Rethinking socialism in the Third World

Abstract

Revolution, though an important political phenomenon historically, seemingly remains so only in the Third World. Contemporary cases of revolution are all in poor, developing countries (Cuba, Cambodia, Mozambique, Angola, GuineaBissau, Ethiopia, Iran and Nicaragua). With the exception of Iran, the leadership of these revolutions has attempted to replace the old order with socialism. The relative success of socialism in these cases is of consequence to those countries, to other Third World countries where intellectuals and political actors consider it a potential course, and, more broadly, to all concerned with the welfare of the Third World. Scholarship on contemporary revolutionary regimes is important not because it influences decision making in revolutionary regimes, but because it shapes perceptions and attitudes toward revolutionary change as a potential strategy for alleviating the woes of impoverished Third World countries. Much has been written about recent attempts to construct socialism through radical change. But the literature is largely disappointing.' The most serious problem is that it tends to be formalistic, concentrating on well publicised changes in the political and economic organisation of society. Thus, the common characteristics identified as constituting socialism are: (1) the abolition, or sharp limitation, of private property; (2) the nationalisation of industry and in some cases the more important sectors of agriculture; (3) the collectivisation of agriculture; (4) state control of the distribution of goods and services; (5) the establishment of a planning bureaucracy; and (6) the elaboration of a state system based on a single party and uniform ideology.2 What is striking about this conceptualisation is that it is intentions, rather than outcomes, that are given prominence. What actually follows from, for instance, nationalisation, is less important than nationalisation itself. The result is an analytical framework which provides few clues as to how changes are actually taking place and the quantity and quality of progress towards attaining equitable development. Difficulties encountered in mid-stream and their consequences are slighted. Other shortcomings of existing literature are that it tends to be coloured by normative biases, case-specific, and insufficiently supported with empirical evidence. The best treatments have escaped these weaknesses by chronicling in detail the difficult choices confronting revolutionary regimes.3 Yet these efforts have not stimulated a reconceptualisation of social theory and, in particular, of the possibilities and problems of implementing socialism in poor, developing countries. Socialist theory thus remains a polemical call to arms with only vague suggestions of what to do when, and if, power is attained. With few notable exceptions,