on
Strategy
and Revolutionary Change
To
the Supporters of the World Socialist Revolution
A
Clarification
We
have to admit that this text is a bit too long but we wanted to be as
explicit and as specific as possible, particularly given the lack of
mutual knowledge between those of us who are making this Proposal and
you who read it.
We
are at your disposal for whatever you need to know and we invite you
to give your opinion on it. To begin with, we thank you for your
patience when you read the text.
Argentina,
25 October 2014.
This
writing is made up of three parts and two annexes:
An
Introduction.
Page 1
I)
Taking stock of the situation.
Page 2
II)
What is to be done in this situation?
Page 7
III)
An internationalist proposal.
Page 8
a)
Who this proposal is addressed to.
Page 9
b)
Core ideas or matters to be dealt with in the reappropriation and
strategic theoretical-political production in the earliest stage.
Page 11
c)
Spaces and procedures for cooperation, interchange, promotion,
production and spreading.
Page 12
d)
Forms of participation.
Page 14
e)
Warnings and clarifications.
Page 15
f)
Immediate Steps.
Page 17
Annex
1:
Draft
on conditions and requirements for the publication of texts, essays,
articles.
Page 18
Annex
2:
Additional
notes on the current theoretical-political production and the need to
promote it from other places and positions.
Page 18
An
Introduction
There
are numerous groupings and organizations of all type and size
worldwide, as well as individuals more or less “on the loose”,
who try to oppose the current society, claiming the need of a
revolution to achieve a society different from the capitalist one,
which some call socialism, others communism, classless society,
anarchy.
The
origins of those groups are variegated. Some come from splits or
breaking of relations of organizations or parties; others arise
encouraged by economic, social, student, political struggle and any
form of resistance to capitalism.
The
present Proposal does not aim at all that spectrum of groups and
people; neither does it aim for unity, grouping or coordination of a
part of them. Neither does it suggest any type of agreements for
combined action in different struggles or situations. Neither does it
make any sort of appeal. Neither does it intend to announce the
appearance of a new political group in the disconcerting mosaic of
names of a puzzle that is impossible to put together.
Neither
is this Proposal made by an existing organization nor by an
organization in project.
It
is the result of a disparate exchange among some supporters of
international revolution to eradicate and overcome capitalism, and of
some balances and conclusions that we have arrived at.
Note:
it must be clarified that the drafts of this Proposal have been
discussed with comrades from
Spain
and Italy, in particular in Spain with the comrades of Inter-Rev, who
made criticism, suggestions and proposals of modification, many of
which have been added to the Proposal. The final writing is just the
responsibility of those of us who are presenting it, from
Argentina,
and surely those comrades will give their opinion on the final
writing and the Proposal itself.
I)
Taking
stock of the situation
As
we said, there are small minorities in the world which want to change
the current society, to achieve a society without exploiters or
exploited, without oppressors or oppressed, without injustice or
discrimination of any type. It is an old desire of many generations
before ours that lived and died without seeing their effort and
struggle succeed.
There
is something about which we cannot fool ourselves. Capitalism,
against those who from the first half of the previous century
foretold its nearing end, has proved its continuity, its strength,
even in the midst of its large crises, armed conflicts, and
contradictions. What is more, if it were true that capitalism is
heading for collapse, it all proves that if it dies from its own
contradictions, it will die killing. But the truth is that despite
its crises, it kills without dying. It is not hard to verify that,
against some forecasts of the early decades of the previous century
and those which came later, the bourgeoisie kept its power and spread
it all over the world, conquered it with its mode of production, its
economy that changes it all into goods, their social relationships;
summing up, it increased capitalist exploitation, oppression and
injustice.
Far
from disappearing, huge inequalities, serious social problems,
repression and wars, social abysses between those who have more and
those who have less have grown to scandalous levels. And we do not
want to figure out where the world, a large part of mankind, would be
but for the struggle of resistance, even those which ended in defeat.
On
the other hand, and confirming the powerful procedures of defence and
reproduction that capital has, successful revolutionary movements,
such as the October Revolution, could not materialise their dreams,
because of the attacks from the international bourgeoisie, the
specific weakness of the proletarian class itself, the defeats of
other labour movements in more developed countries which involved
strangulation by isolation, and internal policies in leading sectors
of those movements, which eventually led those revolutionary
processes to paths of defeat and the triumph of counter-revolution.
Nowadays, there is no block of countries or a single country that has
got rid of capitalism.
Does
this all mean that there is nothing to do and that the command of
capital will be inevitable and eternal? Certainly not, it just means
that we cannot ignore in our analyses, statements, programmes and
lines of action that all this has happened and happens. And that we
must sharpen our aim.
But
this is not all. There are other elements to analyze, of which, for
brevity of this text, we just point at four.
- It is symptomatic, or at least alarming, that there is an absence of socialist revolutions or the great weakness of the relevant movements in the most developed capitalist countries; and that the revolutions that managed to oust leading classes or sectors, even in a partial way or temporarily, were not socialist (except for the Russian one in its earliest stage) and have taken place in countries with a weaker capitalist development, with democratic tasks or of national liberation pending and not in consolidated democracies, in powerful imperialist states. This gives rise to a series of questions that necessarily have an impact on strategic and tactical questions.
- Whereas bourgeois policies and ideologies, even extreme ones, saw dramatic growth, such as the neoliberalism of the 1980's and 1990's, which shook the main political parties in the world, including socialists, social democrats, populists, etc, proletarian revolutionary, anti capitalist policies and ideology saw their presence and influence dwindle, if we compare their situation with that of a hundred years earlier.
