی چندان جالبی برای مقابله با امپریالیسم نیست.
نکتهای دیگر که من متوجه نمیشوم، این مخالفت چپها با نخبهگرایی است. خب هرکاری کنیم، در هر جامعه افراد کمی هستند که باهوشتر یا خلاقتر از بقیه اند، و این ارتباط چندان مستقیمی با آموزش بقیهی اقشار ندارد.
November 28, 2018
3.5 stars, rounded down to 3 because I didn't feel it offered much beyond what Harnecker already said a few years ago in 'Rebuilding the Left'. Plenty of valuable ideas here on constructing socialism in the modern world, but I find it slightly irritating when authors working to define '21st century socialism' are so quick to write off the experience of 20th century socialism which, for all its manifold flaws and contradictions, did achieve some fairly extraordinary things in terms of improving the lives of ordinary people (alleviating poverty, providing education, healthcare, access to culture, basic democratic structures, not to mention defeating fascism!). It's not that we shouldn't criticise these experiences, but it's important to learn the positive lessons and celebrate the successes as well.
May 11, 2019
Η Marta Harnecker θέτει τα πιο κρίσιμα ερωτήματα αναφορικά με το ριζοσπαστικό πολιτικό εργαλείο στον 21ο αιώνα, τον τρόπο συγκρότησης, λειτουργίας και σχέσης του με τις μάζες.
Μπολιασμένο με εξαιρετική βιβλιογραφία και τη πείρα από το "κινηματικό εργαστήρι" της λατινικής Αμερικής, δίνει "ιδέες για τον αγώνα" σε μια εποχή που η πρακτική της αριστεράς δείχνει να μην μπορεί να ξεφύγει από τη δογματική προσκόλληση σε σχήματα του παρελθόντος.
Μέσα από τις εμπειρίες της από τα κινήματα στις χώρες του μαγικού ρεαλισμού και τα θεωρητικά εργαλεία των διανοητών με τους οποίους συνυπήρξε, η συγγραφέας παλεύει να μας υπενθυμίσει δύο πράγματα : πως ο κόσμος γύρω μας αλλάζει και πως σε αυτό το μόνιμα μεταβαλλόμενο περιβάλλον ο μαρξισμός (οφείλει να) αποτελεί "συγκεκριμένη ανάλυση της συγκεκριμένης κατάστασης". 5/5
Μπολιασμένο με εξαιρετική βιβλιογραφία και τη πείρα από το "κινηματικό εργαστήρι" της λατινικής Αμερικής, δίνει "ιδέες για τον αγώνα" σε μια εποχή που η πρακτική της αριστεράς δείχνει να μην μπορεί να ξεφύγει από τη δογματική προσκόλληση σε σχήματα του παρελθόντος.
Μέσα από τις εμπειρίες της από τα κινήματα στις χώρες του μαγικού ρεαλισμού και τα θεωρητικά εργαλεία των διανοητών με τους οποίους συνυπήρξε, η συγγραφέας παλεύει να μας υπενθυμίσει δύο πράγματα : πως ο κόσμος γύρω μας αλλάζει και πως σε αυτό το μόνιμα μεταβαλλόμενο περιβάλλον ο μαρξισμός (οφείλει να) αποτελεί "συγκεκριμένη ανάλυση της συγκεκριμένης κατάστασης". 5/5
February 20, 2016
Harnecker draws on 30 years of very inspiring struggles against neoliberalism in Latin America ("Our America") to point the way forward for the left. She has drawn some very valuable lessons: we need what she calls a "political instrument" to help push forward struggle and help move us toward socialism. But this political instrument can't be the like the vanguard parties of old -- it has to be pluralistic and democratic, and draw from the experience and leadership of all oppressed people.
Her description of how to make work and community life more democratic are very interesting and valuable, and build on real experiments and experience in Venezuela. She says that in the society we are trying to build, we should aim to decentralize as much authority and decision-making as we can. She also has some pointed advice for revolutionaries: show up to meetings on time, and always be the most hopeful and cheerful person in the room.
