Socialist Commonwealth
Establishing Nation
Good night,
my name is Elena Kos and you are watching the Late Night Talk. Here with me today is Grigorii Vidmar, spokesperson for the Union of Communist Workers. He will tell me a bit about the recent coup in Kryobaijan, its effects for Carentania and how the UCW views the new leadership in the north-european state.
Mr. Vidmar, how was the situation in Kryobaijan under the old regime?
Kryobaijan could be called a typical IRB nation. Its revolution stood in a party-communist tradition that can be traced to Kyiv and its socialist revolution at the beginning of the 20th century. In that sense, from our view Kryobaijan was on the other side of the split that currently divides the communist movement into party-communist and council-communist. Kryobaijan was ruled by a beuraucratic machinery with authoritarian control. Its economy was in all meanings of the word state-capitalist
Was the coup a great surprise?
The fightings between the Communist Party and the Intersectionalists have gone on for weeks now. In that sense, it was a real possibility for the opposition to overthrow the government. However, before the outbreak of violence, there may have been a great tension in the country. The minority policies of the Kryobaijani regime, the worsening economic situation and the oppression of individual rights were all stirring up a lot of discontent, but at the same time the Kryobaijani government seemed well in control of the military and, what was very important as well, the proximity of its IRB allies meant those could have intervened at any time. In that way, it was a great surprise the opposition took this bold step and it was a great surprise the IRB did not intervene for whatever reason. Another great surprise, of course, was also that the Intersectionalists took the lead over the opposition.
What is the Intersectionalists platform?
Basically they wish to broaden the socialist struggle, move it away from the pure class-struggle and incorporate the fight for ethnic minority rights, the rights of women, the rights of lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people and the right to freedom of religion. This may not sound all too exciting for Carentanians, who have experienced the fight for these rights finding a central place in Socialism from the late 60's on and council-communists all over the world fight for these rights. However, if we remember that Kryobaijan was led by party-communists who adhered to an orthodox marxism, intersectionalism is a great step forward. Orthodox marxists like those who dominate the IRB have usually viewed these struggles as unimportant "side-contradictions", meaning issues like women rights would be solved automatically once the capital is defeated, or they have perceived them as wholly counter-revolutionary, which may hold especially true for the rights to religious freedom.
When this platform is in contradiction to popular IRB sentiment, why do you think the IRB did not intervene?
There are a lot of possible answers to this. For example the IRB could have completely failed to realize just how strong this opposition is or they could have lacked the necessary ressources for an intervention into Kryobaijan. Seeing as there has not as of yet been any statements indicating that Kryobaijan may leave the IRB, there is also the possibility that the Intersectionalists striked a deal with the IRB, meaning that Kryobaijans allies won't come to the rescue of the communist party and in exchange, Kryobaijan sticks with the alliance. This would have the advantage that a post-coup Kryobaijan may actually be more stable than a Kryobaijan that smashed the coup with help of the IRB.
There have been strong criticisms of the market liberalization process the new Kryobaijani leadership promised. What is your opinion on that matter?
Personally I am, of course, convinced of non-monetary economics. As UCW member I can only be a Sorokinist or I'd be in the wrong union. However, we have to realize that there a few good resons for Artov to promise a liberalized market to his country. The Intersectionalists are spearheading an opposition with very diverse demands and Artov wishes to appease them all. With the intersectionalists ideology, he can appease fringe groups, marginalized individuals, ethnic minorities, homosexuals, feminists, religious people. None of them is really a considerable factor taken individually. At the same time, those wishing for economic reforms can be tied to a movement that is socialist in nature with this promise. People who could not care less of equality are suddenly found supporting equality, because the faction that is the most likely candidate for leading this revolution promises them economic reforms. For now, Artov and his Intersectionalists have averted the threat of a split within the opposition this way.
Could you imagine reapproachment with Kryobaijan?
For now, we will have to see how Kryobaijan developes. If it distances itself from authoritarianism and its IRB allies practising it, I can imagine myself voting for reapproachment in December, yes.
And the economic issues?
Personally, I am not placing a high emphasis on them - for now. A democratic culture in Kryobaijan has to be established first, that is more important than making all bold reforms at once, or else Kryobaijan may be destabilized too much. As I already explained, currently Intersectionalism combines groups with very different interests. I can see Kryobaijan reforming itself towards non-monetarism later, but for now, a controlled market promises faster economic stabilization because the country can rely on an established system, the international market, to replace the current beraucratic structures with their deep roots in the Kryobaijani state. If it were to build a new system from scratch, getting rid of the beuraucrats could prove very problematic. We should not forget that Carentanis current wealth is a result of more than 60 years of peace, of generations that have grown up within non-monetary economics. If we ask those few still alive who have actually experienced life after the revolution, they will tell us how hard it was to get the economic system off the ground.
So you hope for cooperation with Kryobaijan?
Yes. Intersectionalism is ideologically closer to Council-Communism than to Party-Communism. Aside from that, the ressources of the vast Kryobaijani Steppe could solve a lot of the shortage problems currently looming on the horizon for Kryobaijan.
That's all. Thank you for coming.