- The ruling class has perfected its ideological production and distribution, in the theoretical, cultural and political level. The large hegemonic mass media turned into the intellectual collective of the ruling class and influence policies, ideology and common sense in an unprecedented scale, to become the great constructors of the discourse of truth and of the implementation and determination of agendas.
- The fall of the Berlin Wall and the re-unification of Germany, the dismemberment of the USSR and the advances of capital in the former so-called “Socialist” or “Real Socialism” countries -where, apart from elements of state capitalism, there were already other capitalist and even precapitalist relationships- have succeeded in establishing the false idea that capitalism is eternal and that its tremendous crises and injustice are the companions of the whole future and can only be solved or mitigated with other manners of managing capitalism.
All
these questions are known to all those groups. And in their regard,
some of the organizations wonder and agree on the need -and sometimes
even as a matter of urgency- to confront weaknesses -theoretical,
political (and organizational)- to make a leap forward.
Setting
aside those who
embark on activism and movimientismo1
without really caring for the aims and real limitations of action for
the sake of action, many remark the importance of theory and the need
for its development, sometimes repeating Lenin's quote 'Without
revolutionary
theory, there
can
be no
revolutionary
movement'
(in any case, for some of the signatories of this Proposal, the quote
would be better rephrased as 'without
revolutionary theory, there is no triumphant revolutionary
movement').
This
need is also expressed in the slogan of working to keep and construct
against the flow the theoretical, political and programmatic
continuity of the internationalist and international communist
movement.
Some
insist on the need of making a good balance of the revolutionary
experiences of the past, particularly of the Russian Revolution and
the lessons of counter-revolutions, as well as of the current
weakness of the international communist movement. Or that there is a
need to get back to the sources and purge all revisionism and
opportunism.
Quite
a few state that there is a deficit in the assessment of the current
situation of world capitalism, its tendencies and its perspectives.
Some even state that imperialism -as a phase of capitalism- does not
exist anymore and that we now have an Empire, which was naturally
questioned by others, although not always filling the theoretical
gaps caused by the transformations of the last 50 years in economy,
politics and the technological, ideological and cultural fields.
For
different reasons, some have even questioned the proletariat as the
subject of revolution. And refuting them with arguments from spread
manuals can serve to get it out of the way, or convince militants,
but does not answer questions nor overcome criticism. Marx's chapter
on Social Classes remained unfinished on page one -Marx died without
concluding his work. Does this mean that there have been no advances
on the subject? Surely there have, but those advances remain
practically unknown and there is a lot to be done.
Marxism
has been severely questioned, “refuted” and even declared dead.
But every capitalist crisis evidences its vitality, its applicability
and the validity of texts such as the “Communist Manifesto”, of
“Capital”, of “Wage Labour and Capital” and others.
And
what have been the theoretical developments accounting for the
changes and problems arisen over the last hundred years? Which
matters deserve greater efforts of analysis? These are questions that
require answers and their consequent spreading.
One
can also verify that sometimes there are defences of Marxism which
harm it more than attacks from the enemy. Even confusion is so great
that Marxism can denote anything from a bourgeois ideology justifying
Stalinism and other pro-state capitalism tendencies to a new
bourgeois left wing trying to “rejuvenate” and sweep their
previous abandonment of principles under the rug. Only in some cases
Marxism is seen as scientific, revolutionary, internationalist and
militant communism, and even thus there are different tendencies that
claim to be its only expression and say so without turning red, in
spite of the fact that some of them have supported a bourgeois side
in inter-imperialist wars, which places them on the side of
counter-revolution.
And
as an element of this brief partial assessment of the situation, here
is an ascertainment:
Neither
the working class nor the non-proletarian salaried sectors, neither
those which the system tends to proletarize or even worse,
marginalize, need the groups and organizations mentioned in the first
paragraph to fight back abuses form capital, to resist, to organize
picket lines, strikes, marches. Class struggle develops spontaneously
from the entrails of society. Revolutionaries do not generate it.
They can try to lead it and fight to achieve its leadership, they can
contribute to spread it, radicalize it and give it cohesion and
well-defined aims, ingenuity and intelligence to face the enemy. They
can hinder it with their errors and poor action plans, their
confusions and programmatic and method inadequacies and tactical
opportunism. Or they can be in limbo when the situation requires
them, confining themselves to tasks which are not essential or are
secondary.
But
if the most massive powerful movements, rebellions and insurrections
of wide sectors of workers can even bring down a government, they
cannot get off the ground a triumphant Socialist revolution, nor
establish the bases for a new society. Without a programme to account
for the challenges of the current world, without politicized
vanguards, organized and armed with revolutionary theory and
politics, without an international and internationalist revolutionary
party, failure is guaranteed and there will be no chances to
eradicate capitalism.
For
some the strategy is already decided, as they refer to its main
lines: the working class should establish itself as a class, the
bourgeois class must be ousted, with some politics to attract poor
peasant sectors, small producers and non-proletarian salaried to the
proletarian revolution, and once the bourgeois power is finished off,
proletarian power is installed, private property of means of
production and change is finished off, socialism will be installed.
They also add that the strategy of revolution is a worldwide one, as
the proletariat isolated in a single country cannot develop
socialism.
Whatever
the case, these and other general statements, although valid, do not
suffice to solve all strategic and tactical matters, but rather point
at essential general characteristics and part of the way in that
direction. They defend the starting point to analyze, develop,
elaborate, and define in-depth revolutionary politics and tactics
with greater precision.
To
make things worse, regarding the concepts of tactics and strategy,
there are different conceptions, even among those of us who make this
Proposal there are nuances on how to define or understand strategy.
