View the H-Diplo Discussion Logs by month
View the Prior Message in H-Diplo's November 2004 logs by: [date] [author] [thread]
View the Next Message in H-Diplo's November 2004 logs by: [date] [author] [thread]
Visit the H-Diplo home page.
Edwin Moise writes about my comment that the end result of the various radical left groups hardly differed: " I must disagree. China and the Soviet Union were quite different in the late 1960s in the way their economies ran, and very, very different in the way political power was exercised and organized. It would not have been exactly true to take the reality of the Soviet Union and treat that as the goaI of the CPUSA (Moscow-oriented Communists), or to take the reality of China and treat this as the goal of PL (Maoists), but it would have been at least partially true. True enough to make a claim that PL and the CPUSA had very similar goals look very strange to me." As far as how any of these groups would have goverened the U.S. had they been in power, there always seemed very little difference to me. True, there were idealogical differences between the Soviet Union and China. However, this had more do with the different circumstances where each country found itself - i.e. the Soviets more industrialized while China more agrarian during the 1950s. Many leftists during this period time would emphasize that a revolution in the U.S. would have to take into account the circumstances that existed there, as opposed to the circumstances in places like Russia, China and Cuba at the time of the revolutions in those countries. Hence, while Maoists might have wanted to kill more "enemies of the people" than the Soviets, the actual implementation of any forced socialist system would, in my view, look very similar to any other model as far as the U.S. was concerned. Also, it needs to be kept in mind that many on the far left did not adhere to either the Soviet or Chinese dogma. Edwin Moise writes: " When I look at the results of Wahhabi power in Saudi Arabia, Taliban rule in Afghanistan, and the strange fettered democracy that the ayatollahs have created in Iran, I do not see a close resemblance between any two of them, much less all of them." Professor Moise is correct in that there are indeed differences between the three. The Taliban was worse than Saudi Arabia while Saudi Arabia is worse than Iran. However, the similarities between the three are more significant than the differences. Put another way, one could find many differences between the U.S. and France on a host of issues ranging from capital punishment to social welfare to mandatory vacation time. However, these differences would, in my view, pale in comparison to the similarities. The value systems in both countries are very similar - though it might not seem like it at present. The Russian historian Alexander Nekrich has shown, quite convincingly, that the Soviet Union under Stalin and Nazi Germany shared many similar values, despite their differences. ( See his _Pariahs, Partners, Predators : German-Soviet Relations, 1922-1941_). I have recently completed a study - under review at a journal - on Islamist views of Western value systems. I found that despite differences these individuals might have had with each other, the similarity between their value systems was very considerable. John C. Zimmerman University of Nevada Las Vegas