The people of South America have made more progress in fighting back against neoliberalism than anywhere else. However, I think Harnecker over-estimates the progress made by left governments on the continent -- especially in Bolivia where there is a lot of evidence that neoliberalism has not been defeated, and where there are real divisions between popular movements and the Morales government. And at some points, she lumps in governments like in Brazil and Argentina that have introduced social programs but made no real break with neoliberalism. I am sure those movements will continue to point the way forward for all of us -- including, when they need to, challenging the governments that presume to speak for the people.
Her description of how to make work and community life more democratic are very interesting and valuable, and build on real experiments and experience in Venezuela. She says that in the society we are trying to build, we should aim to decentralize as much authority and decision-making as we can. She also has some pointed advice for revolutionaries: show up to meetings on time, and always be the most hopeful and cheerful person in the room.
The people of South America have made more progress in fighting back against neoliberalism than anywhere else. However, I think Harnecker over-estimates the progress made by left governments on the continent -- especially in Bolivia where there is a lot of evidence that neoliberalism has not been defeated, and where there are real divisions between popular movements and the Morales government. And at some points, she lumps in governments like in Brazil and Argentina that have introduced social programs but made no real break with neoliberalism. I am sure those movements will continue to point the way forward for all of us -- including, when they need to, challenging the governments that presume to speak for the people.
January 31, 2015
Like her comrade, Michael Lebowitz, Marta Harnecker shares an approach to 21st Century Socialism that has been tempered in the furnace of experience.
It is wise, pragmatic, hopeful - positive hope (as opposed to tooth-achey hope), based on achievable socialist goals in a world where power structures are aligned against them.
Though the perspectives she shares sometimes float along on platitudes and voluntarism, they are forgivable in the absence of practice (praxis).
In the end, she calls out for a new left culture: "a tolerant and pluralist culture that gives the most important place to everything that unites and a secondary place to that which divides; that promotes unity around values such as solidarity, humanism, respect for difference, and protection of the environment; and that turns its back on the hunger for profit and the laws of the market at the principles that guide human activity."
I have to admit that I expected a little more analysis around commandeering cultural hegemony, though I think Marta offers some useful insights on revolutionary transition towards socialism.
It is wise, pragmatic, hopeful - positive hope (as opposed to tooth-achey hope), based on achievable socialist goals in a world where power structures are aligned against them.
Though the perspectives she shares sometimes float along on platitudes and voluntarism, they are forgivable in the absence of practice (praxis).
In the end, she calls out for a new left culture: "a tolerant and pluralist culture that gives the most important place to everything that unites and a secondary place to that which divides; that promotes unity around values such as solidarity, humanism, respect for difference, and protection of the environment; and that turns its back on the hunger for profit and the laws of the market at the principles that guide human activity."
I have to admit that I expected a little more analysis around commandeering cultural hegemony, though I think Marta offers some useful insights on revolutionary transition towards socialism.
June 22, 2023
every US leftist should read this short and incredibly insightful book about building socialism in the context of (post?)modernity. Harnecker was a prominent thinker, organizer and planner from the Popular Unity days of Allende's Chile to the construction of a new socialist society in Cuba in the 70s all the way up to the end of the Chavez era of the Boliviarian revolution.
Harnecker holds the mantle of one the pre-eminent expositors of 21st century socialism, the theoretical framework that has animated left movements in Latin America in the last two decades. These ideas have resonated with 100s of millions of working and poor people from Brazil, Uruguay, Ecuador, Venezuela, Bolivia, Honduras, Mexico and beyond. At the most advanced levels, this new spirit of socialism, distinct (but not discarding) the experiences of actually-existing-socialism in the past, has mobilized workers and the oppressed to win state power and build a new participatory, anti-capitalist hegemony. Contrary to some sectarian's claims, 21st century socialism does understand the class nature of the capitalist state and the need for an armed revolutionary process as demonstrated in the defeat of the US backed 2002 coup.