It
is frequent among militants not to have a clear view of the very
relationship between strategy and tactics and even a confusion of
both. Valuable contributions on those matters that can exist remain
practically unknown and demand tasks of separating the wheat from the
chaff. And well-known materials on strategy and tactics are usually
quite schematic, inadequate and some of them, in our opinion, are
wrong.
Those
who think that strategy is the same as tactics quickly lose sight of
the aims and organize hierarchically actions and movement and
generally end up in unionist, parliamentary, economicist and
spontaneist groups. Besides, they usually mistake the programme for a
piece of paper where to write slogans and general aims.
Those
who think that tactics is the same as strategy generally end up in
absolute isolation, in politics of the all-or-nothing, in the
inability to perceive nuances and believe and treat a dictatorship
like Pinochet's the same as a government like Salvador Allende's. It
is true that in both cases power remained in the hands of the
bourgeoisie, that it remained a capitalist country although one of
them thinks that it is heading for socialism and that in any case, in
that way, it just could lead to state capitalism and that it does not
alter fundamentally the proletariat's revolutionary tasks. But they
are not the same regarding the secondary form and aspects (generally
they also correspond to distinct sectors of the ruling class). And as
they do not solve tactics correctly, some end up isolating themselves
from real processes without a chance to have an impact on
consciousness and organization of the working class and other sectors
susceptible of being influenced by the proletariat's politics,
confining themselves to non-conformist, testimonial, propagandistic
practice (although sometimes the weakness of forces does not allow to
do anything else).
Obviously,
telling the difference between them does not involve a support of
fronts with those or other sectors of the bourgeoisie, nor a change
in the programme, nor encourage expectations for those governments,
or hide the fact that only the proletariat, in its revolutionary
class struggle, will be able to finish off the evils of capitalism
and capitalism itself.
Of
course, cue-taking of left-wing or populist governments is as harmful
or even more harmful. But neither do extreme alternatives make the
forces of revolution advance.
Not
analyzing these questions in deep also prevents us from seeing their
strategic/tactical implications, which eventually leads to set off
course.
How
not to fall into one extreme or the other? Which is actually the best
conduct to follow so as to avoid it? How to act in different
struggles, movements or situations? What for? Well, these are some of
the matters that require more production and revalue the past
production, making the best of the extremely rich experience of the
revolutionary labour movement.
II)
What is to be done in this situation?
The
current Proposal does not intend to set indications, recommendations
or reconventions regarding every group's practice. There is already
too much pedantry and charlatanism around to add more, and it would
add nothing to the assessment of the current situation.
What
we try to remark here is a weakness -among several- of the real
movement and the need to devote a part of the efforts to work on it
even more.
We
are addressing all of those who share the need to help in the
clarification and revalorization of theory, the principles, the
programme, the revolutionary strategy and tactics and other strategic
and fundamental problems, be they individuals, incipient groupings,
groups with a trajectory. Of course, with an agreement on basic
criteria.
It
is important to notice that some groups and individuals consider what
is to be done and accordingly make different proposals or start
different projects aimed at giving account for the specific lacks and
needs underlined above. This Proposal does not intend to discredit
those efforts neither to compete with them.
In
this Proposal we are going to focus on something that is in our
hands' reach, which may also be in the hands' reach of several of the
groups and people mentioned above, and that we think can somehow
contribute to create better conditions for the development of
proletarian, anti-capitalist, communist forces. And at the same time,
to be also a small contribution to break the isolation of the
different proletarian vanguards and sensitive committed people who
want to contribute to finish off the society based on the
exploitation of the human being by the human being.
Among
the different problems that we must work on to alter the current
correlation of forces is
the dispersed and to some extent poor strategic political theoretical
reappropriation and production and its spread.
The
Proposal focuses on that problem: the
strategic theoretical and political reappropriation and production to
confront
bourgeois and petty bourgeois ideologies, theories and policies, and
to contribute to the theoretical and political continuity of
revolutionary communist positions from the past as well.
Contributing
to improve the reappropriation and theoretical and political
production on strategic questions and its spread
Whereas
the bourgeoisie has the great ideological, theoretical, political and
cultural means
of
production, distribution, spread, installation and consumption, the
cause of proletarian emancipation has next to nothing. Of course, it
is logical, for, as Marx and Engels pointed out clearly in The
German Ideology,
the class exerting the ruling material
power in society is, at the same time, its dominant intellectual
power.
“The
class which has the means of material production at its disposal has
control at the same time over the means of mental production, so that
thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the means of
mental production are subject to it.”
It
does not mean that proletarian, anti-capitalist communist forces do
not have any means
or
that they sit powerlessly in the face of that reality, but it is
necessary to take that reality
into
account to
potentiate the small forces, the small means of production, to
produce, spread, defend and extend their productions.
Always being aware, on the other hand, that it is just in certain
moments of rise of class struggle, of prominence of the large masses,
in the practice of confrontation and struggle that the latter will
manage to break part of their political and ideological chains and
not with a merely propagandistic task. And, of course, provided that
there is a vanguard armed theoretically and politically to lead and
organize solidly and coherently forces against class enemies.
It
is obvious, but it is equally necessary to clarify it, that this is
not a theoretical or a theoreticist proposal, cut off from the world
of struggle. On the contrary, this Proposal is precisely embedded in
one of the needs of praxis. And it involves doubling the efforts to
assume one of the tasks that reveal the struggle of our class and of
its most active sectors, a task that must not be underestimated or
postponed. Also, it should not be forgotten that many times the
efforts do fail not for their theoretical, programmatic, strategic or
tactical lack, but for the tremendously unfavourable correlation of
forces and the state of the working class and the elements that join
Internationalist communism.
