File spoon-archives/marxism-news.archive/marxism-news_1997/97-02-23.213, message 51


Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1997 07:55:16 +0100 (MET)
From: malecki-AT-algonet.se (Robert Malecki)
Subject: COCKROACH! #37 (part 1)


COCKROACH! #37

A EZINE FOR POOR AND WORKING CLASS PEOPLE.

WE HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE BUT OUR CHAINS.

It is time that the poor and working class people
have a voice on the Internet.

Contributions can be sent to <malecki-AT-algonet.se>
Subscriptions are free at    <malecki-AT-algonet.se>

Now on-line at http://www.algonet.se/~malecki

How often this zine will appear depends on you!
--------------------------------------------------------
1. Gramsci,  Lukacs,  mass unemployment 
   and worker militancy.

2. Sweden-More Social Democratic Betrayals!

3. Open Letter to the WRP!

--------------------------------------------------------
Gramsci,  Lukacs,  mass unemployment and worker militancy

Paul writes;

>The second argument, I want to stress, is the analysis of the causes of
>fascism, evolved in the twenties by the luxembourgian marxists like
>Thalheimer, Brandler and others. They renewed the classical marxian
>analysis of cesarism (The 18th Brumaire of Napoleon Bonaparte). If the
>ruling classes become weaker and weaker and in the same time the
>progressive forces weren't able to fill in the political gaps and to
>take over political power, there will be an instable political
>situation, that leads to the evolvement of a third authoritarian force,
>which will do it. This bonapartistic force will--with the consent or
>apathy of workers, and also of the leading classes--carry through a
>social change in society, a passive revolution as Gramsci said. E.g.
>Michal Kalecki (in Political aspects of full employment, 1943), explains
>the economic policy of the Nazi-party as a deal between three positions,
>organized by the national socialists: 1) the capitalists agreed with a
>statal policy of full employment because the nazi guaranted the
>suppression of progressive forces and labor movements. 2) The workers
>tolerated and agreed with the autoritarism of the nazi-state because it
>provided for employment and subsistence. 3) The nazi with this consensus
>so could carry through their political objectives like political and
>social control, rearmament, preparation of war. So mass unemployment not
>necessarily leads to more consciusness of workers as "truly
>revolutionary class".

I think the above just confirms the fact that it is *only* the proletariat 
is the revolutionary class. Any political leadership whether it be bougeois, 
fascist or working class is forced in one
way or another confine its politics to this class because of its position in 
society. Especially in periods of political and economical turmoil.It was 
not a point, nor in our historical epoch ever
a point *if* the western proletariat is revolutionary. What determines the 
outcome of every struggle depends on the political leadership in a given 
society. In the above case Paul takes up Germany and the Fascists. However 
the one thing he forgets to mention is the *lack* of
revolutionary leadership for the working class. The whole point being that 
what the German workers had was the Social Democracy and Stalinism! Neither 
who could show a way to victory. The successes and failures of the western 
working class depends just on this central
point of who is leading what-where and which most of the people on this list 
are trying to ignore-if not outright deny!
>
>
>My third argument comes from the post-gramscian left discussion in
>Italy. Within political actions of social movements there is a
>mechanism, which leads to a braking and slow down of revolutionary
>impulses. People struggle for more civil rights, spaces, wealth, better
>working and living conditions etc. As a result of these conflicts they
>take over certain social and political positions: they gain more rights,
>they create welfare organisations, their salairs and living standards
>augment, their trade unions and left parties gain political influence
>etc.--these all beeing concrete objectives or results of their
>struggles. With all these actions they penetrate the state, become
>themselves parts of the state (in Italian: farsi stato), accept certain
>rules, consent to the state-institutions, they had contributed to
>create. Within recent political conflicts one can see, that they have to
>loose something, that they fight against cutting of social welfare of
>civil rights. Will say, that they accept the whole framework, beeing the
>state, that they operate as a corporate force within the state, not
>"revolutionary", but "reformistic", having historically constituted
>cognitive structures, that assume and reproduce capitalism and bourgeois
>state.

This is also ridiculous! as if the working class has ever been part of the 
state. What has been really going on is that the reformist and Stalinists 
leaderships are a part of the state. IT is the political leadership that has 
made the historic compromise. The toolhas in the labour movement has been 
the trade union bureaucracy. As far as the civil rights movements--they have 
hardly ever gone beyond liberalism. The only class that can garantee civil 
rights is a victorious proletariat with a revolutionary leadership!