This book explicates the theory of the transition to socialism. It seeks to answer 'how can left revolutionary movements win state power and then build a new socialist system by breaking the power of the old state'? In broad strokes, the success of socialist movements in Venezuela (but also Bolivia and to some degree Ecuador and beyond) relies on building the broadest possible anti-capitalist coalition. The US left needs to learn from this example, rather than withdrawing into small so-called vanguardist parties and refusing to collaborate.
While many small 'revolutionary' parties spend all their time studying Spain '36, Germany '18, Russia '17 or maybe China '49, they miss the very real lessons of class struggle and the construction of socialism in contemporary societies. While there is no recipe to build socialism, we could learn much more from a place like Venezuela than from tsarist Russia. For all the differences between Seattle 2023 and Caracas 2002, both are far more similar to each other than to Petrograd 1917. We have to study what our comrades are doing across the globe and discard the arrogance that prevents us from learning the valuable lessons of how movements mobilized millions of people to struggle.
Harnecker holds the mantle of one the pre-eminent expositors of 21st century socialism, the theoretical framework that has animated left movements in Latin America in the last two decades. These ideas have resonated with 100s of millions of working and poor people from Brazil, Uruguay, Ecuador, Venezuela, Bolivia, Honduras, Mexico and beyond. At the most advanced levels, this new spirit of socialism, distinct (but not discarding) the experiences of actually-existing-socialism in the past, has mobilized workers and the oppressed to win state power and build a new participatory, anti-capitalist hegemony. Contrary to some sectarian's claims, 21st century socialism does understand the class nature of the capitalist state and the need for an armed revolutionary process as demonstrated in the defeat of the US backed 2002 coup.
This book explicates the theory of the transition to socialism. It seeks to answer 'how can left revolutionary movements win state power and then build a new socialist system by breaking the power of the old state'? In broad strokes, the success of socialist movements in Venezuela (but also Bolivia and to some degree Ecuador and beyond) relies on building the broadest possible anti-capitalist coalition. The US left needs to learn from this example, rather than withdrawing into small so-called vanguardist parties and refusing to collaborate.
While many small 'revolutionary' parties spend all their time studying Spain '36, Germany '18, Russia '17 or maybe China '49, they miss the very real lessons of class struggle and the construction of socialism in contemporary societies. While there is no recipe to build socialism, we could learn much more from a place like Venezuela than from tsarist Russia. For all the differences between Seattle 2023 and Caracas 2002, both are far more similar to each other than to Petrograd 1917. We have to study what our comrades are doing across the globe and discard the arrogance that prevents us from learning the valuable lessons of how movements mobilized millions of people to struggle.
June 21, 2017
From the conclusion:
"These reflections about the political instrument needed to build 21st century socialism are intended to show how we imagine the horizon toward which a growing number of Latin American governments are moving.
However, so that this task may be successfully carried out, we need a new left culture: a tolerant and pluralist culture that gives the most important place to everything that unites and a secondary place to that which divides; that promotes unity around values such as solidarity, humanism, respect for difference, and protection of the environment; and that turns its back on the hunger for profit and the laws of the market as the principles that guide human activity.
We need a left that begins to realize that being radical does not consist of raising the most radical slogan or in carrying out the most radical actions—which only a few agree with and which scare off the majority—but is instead about being capable of creating spaces for bringing together the broadest possible sectors where minds can meet and join in struggle. Realizing that there are many of us who are in the same struggle is what makes us strong; it is what radicalizes us.
We need a left that understands we must obtain hegemony; that is to say, we need to convince rather than impose.
We need a left that understands that more important than what we have done in the past is what we do together in the future to win our sovereignty and build a society that makes possible the full development of human beings: the socialist society of the 21st century."