Of
course, there are those for whom the movement is everything that
counts and the aims do not matter. Obviously they will not be
interested in this Proposal, except, maybe, to discredit it. Those
who have everything solved will not be interested either and for them
the only thing missing is for the proletariat to admit it and see
them as its leadership. It is up to them. It will indeed be important
to have constructive criticism of the Proposal from those who are
interested in that practical need to improve and to go more deeply
into the strategic theoretical-political reappropriation and
production and regarding this Proposal opposing -or supporting- with
valid causes, and to set it out with arguments.
III)
An Internationalist Proposal
Taking
thus into account the needs
- to revalue, defend, clarify and precise the theory, the principles, the programme, the revolutionary strategy and tactics and other strategic and fundamental problems;
- to be able to fight a better and more forceful ideological, theoretical and political combat against the bourgeoisie and its influence in the heart of the working class and other deprived sectors;
- to have up-to-date materials to train cadres and to counteract the influence of the proliferation of versions of Marxism and of self-proclaimed revolutionary politics which are merely common-or-garden versions integrated into the system;
- to contribute to make the efforts of those who came before us in our positions not to fade into oblivion and be known and have the new generations make the most of them;
- to help break up isolation and to create better conditions to encourage good polemics and the future convergence processes of classist minorities, left communists, etc.
we
intend to make and propose making yet another small modest step in
that sense.
For
that purpose,
- with the main aim of promoting, stimulating and spreading the reappropriation and theoretical-political production on strategic questions of the struggle for a classless society,
we intend to make and propose creating an area and instruments to facilitate cooperation, exchange, production, promotion and organized spreading of the efforts that everyone might make regarding this aspect of the ideological political struggle.
This
Proposal is specified in five parts:
a)
Who this Proposal is addressed to.
b)
Core ideas or matters that the reappropriation and
theoretical-political strategic production in an early stage will
deal with.
c)
Spaces and procedures for cooperation, exchange, promotion,
production and spreading.
d)
Forms of participation and answers to the Proposal.
e)
Warnings and clarifications.
f)
Immediate steps.
a)
Who
this proposal is addressed to
This
Proposal is not open to everyone or for everyone to publish whatever
they want in the media of the Proposal.
As
of now, it is not addressed to those who do not see a need of a
social revolution, or those who consider that prior to a Socialist
revolution there is some sort of bourgeois or multi-classist stage.
All those sectors and people have already got at their disposal the
media of the ruling class they serve. Should the ruling class not
consider them, that is their problem only.
The
Proposal starts from a base of the revolutionary proletarian
movement, and there is no way back, i.e. the conviction of the need
of a Socialist Revolution without stages nor prior democratic or
national liberation stages, that the current State is of no use for
the period of transition from a capitalist society to a new society,
and on the contrary, it will be necessary to set up another type of
State, whose last goal it its own extinction as a State, in a new
world, free from social classes or exploitation. That socialism is
not the state capitalism that triumphed in the Russian
counter-revolution. They also agree on the certainty that
parliamentarism is not a means of conquest of power but a drifting to
other ways that trap the proletariat in. And instead of national
claims, they raise the flags of proletarian internationalism and they
consider the need of a revolutionary party. They also agree that the
construction of communism in a single country is impossible and that
today, in every country, regardless of the name of their society,
there is capital and the system of wage-earning work.
Important
Note:
Those
who agree on getting the Proposal off the ground will better
determine the above mentioned distinguishing features or determinants
to take part in.
Despite
the need of leaving it clear that those who preach about class
conciliation or a different manner to manage the bourgeois State and
capitalism, or those who defend the path of reform instead of
revolution, are excluded from the Proposal, we find it an error to
set up an extremely long list of determinants so as to let in just a
very small minority.
Surely
more restricting boundary lines could be established. But our
guideline is that, excepting those who fit in these distinguishing
features, we do not intend to censor ideas which do not meet every
group’s opinions -or of those who make this Proposal-, for the aim
is to encourage genuine production, with arguments and developments,
which will certainly stimulate debate, analysis, open-mindedness, and
a strengthening of positions, whether by adding other points of view,
or by strengthening and developing one’s previous ones.
It
must be clear that for some groups, other groups, particularly if
they are the result of a fracture or former comrades who went through
a painful split, are practically the worst enemy and should not be
included in this Proposal. Or maybe they might agree on taking part
on condition that the other party does not participate. We shall try
to avoid those questions and follow the guidelines that we shall
establish. Particularly if we keep in mind that there are many
different Forms of participation in this Proposal and, besides, it
does not involve joint signatures, or mutual recognition, or
necessarily common work with others.
Other
conditions are also necessary for the publication of a text, mostly
formal ones but also with their own political side. These conditions
will rather be aimed at avoiding poorly substantiated, aggressive
texts or polemics between groups which have already got enough room
in their own press. Some of these points are specified in an annex at
the end of this document, but will actually be defined by those who
support the Proposal.
In
order to solve in a transparent manner this issue and without
manipulations, those who agree finally on the Proposal will establish
clear norms for publication so that everyone knows what to expect and
to avoid arbitrary decisions or scheming.
b)
Core
ideas or matters that the reappropriation and theoretical-political
strategic production in an early stage will deal with
(The
choice of number of core ideas and their determination is not
restricted, it is a mere draft, and it is exposed here very briefly,
without an order of importance and will be specified by those who
support the Proposal.)
One.
