Following a decade of dictatorship the Sandinista regime in Nicaragua on this day in 1989 agreed to release some political prisoners and hold free elections within the space of a year in return for the closing of Contra bases in Honduras. Described as leftist, or ignorantly as Marxist or even a "beachhead of communism" (Ronald Regan), the most apposite label for Nicaragua at that time is state capitalist. A contemporary account develops this point:
"Under Nicaraguan state capitalism the major features of the economy are under state control. Unlike in Russia and and other "socialist economies" the Nicaraguan government does not directly own the means of wealth production and distribution but does monopolise the banks (which control agricultural credit) and all imports and exports, thus effectively appropriating profits from cotton, beef, sugar and coffee which constitute two thirds of the country's exports. The state also controls the means of processing agricultural commodities, so that although most land used for cotton cultivation is privately owned most of the cotton processing factories are state-owned; although 70 per cent of cattle are owned by peasant farmers 80 per cent of slaughter houses are state-owned. The state is under an obligation to use its power as a national capitalist to milk as much profit as it can out of the war-weary workers. This profit is needed firstly to pay the interest on the massive debt - in excess of $2.5 bn - which is owed to the big Western banks; secondly, to offset the massive flight of private capital which has taken place since 1979 - Nicaraguan capitalists are quite understandably prefer to invest in safer economic regions than one under attack by US imperialism; and thirdly, to pay for the destabilisation, which has been openly funded by the US Administration to the tune of $130 million in aid to the contras, added to which has been a US trade war against Nicaragua. Given these circumstances and given the imperative need for capital accumulation which is essential to an underdeveloped capitalist economy, the state as capitalist has no option but to act as a ruthless and exploitative boss.
As with the economy, so in national politics the FSLN [Sandinista Front for National Liberation] monopolises power. Technically, power is vested in the Council of State. Epstein and Evans, writing in the radical US paper, In These Times, contend that the Council is "little more than a sounding board for the policies of the nine-man FSLN directorate" (11 January, 1983). The FSLN junta has suppressed opposition parties and newspapers and, as is the usual tendency when a vanguard party monopilises the state, the new bureaucratic elite has established for itself a privileged lifestyle:
"As the FSLN consolidates its hold over the government, its leaders inevitably gain access to the prerequisites of power. Commandantes live in the wealthier districts of Managua, occupying mansions previously owned by the leading Somocistas. They are provided with chauffeur-driven cars, servants and bodyguards. Their government offices are air-conditioned, a most exclusive and important status symbol in tropical Managua." (A Critical Look at the Sandinistas, Changes, May 1982, p. 14)
One black marketeer quoted in The Toronto Star (12 April 1987) complains that "President Daniel Ortega and the nine commandetes are the only people in the country with money. The rest of us are dying of hunger". No doubt this quotation is printed by a pro-US Canadian paper as part of the ideological war against the Sandinistas but it does probably reflect the resentment which is all to common in the so-called nationally liberated countries such as Cuba, Vietnam or Kampuchea where the beneficiaries of "liberation" are the small class of bureaucrats who control the national state..." (Is Nicaragua Socialist?, Socialist Standard, July 1987)
Needless to say, the situation today remains much the same: the poor remain poor. Daniel Ortega however has transformed himself from 'revolutionary' leader of the FSLN to plain revolting: he was re-elected in 2006 as the catholic president of Nicaragua, one of only three countries in the world where abortion is totally illegal. Further, he has remarked that "revolutions of Iran and Nicaragua are almost twin revolutions...since both revolutions are about justice, liberty, self-determination, and the struggle against imperialism." (Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Ortega)
'jackart',
ReplyDeletethe post quotes extensively from a Socialist Standard article from the 1980s, which rightly criticised the so-called socialist pretensions of the Nicaraguan regime. It wasn't a case of playing the 'Monday morning quarterback'. We were criticising it as socialists when it was the cause celebre for the left-wing of capitalism.
The Socialist Standard was criticising the authoritarian exploitative nature of regimes such as the Soviet Union, China, Cuba, East Germany etc etc long before your dad was a twinkle in your grandad's eye.
And, yes, it is someone else's ideology. A state capitalist ideology with bugger all to do with socialism. You'd know that if you actually read the blog, rather than just linking to it.
cheers
Excuse me, but I would like to know exactly where you got the following paragraph from...
ReplyDelete"Under Nicaraguan state capitalism the major features of the economy are under state control..."
Cannot acertain here the authors sources came from but a look on the internet produced this.
ReplyDeleteAfter the revolution, the Sandinista administration pledged to maintain a mixed (privately and publicly owned) economy. All property and businesses owned by the Somoza family or their associates were immediately taken over by the government. Farm workers were encouraged to organize under cooperatives on appropriated land. However, private businesses not previously owned by the Somozas were allowed to continue operations, although under stringent new government regulations. In general, however, nationalization was concentrated in the banking, insurance, mining, transportation, and agricultural sectors. During the eleven-year tenure of the Sandinistas, the private sector's contribution to the GDP remained fairly constant, ranging from 50 percent to 60 percent.
The expropriation of lands owned by the Somozas in 1979 left the new Sandinista administration holding about 20 percent of the country's arable lands. At first, these holdings were turned into state farms. In 1981 the administration passed the Agrarian Reform Law defining the process of nationalization and stating what could be done with expropriated land. The law guaranteed property rights to those who continued to use their property, but land that was underdeveloped or abandoned was subject to expropriation. Land could also be declared necessary for agrarian reform and purchased from its owners at a price set by the government.
http://workmall.com/wfb2001/nicaragua/nicaragua_history_the_sandinista_years_1979_90.html
The nationalization of Somoza’s property alone affected a total of 168 factories—25% of industrial plant in Nicaragua. The Sandinistas issued reform that nationalized sugar distribution, commenced state control over agricultural cooperatives, and started a limited policy of nationalization of business. By 1981, the state accounted for more than 30% of the industry of Nicaragua. The government also initiated control, with so-called ‘wildcat nationalizations’, over 20% of the cotton industry, 50% of the tobacco industry, and 60% of the ‘staple cereal’ industry.
http://www.jorian.com/san.html
Banks were nationalized
http://vianica.com/go/specials/15-sandinista-revolution-in-nicaragua.html
So i believe the author can claim that the important parts of the economy were nationalized.
Anon, the quotation in question is taken from the July 1987 edition of The Socialist Standard which is not yet, alas, available online. A photocopy of "Is Nicaragua socialist?" can be obtained by contacting HO: spgb@worldsocialism.org
ReplyDelete