Thank you for inviting me.
my name is Elena Kos and you are watching the Late Night Talk. Here with me today is Grigorii Vidmar, spokesperson for the Union of Communist Workers. He will tell me a bit about the recent coup in Kryobaijan, its effects for Carentania and how the UCW views the new leadership in the north-european state.
Mr. Vidmar, how was the situation in Kryobaijan under the old regime?
Kryobaijan could be called a typical IRB nation. Its revolution stood in a party-communist tradition that can be traced to Kyiv and its socialist revolution at the beginning of the 20th century. In that sense, from our view Kryobaijan was on the other side of the split that currently divides the communist movement into party-communist and council-communist. Kryobaijan was ruled by a beuraucratic machinery with authoritarian control. Its economy was in all meanings of the word state-capitalist
Was the coup a great surprise?
The fightings between the Communist Party and the Intersectionalists have gone on for weeks now. In that sense, it was a real possibility for the opposition to overthrow the government. However, before the outbreak of violence, there may have been a great tension in the country. The minority policies of the Kryobaijani regime, the worsening economic situation and the oppression of individual rights were all stirring up a lot of discontent, but at the same time the Kryobaijani government seemed well in control of the military and, what was very important as well, the proximity of its IRB allies meant those could have intervened at any time. In that way, it was a great surprise the opposition took this bold step and it was a great surprise the IRB did not intervene for whatever reason. Another great surprise, of course, was also that the Intersectionalists took the lead over the opposition.
What is the Intersectionalists platform?
Basically they wish to broaden the socialist struggle, move it away from the pure class-struggle and incorporate the fight for ethnic minority rights, the rights of women, the rights of lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people and the right to freedom of religion. This may not sound all too exciting for Carentanians, who have experienced the fight for these rights finding a central place in Socialism from the late 60's on and council-communists all over the world fight for these rights. However, if we remember that Kryobaijan was led by party-communists who adhered to an orthodox marxism, intersectionalism is a great step forward. Orthodox marxists like those who dominate the IRB have usually viewed these struggles as unimportant "side-contradictions", meaning issues like women rights would be solved automatically once the capital is defeated, or they have perceived them as wholly counter-revolutionary, which may hold especially true for the rights to religious freedom.
When this platform is in contradiction to popular IRB sentiment, why do you think the IRB did not intervene?
There are a lot of possible answers to this. For example the IRB could have completely failed to realize just how strong this opposition is or they could have lacked the necessary ressources for an intervention into Kryobaijan. Seeing as there has not as of yet been any statements indicating that Kryobaijan may leave the IRB, there is also the possibility that the Intersectionalists striked a deal with the IRB, meaning that Kryobaijans allies won't come to the rescue of the communist party and in exchange, Kryobaijan sticks with the alliance. This would have the advantage that a post-coup Kryobaijan may actually be more stable than a Kryobaijan that smashed the coup with help of the IRB.
There have been strong criticisms of the market liberalization process the new Kryobaijani leadership promised. What is your opinion on that matter?
Personally I am, of course, convinced of non-monetary economics. As UCW member I can only be a Sorokinist or I'd be in the wrong union. However, we have to realize that there a few good resons for Artov to promise a liberalized market to his country. The Intersectionalists are spearheading an opposition with very diverse demands and Artov wishes to appease them all. With the intersectionalists ideology, he can appease fringe groups, marginalized individuals, ethnic minorities, homosexuals, feminists, religious people. None of them is really a considerable factor taken individually. At the same time, those wishing for economic reforms can be tied to a movement that is socialist in nature with this promise. People who could not care less of equality are suddenly found supporting equality, because the faction that is the most likely candidate for leading this revolution promises them economic reforms. For now, Artov and his Intersectionalists have averted the threat of a split within the opposition this way.
Could you imagine reapproachment with Kryobaijan?
For now, we will have to see how Kryobaijan developes. If it distances itself from authoritarianism and its IRB allies practising it, I can imagine myself voting for reapproachment in December, yes.
And the economic issues?
Personally, I am not placing a high emphasis on them - for now. A democratic culture in Kryobaijan has to be established first, that is more important than making all bold reforms at once, or else Kryobaijan may be destabilized too much. As I already explained, currently Intersectionalism combines groups with very different interests. I can see Kryobaijan reforming itself towards non-monetarism later, but for now, a controlled market promises faster economic stabilization because the country can rely on an established system, the international market, to replace the current beraucratic structures with their deep roots in the Kryobaijani state. If it were to build a new system from scratch, getting rid of the beuraucrats could prove very problematic. We should not forget that Carentanis current wealth is a result of more than 60 years of peace, of generations that have grown up within non-monetary economics. If we ask those few still alive who have actually experienced life after the revolution, they will tell us how hard it was to get the economic system off the ground.
So you hope for cooperation with Kryobaijan?
Yes. Intersectionalism is ideologically closer to Council-Communism than to Party-Communism. Aside from that, the ressources of the vast Kryobaijani Steppe could solve a lot of the shortage problems currently looming on the horizon for Kryobaijan.
That's all. Thank you for coming.
Thank you for inviting me.