The
current state of capitalism and its economic, social and political
tendencies. Its crises and the current crises. Common and
distinguishing features regarding Marx's times, the fight against the
bourgeois political economy and its “explanations”. It includes
Lenin's Imperialism,
the Highest Stage of Capitalism,
plus Bukharin's, Rosa Luxemburg's and others' works on monopolistic
capital, etc. or should new phenomena, distinct stages or phases be
considered? What is their influence on politics? And on the working
class itself? What lessons can be drawn from the experiences of class
struggle? These could be some of the many themes and subthemes to be
considered.
Two.
Characteristics
of the Revolution, particularly in regard to the period of transition
and its tasks. The plan is not to ‘invent’ something ideal or
make nice statements that avoid the real problems that a triumphant
revolutionary movement will face, but ground it on the base of the
experiences of revolutionary processes and thinking of the
problematic as based on today’s countries and real world. Summing
up, “taking” power is probably the easy bit, but what next? What
is to be done with it or with the new power, if the old one is
dismantled? And a traditional, generic, wishful-thinking ideal answer
does not suffice and it will be tragic thing to find out when power
is held. State of transition. Democracy, Programme, State, Class and
Party (or parties). Forms of organization of the proletarian power.
Economy or neoeconomy. Balance of experiences.
With
people’s stereotypical view, that imaginary view created by the
ruling ideology, plus some tragic events in the revolutionary
processes, plus the fall of the USSR and the processes of capitalist
advances in the former self-proclaimed socialist countries, there is
a long way to be run. It is no use to turn a blind eye on this and
mere denunciation does not suffice.
Three.
The
subject of revolution. The real current situation of the working
class - social composition, relative weight, etc. The presence of
other types of protest movements as compared to the traditional ones,
regarding injustice and situations of oppression. What should be seen
as a proletarian class today, as seen from social and political
stands? What to consider or substantiate regarding the statements
that the working class of the largest capitalist countries tends to
vanish and to gentrify. What is the political positioning vis-à-vis
the phenomenon of working sectors which defend their particular
interests against those of the working masses? Those are some of the
many matters regarding which there is surely a lot produced and to be
produced.
Four.
The
role of Justice and Judicial Power as the last bulwark of the
bourgeois power. The apparatuses of ideological, political and
cultural production and distribution, not just of the State but of
the ruling class as a whole, at national and international level.
Forms and mechanisms to construct its common sense, its discourse of
truth and its agendas. How to counteract at least in the vanguard
sectors. How do the vanguards fortify the production and distribution
of their theories and politics and counteract those of the ruling
class.
Five.
Class
and party. Theory and Revolution. Spontaneism, consciousness,
organization, the role of vanguards. Reappraisal and defence of
Marxism. Theory and Praxis. The theories on class consciousness that
proliferated in the proletarian movement.
Six.
The
problems of strategy and tactics. Their relation with the Programme
and the principles. The various conceptions and their implications in
practice. The relation between strategy and tactics. It is also
necessary to identify and study the different strategies and tactics
of the bourgeois class to defend and extend its system, and in its
struggle against the exploited and oppressed of the world. The own
politics and tactics of the supporters of revolution must take this
into account and act in consequence. Valuing and synthesizing the
relevant polemics.
All
the points are mixed up
Obviously
many of those matters, if not all, are mixed upand influence each
other and the division we make is an artificial one: their main
purpose is to make a panoramic view of the problems that we think the
project in this early stage must grasp.
This
list is to be improved. As a matter of fact, there are key questions
missing that deserve inclusion, such as the union question, ecology,
women, counter culture, war in capitalism, economies of self
subsistence or outside the large markets, Democracy, the State,
parliamentarism, the remnants of the national and peasant question.
Actually
there is no subject excluded.
What
we do want to remark is the need of making
the effort of going beyond the daily present
and think in perspective, on the medium and long run, about the main
problems that must guide the anti-capitalist, classist revolutionary
movement. Of course, we have an advantage: we do not start from
scratch. We have a long, extremely rich theoretical-political
tradition and it is on it that we feed ourselves, as well as on the
experiences that we have lived and are living in the daily struggle.
Disadvantages are left out: we do know them and suffer them.
How
do we plan and propose to stimulate the reappropriation and strategic
theoretical production on those matters? With what procedures? What
are we inviting you to take part in?
c)
Spaces
and procedures for cooperation, exchange, promotion, production and
spreading
- Spaces
Given
the international nature of the Proposal (internationalist in its
content, international in its form), its production will be published
in magazine, book, bulletin and brochure format (according to the
production), in all formats and supports available. (It is important
to remark that this is not thought as a publishing house or an
editorial task).
The
central publication medium will be the magazine of the Proposal.
The
publication rate of the magazine will depend on production, although
a minimum rate and an ideal rate will be defined by the participants
of the team. It will preferably be published on paper but, of course,
on digital supports as well, including audio-books and other formats
that technology will permit.
(NB:
in relation to the materials received, those of us who make the
proposal guarantee the design, the layout and their digital output in
different formats, including audio-books, the digital version
paginated as a book, web publication and distribution to those who
might subscribe and other contacts. As
regards the paper edition, we can just propose it with our forces in
Spanish and for Argentina.
Re other places and languages, it will depend on those who take part
in the magazine and the chances we might achieve.)
In
relation to the Spaces for exchange, debate, collaborative
production, etc, they will be defined by those of us who decide to
participate in the proposal. Real physical spaces and chances of
meetings will be defined on the go and the real chances, given the
long distances.
- Procedures for cooperation, exchange and production
What
will the production of materials be like? What will the procedures
be?
As
we said above in point A), besides a clear dividing line with those
who are the left of the system, the dividing line in relation to
other groups is not clear or there are too many of them.
