Mass Participation and the Transition to Socialism: A Critique of Petras and Fitzgerald

THE MAIN ARGUMENTS OF THE FITZGERALD AND PETRAS ESSAY "AUTHORITARIANISM AND DEMOCRACY IN THE TRANSITION TO SOCIALISM" ARE CRITIQUED IN THIS ESSAY. THE AUTHOR HERE ARGUES THAT GENUINE POPULAR DEMOCRACY IS THE MOST EFFECTIVE MEANS OF SECURING A SOCIALIST TRANSITION. HE REDEFINES THE TERMS OF THE DEBATE BY ARGUING THAT PETRAS AND FITZGERALD FALL INTO THE LIBERAL TRAP OF DEFINING DEMOCRACY AS A POLITICAL SYSTEM THAT IS CHARITABLE TO ALL, WHEN IN FACT THIS IS NOT TRUE. HE ARGUES THAT IF THE POLITICAL OFFICEHOLDERS REALLY REPRESENT THE INTERESTS OF THE MAJORITY OF THE POPULATION, THAT IS, THE POPULAR CLASSES, THEN THEY MAY TAKE MEASURES AGAINST THE MINORITY, THAT IS, THE BOURGEOISIE, THAT ARE SIMULTANEOUSLY DEMOCRATIC AND COERCIVE. HAYNES REFUTES THE THESIS OF PETRAS AND FITZGERALD THAT IT WAS THE FAILURE TO USE AUTHORITARIAN MEANS THAT LED TO THE DOWNFALL OF THE ALLENDE AND MANLEY REGIMES. HE CONTENDS THAT IT WAS THEIR APPEASEMENT OF THE BOURGEOISIE AND THEIR FAILURE TO FOLLOW THE POPULAR WILL THAT LED TO THE DOWNFALL OF BOTH THESE REGIMES.