History of movements of the poor and working class, can you give me one 
example where poor and working class people when aroused and angry wanted to 
always go much futher then any of its reformists or liberal leaders! So the 
truth is it is not the movement that is the problem but the leadership is 
the problem. Because history has given us many examples of the 'movement' 
being betrayed by the leadership and not the other way around! One of the 
later examples is Nicaragua as being a good example.

Or today in Sweden when we have a grass roots moving that is far more angry 
and to the left then any of the left-wing political tendencies who claim to 
want to lead this movement. In fact what we have is political leadership 
that wants to shackle this movement all for different reasons. As always it 
is the movement of the revolutionary proletariat which makes everybody just 
creep out of the walls to betray this movement or channel it down a path of 
at best a historical compromise with its deadly class enemy and at worst 
historical defeats and bloodbaths!

In fact the tendency on this list to blame the poor and working class for 
not being revolutionary is a scandal. It is a petty bougeois anti-Marxist 
and top down group of intellectuals saying in practice. That they have given 
up on the working class especially in the
west. Well, if this is true and I doubt it to one hundred percent-What have 
you people to come with instead of? Nothing! I think when reading Lenin's 
"what is to be done! " what we are seeing here is in fact the same old 
discussion about people who are either blaming the working class or tailing 
the spontaneous outbursts of the class. Nobody wants to really talk about 
leading this class to a political split with its historic betrayers--the 
reformists and the Stalinists or even worse outrageous stuff of "Yankee 
Doodle" patriotism or on the other hand the so called broad anti-imperialist 
front which says nothing and can do nothing.
>
>
>I want to close with some of my personal opinions about that. 
>(#) The "revolutionary" left has contributed to this evolution, having
>again and again very (anti-)governmental objectives and concepts (like
>government of the proletariat). I remember a criticism of the young Marx
>against the atheists, in which he argues that the atheism was itself a
>sort of religion, because it referenced itself to the theism. It's a
>similar thing with the anti-governmental impulse of the left.
>(#) We should learn to redefine the concept of revolution. For example,
>to fight for a new democracy with forms of self-government
>(autogestione), autonomous, non state-regulated organisations of
>activity, mutual aid, democracy on work-places etc., that today could be
>a real social revolution. Also to fight for a policy of full employment
>and of throttling speculative activities would be a very important and
>"revolutionary" activity.

First Paul tells us that the "revolutionary left" which for me is something 
that does not exist! should fight for some sort of "New Democracy" with 
forms of self- government. And then
goes on to say that we need to redefine the concept of revolution. But what 
he really means is that he wants to desert revolution and at best organise 
around some single issues. In fact this is just another modern arguement of 
the same argument that Lenin took on the Economists and Berstien for. 
Against this liquidationist line Lenin called for a party that would prepare 
the working class POLITICALLY for its historical tasks. If anybody is to 
blame at all it is the
leaderships that have evolved Internationally since the October Revolution.

>(#) Left people should finish to characterise themselves mutually as
>real (what is that?) revolutionaries or reformists, renegades, Marxists,
>marxologues etc. The situation is too serious for such games. This games
>will never convince the workers to become more militant.
>(#) We should work out more concrete policies and political actions,
>which may change and improve the situation of the workers, no regard if
>they are considered by some particularly crafty guys as "revolutionary"
>or not.

This last argument is the favourite of just those people and their clones 
who are responsible for all of the defeats of the working class. All this 
shit about forgetting about the old is just a
cover for forgetting that it was the Stalinists and the reformists who in 
fact are responsible for many of the historical defeats and at this point in 
time have left the working class with a gigantic political vacuum in the 
face of the bourgeoisie's renewed attacks on the western
proletariat. And all this "Unity" stuff. Well, Paul answer me? What kind of 
Unity? Naturally anybody can say that they want too make things "better" for 
the workers. But the point is, at least from a Marxist point of view, the 
working class smashing bougeois society and putting it on the garbage pile 
of history where it belongs. You are as a Marxist either for this or against 
it. But without a Leninist party in the leadership this task is and has been 
proven impossible.
In fact you arguments in helping the working class are in fact exactly the 
opposite. You are or want to tell workers at best "Well.pal we are on your 
side!" So big fucking deal. Because the whole point is not JUST making 
things better but a leadership which will give the proletariat its 
historical Political role as a conscious vanguard of revolution and a future 
Communist society.

In stead of "one step back,two steps forward" you are in fact paddling the 
canoe backwards along with a lot of other people on this list.

The tasks of Trotskyists among other things is to expose these fakers and 
the politics that they have represented historically. But also to provide a 
*real* revolutionary leadership for the ONLY revolutionary class in society 
--the International working class.