"These reflections about the political instrument needed to build 21st century socialism are intended to show how we imagine the horizon toward which a growing number of Latin American governments are moving.
However, so that this task may be successfully carried out, we need a new left culture: a tolerant and pluralist culture that gives the most important place to everything that unites and a secondary place to that which divides; that promotes unity around values such as solidarity, humanism, respect for difference, and protection of the environment; and that turns its back on the hunger for profit and the laws of the market as the principles that guide human activity.
We need a left that begins to realize that being radical does not consist of raising the most radical slogan or in carrying out the most radical actions—which only a few agree with and which scare off the majority—but is instead about being capable of creating spaces for bringing together the broadest possible sectors where minds can meet and join in struggle. Realizing that there are many of us who are in the same struggle is what makes us strong; it is what radicalizes us.
We need a left that understands we must obtain hegemony; that is to say, we need to convince rather than impose.
We need a left that understands that more important than what we have done in the past is what we do together in the future to win our sovereignty and build a society that makes possible the full development of human beings: the socialist society of the 21st century."
April 30, 2025
اين كتاب در سال ٢٠١٥ نوشته شده كه در آن از دولت هوگو چاوز در ونزوئلا الگويي براي نمونه موفق سوسياليسم در قرن بيست و يكم نام برده ميشود در حاليكه درست يكسال قبل اون يعني سال ٢.١٤ ارنست ولف در كتاب
Pillaging the World: The History and Politics of the IMF
از عمليات پشت پرده پنهاني اكثر دولت هاي به ظاهر پوپوليستي خصوصا دولت هوگو چاوز در سال هاي ٢٠٠٧ تا ٢٠١٢ رونمايي مي شود كه عملا به وسيله دريافت وأم شرايط تعديل ساختاري صندوق بين المللي پول در خصوصي سازي ها را پذيرفته و عملا خود جزئي از ساختار سرمايه داري جهان به شمار مي آمدند
بنابراين به نظرم اومد اين كتاب صرفا جنبه پروپاگانداي داخلي داشته و از جمله كتبي است كه تاريخ مصرف دارد
وأم هاي قرضه بردي كه به صورت خريد و فروش أوراق بهادار با وثيقه مسكن به صورت معاوضه بدهي داخلي با خريد مسكن در خارج از كشور جايگزيني براي سرمايه گذاري غير مستقيم در داخل كشور هاي با بحران اقتصادي است
دو رويي و پنهان كاري كشور هايي مثل ايران و ونزوئلا كه هم ميخواهند در ظاهر براي جنبه تبليغاتي داخلي براي مردم خود ژست ضد سرمايه داري بگيرند و هم از ابتداي حكومت اشان از ترس سرنگوني حاضر به پذيرش هرگونه شرط صندوق بين المللي پول شده اند
و حالا براي پنهان كاري رد اين معامله هر چند سال يكبار با رو كردن پديده هايي مثل خاوري كه پول هاي بانك ايران را به صورت خريد ملك در كانادا سرمايه گذاري كرد و يا چاي دبش كه به جاي واردات چاي، ارز تخصيص داده شده را خرج خريد مسكن در اسپانيا و دبي كرده است در واقع در پشت پرده در حال عمليات انتقال بدهي مالي خود به غرب هستند
اين تنها برخي از نمونه هاي رياكاري دولت هايي مثل جمهوري اسلامي ايران است كه همتاي ونزوئلايي او نيز همين مسير را طي مي كند
قرضه بردي
Brady plan
Pillaging the World: The History and Politics of the IMF
از عمليات پشت پرده پنهاني اكثر دولت هاي به ظاهر پوپوليستي خصوصا دولت هوگو چاوز در سال هاي ٢٠٠٧ تا ٢٠١٢ رونمايي مي شود كه عملا به وسيله دريافت وأم شرايط تعديل ساختاري صندوق بين المللي پول در خصوصي سازي ها را پذيرفته و عملا خود جزئي از ساختار سرمايه داري جهان به شمار مي آمدند
بنابراين به نظرم اومد اين كتاب صرفا جنبه پروپاگانداي داخلي داشته و از جمله كتبي است كه تاريخ مصرف دارد
وأم هاي قرضه بردي كه به صورت خريد و فروش أوراق بهادار با وثيقه مسكن به صورت معاوضه بدهي داخلي با خريد مسكن در خارج از كشور جايگزيني براي سرمايه گذاري غير مستقيم در داخل كشور هاي با بحران اقتصادي است