But
supposing that this dividing line is more or less determined, in
relation to those of us whose participation in the proposal is
valuable, we meet another difficulty:
Although
it would be ideal for all of those who want to participate in the
elaboration of some of the matters to meet, to debate, etc, to reach
a combined production, it is nowadays impossible, except for a small
group of people, preferably from the same organization. But this
Proposal is not necessary for that purpose (although the Proposal can
serve for their spreading and enrichment).
The
existence of “great” barriers and frontiers among different close
groups, hinder today that combined production and even a serious
discussion on those matters. The history of failed meetings and
brushes so proves it.
The
motives of that current impossibility are many. Some can surely be
solved or are in the background in another moment, and are more
related to sectarianism, previous confrontations, too much
individualism, poor classifications and obviously the weight of
counter-revolution and the wear and tear of rowing against the flow.
But there are also really important differences on some or many
matters that might stop that combined production.
For
all that, the Proposal must start from the current reality: many
groups or people that might agree on some basic questions cannot
discuss together today, not to mention work together.
And trying to solve that first would only lead to endless debates
without perspective.
But
there is also another truth that cannot be ignored, and this is the
fact that, if we just had contact with those who absolutely agree
with us, we would be throwing in the towel on the very essence of
political and ideological struggle and could never change the current
correlation of forces between the supporters of revolution and the
diverse groupings defending the capitalist system.
We
should start from the base that those who are interested in
contributing to the production on a subject will have points of view
that are different from the rest.
Then
the solution is –obviously,
from a common base that excludes the left of the capital-
to encourage the production of diverse developments, each of them
with their own approach, and integrate the same in a single volume of
the magazine, of a book. For example, like a publisher in the past,
Pasado y Presente, used to gather texts by diverse authors, for
example “Sobre el Partido”, tome 1, tome 2, etc.
As
most of the writings made or sent for publication will actually be
rather personal contributions, even when those people might belong to
such or such group, it is much more transparent and simple to assess
the writings than the people or groups, for which reason, if the
writings respect the points and conditions agreed on, they will be
published, those which do not, will not.
And
so on in every case: each person or group will determine what it is
ready to do in a team and with whom, to produce a text in common, and
it will not be determined by the Proposal, as it is not necessary
that all of those who take part agree on everything and take part in
everything.
In
this manner, every participant will have the possibility of choosing
different types of participation and places in this Proposal.
d)
Forms
of participation and answers to the Proposal
Setting
aside the first stage of this Proposal (which will be dealt with in
point E), where the basics will be determined by the discussion and
redefinition of the Proposal itself, there will be many manners of
membership and participation.
Here
they are, from minor to major, and everyone shall decide which one or
ones they are interested in:
- Get the magazine and other publications that might be produced in the Proposal.
- Spread the Proposal and its productions.
- Contribute to propose matters to be dealt with.
- Make comments on texts published.
- Contribute to the forums that might be set up for debate, prior or after each production of each subject.
- Contribute to proofreading -spelling, style, etc – of the drafts sent to the Proposal.
- Send articles or essays on some of the core ideas and matters defined.
- Join any of the different groups that might be set up for production of an article or essay on subject X.
- Join the group that coordinates production and compilation of subject X.
- Join the design/publication team of each material (magazine, etc) either by joining teams centralizing those tasks or in cooperation with them.
- Join the general team that will carry out the global Project of the Proposal and will make general decisions on aspects such as formal requirements of the articles, dates, and will decide on questions that might arise, etc.
(More
forms of participation can be defined)
e)
Warnings and clarifications
Probably
the greatest difficulty that the project will face is how to aim at a
real strategic production planned for the dispute against the
influence of the bourgeois and petty bourgeois ideology in the most
sensitive sectors of the working class, of the young and of those who
resist the arbitrary decisions of capitalism. We have a tendency to
focus on formal issues, to concentrate mostly on the juncture, on
tactical problems, on short texts or on the immediate taking of a
stand in isolated cases. The point is, each group generally faces
these urgent, immediate needs with their press, website or forum.
It
must be stressed that this Proposal does not intend to underestimate
the specific, daily militant activity that each group carries out in
their labour, student or social milieu. In any case, it should be
reminded that strategic perspective helps a lot in that daily task,
in the participation in movements, in “mass” actions and
everything else. With a more precise strategic view, tactical actions
can be integrated and be given a meaning.
It
also does not intend to substitute,
replace or underestimate
other
proposals for debate, exchange of ideas, or production from different
groups.
In any case, this Proposal can even strengthen their influence and
aims, create yet another place to spread their developments and can
even be an additional stimulus to accelerate them.
As
we do not propose regroupings, etc, this could lead to the wrong
conclusion that we underestimate that need. We do see it as
necessary, but as we said above, that is not in our hands.
The
fact that the Proposal is being promoted outside an organizational
framework might also lead to the conclusion that we underestimate the
need of the construction of vanguard organizations and of the Party.
Or that we are proposing study groups or trying to arrange individual
work in order of importance. Not at all. This Proposal not only does
not intend to substitute the organizations and their activities, but
on the contrary, it does intend to contribute -on a very modest
scale, by the way- to each participant of the Proposal, and to the
development of the Internationalist communist movement, without an
aim of beating anyone nor to purport as an alternative group to
others. It
rather intends to be an instrument for the work that everyone is
carrying out.
To
give an example (taking into account the limitations of any example),
electricity, the Proposal is not intended to be a dam or a power
station, but a small part of the mains of electricity supply, where
something can be produced, but basically stimulates and helps those
who produce to find other channels of distribution to reach other
people. And not just anybody, as this is not a proposal for a
bookshop or a publishing house, but for the people who are fighting
or approaching the struggle.
In
relation to warnings from organizations, it
must be stressed that this Proposal does not involve unities,
alliances not even mutual action agreements for the participants, not
to mention an endorsement or an acceptation for all the materials
that might arise.
It
must be added that the magazine of the Proposal, as well as any other
publications,
will not belong to any organization neither will it be signed by a
group, not even by the groups that might claim it, and no group will
be its owner. As
a matter of fact,
the
Proposal itself “will be” of those who carry it out in its
integrity and not ours. (“Will be” in quotations, for, to be
precise, the Proposal belongs to our class, but today this is merely
a phrase with a great amount of voluntarism.)
The
articles may be signed as it best suits their authors. (Pseudonym,
real name, real name + organization membership, organization, etc.)
For
the organizations and/or individuals, their minimum participation
will just give them one more place, and an unbiased one, where they
can publish their materials (which,
as a matter of fact, could be done without their permission, as none
of the groups that we are really addressing agrees with private
property and copyright preventing or charging for the publication of
their ideas, but obviously it is not the same).
To
make clear the meaning of unbiased
place,
it obviously takes stand, i.e. it supports the Socialist/proletarian
revolution.
What
we want to point out is that the magazine, etc will not be of an
organization neither a list of them. And we do not intend
to make the publication into a group or a mentor or model,
as it usually happens.
If
the goal of the
minimum participation
is
the
publication in the Proposal,
the maximum participation is the participation in the establishment,
promotion, coordination, orientation and strengthening of a place
(printed/digital) where productions on strategic matters will be
considered. (Or
takes part in the general team of the project).
In
relation to the magazine, we suppose that in many cases it will be
monothematic, i.e. in the same issue there will be one or several
articles and essays (by one or several authors) on some of the core
ideas proposed. In other cases, every issue will deal with more than
one subject.
The
general team will prioritize some of the matters in order to publish
the first volume on that. The idea is to make it a quarterly or
four-monthly publication (it will be defined according to the forces
and possible production), but as volumes are completed, they will be
published as soon as they are ready and in the order to be
determined, as well as the minimum of pages agreed on.
With
our current forces, we can just make the Proposal a publication of
two issues per year and surely of low quality in content if we
compare it with the possible results if other people and groups
contribute to the Proposal.
f)
Immediate steps
We
approach this Proposal in two stages, a stage of formalization and a
start-up stage.
The
stage of formalization is aimed at considering criticism and
suggestions from different people and groups on the definitions and
characteristics of this Proposal. The aim of the stage is to improve,
correct, enlarge, rewrite the Proposal itself and better define the
diverse aspects of the same. Apart from that, it requires
abridgement, this writing is too long.
As
for the second stage, the start-up of the Proposal, we intend to
start it three months after it is officially published and with those
who by that time will have expressed their will to take part, then
the rest will join in, as they show their will to participate in the
activities they are interested in and in those we might need. The
period might be extended if the evolution of the stage of
formalization so requests it.
In
relation to the first stage, those who agree with the whole or part
of the Proposal, or those of you who want to give your opinion on it,
will you please send your remarks, contributions, criticism, etc to
the following address
propuestainternacionalista@gmail.com
Letters,
unless otherwise requested, will be uploaded on the website where the
materials of this Proposal will be centralized and published.
Besides, that website will have links to the senders' websites. The
website will be at:
www.propuestainternacionalista.blogspot.com
Subsequently, with
the decision of those who take part in the Proposal, forums
and other procedures and resources for work, discussion and spreading
will be open.
Thanks
for your attention; we send you cordial fraternal regards.
Starting
team of the International and Internationalist Proposal
“Revolutionary Strategy and Change”
Argentina,
25 October 2014
IMPORTANT
WARNING:
Unfortunately for the time being we can just read and answer in
Spanish in full, read in Italian, and hardly read French and English.
Probably if comrades from different places join us, we might include
other languages. Regarding the publications that we have put forward
in the Proposal so far, we can just guarantee them in Spanish.
Annex
1:
Draft
of conditions and requirements for the publication of texts, essays,
articles
1
Writings must stick to the subjects proposed and have an emphasis on
strategic perspective, i.e. they must not be an informative view or a
taking of stand on a present event (except for an analysis with
long-term perspective and with a tactical aim within that limit).
2.
Every proposal must be based, as much as possible, on verifiable
facts, theories and sources.
3.
The defence of positions that are unconnected to the points of
minimum agreement on the Proposal, the support of
counterrevolutionary policies and of states where capital and the
exploitation of the wage-earning is dominant will not be accepted.
4.
Some formal rules for the presentation of writings will be
established.
Annex
2:
Additional
notes on the current theoretical-political production and the need to
encourage it from other places and positions
Where
has the theoretical production of the so-called forces against
capitalism, for socialism, for communism been through over the last
decades?
It
is important to remark that some groups have made many efforts to
keep alive the positions of their reference points and the
revolutionary traditions that they claim. They have implemented
policies of development of cadres, studied the classic authors,
disseminated them, or applied those lessons to the analysis of
specific situations and drawn new lessons. All of this proves great
valuable theoretical, political and mostly personal effort, as it
involves commitment, time -which is usually detracted from “free
time”- and economic resources -which also come from personal
contributions.
But
if, besides those efforts, we wonder, apart from some classics, what
can be found in bookshops, opinion magazines, newspapers, mass media,
etc, regarding Marxism and its supporters, what we can see was and is
produced mostly in the university milieu, rarely with direct links to
the working class struggle and their radicalized and/or revolutionary
vanguards. These are productions that are tinted with an intellectual
academic imprint, and with little incidence on strategic production,
on finding answers to the great concerns and problems of the
Internationalist communist movement.
Thus,
we shall find a range of “Marxisms” that are real influential
promoters of ideologies of the capital or of helplessness in this
regard, absolutely devoid of any revolutionary force.
Besides,
in that theoretical production, there is a shift in the objects of
study and the elaborations. Little by little, core matters such as
revolution, power, the transition of capitalism to socialism and/or
communism, economy, the relationships between strategy and tactics,
the lessons in relation to all those problems of the different
historical revolutionary experiences, are losing importance. Instead,
other matters, regardless of their importance, but which cannot
replace the previous ones: philosophical, speculative, cultural,
methodological, epistemological, anthropological, aesthetic,
professional ones and many other issues requested by academic
teaching in different disciplines, become more relevant to them (it
should be reminded that we are always referring to those with some
presence on the shelves, newsstands, and the diverse mass media).
It
is indeed important to remark that, due to the correlation of forces,
very favourable to capital, the defence of the genuinely communist
theory was confined to groups of limited influence. The revolutionary
and proletarian tension and resolution generated texts, analyses,
criticism and self-criticism, balances of defeats, all of which must
be recovered and developed and are nowadays practically unknown in
many countries, be it for the absence of translations or for the
predominance of the policies of those who see themselves as the real
representatives of the proletariat, of revolutionary Marxism and
communism, who have helped to make those contributions invisible as
they questioned their reformist formulations directly or indirectly
concealing state capitalism, or supporting a bourgeois side and its
institutions.
Over
the last few years, the theoretical production of a good deal of the
materials, books, etc, that saw the widest circulation moved from the
French, Italian, etc, academic milieu to the USA, the UK and, to a
lesser extent, to Germany. In Latin America there were some isolated
productions, but without major spreading and impact.
A
rare paradox: a god deal of the lessons, defence or installation of
the Marxist “truth”, does not just stem from the academic field,
but from countries where revolutionary proletarian forces have
developed less and where the bourgeoisie's hegemony is stronger. And
with another characteristic: these are imperialist states. And the
curious thing about it is that those developments are many times
focused on methodological questions or on the situations of other
countries, whereas in those same countries the struggle, opposition
and, resistance also develop but are silenced, ignored and crushed.
And these theoreticians rarely take part and theorize on that
struggle in their own countries.
The
mentions to “academy” above and to the fact that, to a great
extent, the current developments come from the university milieu, do
not automatically involve condemnation on our part.
We
mention it because we see the need to promote and prioritize another
sort of production, from elsewhere, not just geographically speaking,
but “non-academically” or should we say, without the academic
cast of mind. And also from “elsewhere” because, as someone said
over a hundred years ago, you do not see the same from a hut than
from a palace. The priorities are also different. The truth is that
good theoretical, communist, revolutionary and Internationalist
production is needed, no matter where it comes from.
It
is interesting to verify and highlight a production “from
elsewhere”, although in comparison with the above mentioned, it
will not reach their spreading nor their “status” to be taken
seriously and they will rarely be seen on a shelf in the form of a
book, in a large-print newspaper or in the mass media.
Thanks
to technological advances, particularly thanks to the Internet, a big
leap has been made in the production of ideas, information, and
criticism of some aspects of the capitalist society.
Countless
blogs, websites, discussion forums, internet radio stations, digital
magazines, bulletins, emails, belonging to some organizations or as
the result of personal efforts by small groups, reveal a potential
for counterculture and counter-information. Those who just see
eclecticism, poor in-depth view or poor coherence, ups and downs and
intermittencies, presences and absences -all of them real-, do miss
contributions and potentials. Certainly there is a lot of excitement
and dispersion of forces, and their contents are many times partial
or superficial, but it is a space to be considered.
What
it does happen, as it happens in general with the internet, is that
such great production of notes, news and articles on countless sites,
produces saturation, superposition and get little impact in relation
to the forces invested and the results achieved.
On
the other hand, the cultural and consumerist tendencies themselves
have promoted -knowingly or unknowingly- in most of the population,
particularly among the youth, a rejection of reading long or deep
texts. Hence the tendency to produce short notes, aimed at particular
questions, denunciations, information, small developments, isolated
critical reflections, cultural, poetic matters, which might be
important when framed in a strategy of struggle and counter-cultural
accumulation, but isolated and without greater perspective, in many
cases they just unfortunately add to the great mass of materials that
can be found -and get lost- on the internet chaotically and just play
their role partly in small communities of friends, sympathizers or
followers.
Also
on several of those websites, those which are more politicized,
polemics or message exchanges develop with a great amount of
flippancy and aggressiveness. And there is also that growing presence
of armies of scribes and agents provocateurs, paid by the system
factories that flood the net with rubbish, with bourgeois ideology
and with open or covert propaganda in defence of certain interests of
the ruling class, at the same time encouraging despair, helplessness
or dead ends.
In
any case this panorama shows that there are, no matter how small in
the general context, valuable creative people, producing ideas, who,
in spite of fulfilling it under precarious conditions, do not resign
themselves to be the toy of trends and of the ruling ideology. It is
indeed very limited, even for the individual work itself, without an
organic framework, which reduces forces. There are also incoherent or
superficial opinions coexisting with others that are not so.
We
just want to stress the fact that the new digital tools and resources
and mass media must be taken into account and their potentials and
dangers must be better weighed.
We
must indeed not forget that the strategic theoretical production and,
what is more, the strategic political production depends on other
variables: class struggle, links and political positioning in same,
knowledge of previous productions and so on.
1
From movimiento,
movement. A Latin American, mostly South American, term referring to
mass action on the streets, a sort of populism. Translator's note.
No hay comentarios.:
Publicar un comentario