It is not something "new" we need. What we need is to go back to the very 
basics! That is Lenin, Trotsky, the first four congresses of the Third 
International and the struggle of the Left Opposition and the founding of 
the Fourth International.

Because in reality the clones and the renegades are not really coming with 
anything new. They are just trying to change their clothes with a bit of new 
terminology. But the fundamentals are still very much the same. In other 
words who rules! The International
Bourgeoisie or the International Proletariat!

Warm Regards
Bob Malecki
--------------------------------------------------------
Sweden-More Social Democratic Betrayals!

In and unprecedented bluff the Social Democracy, in answer to the rising 
massive movement against their governmental policy of dismantling the 
welfare state with its bougeois partners
in the Center Party, have come up with a so called "secret" plan to "create 
50,000 new jobs" in the public sector. And the mass media appears to have 
been completely sucked into this big
bluff. Naturally the Social Democratic press is hoping for anything at this 
point to present to the Swedish working class in order to try and defuse the 
growing rage against the party and the open split between the party and its 
historic base the trade union movement.

In every major channel on TV and Radio and in the press they were talking 
about the "50,000 new jobs". And the whole thing is a big lie! A big bluff! 
And an attempt by the Social Democracy to make even more (!) cutbacks and 
higher taxes.  Every Socialist,Communist,
worker, or person must throw these lies right back in the faces of the 
Social Democratic government. Openly and clearly say that in fact the so 
called 50,000 new jobs that they are proclaiming is nothing other then a 
party leadership who is lying in our faces and trying to do
another hat trick with numbers! What this in reality means is not 50,000 new 
jobs-but quite clearly a declaration by the Social
Democratic government to reduce unemployment payments even more,
and to raise taxes! And No new jobs at all!

Because in fact the new jobs that the Social Democratic government is 
talking about do not exist! They say that this package in reality is to stop 
the local governments from laying off 40,000 to 50,000 workers in the public 
sector this year! In other words jobs that exist now! So
this is not "new" jobs. But old jobs. And in order to pull off this hat 
trick they are saying that we will "have to go in and reduce unemployment 
benefits even more! That is the whole gist
of this operation! No knew jobs just new excuses to impoverish the 
unemployed even more then they are today.

Every trade unionists, every unemployed person, must throw this garbage 
right back in the faces of these "Socialist" traitors! Thanks for nothing! 
And we must even go futher. We must bring down this present Social 
Democratic government and its bougeois partners. They are liars and have 
deserted both the trade unions and the hundreds of thousands that now are on 
the dole. Our demand must be for putting forth a independent list of trade 
unionists, socialists and communists on a independent program that will not 
only roll back the dismantling of the welfare state but extending it!

Our war cry should be. No political support to these "Socialists" traitors!

Break with the Social Democratic Party!

For a *real* workers government of independent trade unionists, socialists 
and communists!

On a program that rolls back the dismantling of the welfare state and 
extending it!

Naturally this would be a great *real* step forward. But the present attacks 
on the welfare state here in Sweden and the criminal politics of the Social 
Democratic Party traitors who
have deserted the trade unions and the working and not in the least 
International solidarity with the third world is in reality a part of the 
general attack on the poor and working class
Internationally all along the line. The central reason is that it is not any 
longer "Communism" that is the main enemy after the disintegration of the 
former Soviet Union under the
treacherous leadership of the Stalinists. The main enemy for the bougeois 
Internationally is the trade unions and the working class in their *own* 
countries. Thus they have declared war
on all of the gains made by the workers movement since the end of the second 
world war.

Only by understanding that we are once again witnessing a confrontation of 
two fundamental classes in society the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. And 
the bourgeoisie is well organised
and attacking all along the line. The working class has been left in a 
vacuum of political leadership with the destruction of the Stalinist parties 
and the desertion of the Social Democracy into the camp of the bourgeoisie. 
Only by going forward and creating a new
leadership, can really solve this crisis. And this leadership must be forged 
in the daily struggles going on today Internationally.

A party with the most militant and determined Working class vanguard must be 
created and armed with a program which will not only be able to fight the 
defensive battles -but can when the time comes go over to the offensive and 
make a desperate struggle for political power.
And this must be done in every country of the world.

Thus only by creating a revolutionary International that can once again can 
take the lead can the future of a working class victory be made possible. 
All other ways can only lead to great
new historical defeats!

Forward to a class conscious working class vanguard.

Forward to the reforging of a revolutionary International

Bob Malecki
--------------------------------------------------------
Continued in part 2





   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005