دو رويي و پنهان كاري كشور هايي مثل ايران و ونزوئلا كه هم ميخواهند در ظاهر براي جنبه تبليغاتي داخلي براي مردم خود ژست ضد سرمايه داري بگيرند و هم از ابتداي حكومت اشان از ترس سرنگوني حاضر به پذيرش هرگونه شرط صندوق بين المللي پول شده اند
و حالا براي پنهان كاري رد اين معامله هر چند سال يكبار با رو كردن پديده هايي مثل خاوري كه پول هاي بانك ايران را به صورت خريد ملك در كانادا سرمايه گذاري كرد و يا چاي دبش كه به جاي واردات چاي، ارز تخصيص داده شده را خرج خريد مسكن در اسپانيا و دبي كرده است در واقع در پشت پرده در حال عمليات انتقال بدهي مالي خود به غرب هستند
اين تنها برخي از نمونه هاي رياكاري دولت هايي مثل جمهوري اسلامي ايران است كه همتاي ونزوئلايي او نيز همين مسير را طي مي كند
قرضه بردي
Brady plan
November 28, 2022
There are helpful things in this book, especially the in-depth look at how Venezuela has tried to implement socialism. But overall I found it frustratingly theoretical, vague and idealistic.
There are lots of "21st century socialism must/should do X..." where "X" is certainly an important factor to keep in mind, but where no blueprint or concrete example is provided for how to get from here to X.
Harnecker's contributions to theory are useful, especially in distinguishing modern socialism from 20th century versions, and emphasizing the need for decentralization and "participatory protagonism" of the populace. I tend to agree. But I think most people would have to agree that the book is pretty light on illuminating the "paths" of the title. Or at least the specific contours of the paths... it's more like a faintly moonlit path than a streetlamp-lit path with emergency checkpoints.
Anyway, it's pretty short although Harnecker's writing is dense. I'd recommend it for people interested in Latin American socialism and modern attempts to bring Marx into the 21st century. It is a little out of date with respect to Ecuador, as it even namechecks Lenin Moreno for one of his progressive policies, when we now know how that one ultimately turned out...
Not Bad Reviews
There are lots of "21st century socialism must/should do X..." where "X" is certainly an important factor to keep in mind, but where no blueprint or concrete example is provided for how to get from here to X.
Harnecker's contributions to theory are useful, especially in distinguishing modern socialism from 20th century versions, and emphasizing the need for decentralization and "participatory protagonism" of the populace. I tend to agree. But I think most people would have to agree that the book is pretty light on illuminating the "paths" of the title. Or at least the specific contours of the paths... it's more like a faintly moonlit path than a streetlamp-lit path with emergency checkpoints.
Anyway, it's pretty short although Harnecker's writing is dense. I'd recommend it for people interested in Latin American socialism and modern attempts to bring Marx into the 21st century. It is a little out of date with respect to Ecuador, as it even namechecks Lenin Moreno for one of his progressive policies, when we now know how that one ultimately turned out...
Not Bad Reviews
January 2, 2025
I think this was a great read in how the left can go about bringing about change after the successes and failures of 20th century socialism. I think it helps in understanding modern Latin American left wing governments and movements and how they are transforming society but also how they are governing in a way that creates popular participation. It also helps to understand how societal transformation is not a one shot act but a long transition that could take decades or centuries.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews