Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 05:30:25 +0200 From: Jorn Andersen <ccc6639-AT-vip.cybercity.dk> Subject: Re: problems of workers power At 15:04 21-06-96 +0000, Raymond Hickman wrote: >Anyway the two problems I'm trying to get at >are I think these. Firstly, from your 'socialism = workers power' >perspective what is the role of the revolutionary party after the >revolution? Secondly, and don't take this the wrong way, but just >how rapid will the world revoltuion you envisage need to be? Jorn: No, it is not rubbish - but serious questions. And as I wrote in my first mail: Many aspects of these question will have to be answered by history only. These questions are on the border line of what we can know about and what we think, guess, or hope will become reality. So your point about - >If this is the way you see socialist revolution happening - not >just the way you would like it to happen - is well taken. I accept that. (Though I think that it is not day dream - I hope I can make that clear below :-) ). But before I get too long winding about that, let me re-phrase the questions/problems a little. First, I think your two questions are really not so close connected. I think they were too close linked in my first letter - and that this has confused me maybe more than you. One question is about the role of a revolutionary party after the revolution. The role of stalinist parties in power - and sometimes even without - has obscured this question in the minds of many people. Obscured in the way that - OK, the revolutionaries may be good fighters against capitalism, but when they get power won't we get the same old story with new actors? So, let us get it clear that a revolutionary party will only be able to lead the working class to socialism, if they lead in the same way after the revolution as before. That is by convincing workers - and others - how to best fight and organize. But lets get closer: After the revolution real power will lay in the workers' councils - not in the party. It is they who are the socialist state - not the party. So today the embryonic form of workers power is not the party but the real strength that workers have in their struggles. The power which means that the capitalists can't just do what they want at will. How does this power exist - today? In the minds and actions of living people. Through low level organization on the floor through to trade unions, community organization etc. - if we think of it in organizational terms. At higher levels of struggle these "embryonic forms" can develop quite rapidly - and they develop not only in quantity, but also in quality. At the highest level of struggle, the struggle for power, where it is decided which power is to rule society here and now and in the future - at that time workers' real power has to be organized and centralized to the extreme. This means that the minds of workers - the majority, not only the avantgarde - has to be won so much for the revolution that they think it is worth risking their lives for. It will not be the revolutionaries which in the end convince them about this, it will be reality itself. The role of revolutionaries is to connect this to the possibility of *changing* this reality. In a pre-revolutionary period the centre stage for the work of revolutionaries will still be the shop floor - but in terms of actions the workers councils will become more and more central. When workers organize to sell their labour power the highest forms of organization are the trade unions. When workers organize to take power and run society the highest forms is the workers councils. This part of it has been confirmed so many times that we can take it for a fact. Forms change slightly, but there are so many common feautures - developed in different degrees - from the russian soviets, the iranian shoras, the chilean cordones, the italian workers councils, the MKS in Gdansk, and even embryonic in today's strike commitees. They are built from below, they are highly democratic, they "overcome" - by making them open and debatable - a whole range of the divisions which exist inside the working class today. Finally they centralize workers power. It is the political direction of these workers' council which decide the real strength of the working class - and thus whether the workers shall win or lose. The party can not substitute for that power. Nor can they after the revolution. And then we are back to questions which only history can tell. Nobody can promise you, me or anybody else what will happen then. But I doubt workers will let anybody rule them, if they have just once tried not to be ruled over. And - contrary to now - in the workers councils they have a tool to decide. They may be *beaten* but that's another story - they won't *give* power away. Remember, they were *beaten* in Russia by Stalin. It took a lot of blood for him to win. We owe those who fought against never to forget that. If we have come this far, I think for now there is only one more thing to say about the role of the party: It will wither away with class society and the state - probably as the first one of these. It will be thrown in the dustbin of history. Your second question I will only say this about now: Yes, world revolution may become a little more uneven than I suggested in the first mail. But I think two factors point in the direction that it may not be that uneven after all: 1. Capitalism today is so international, that it is hard to imagine how it should be possible to win decisely in one part of the world only. There may be a longer, protracted crisis which will form the frames around a revolutionary period, but the character of this crisis will be international, and so will the solution to it. When the crisis is over so is the open question of who is in power - on a world scale. 2. The working class today is also very international. When workers fight in South Africa, this immediately affects the way we think in the US and Europe - and even more so the other way round. Of course the working class is also a numerically much stronger class than ever before. Enough for now. Hope not too much day-dreaming? > what is the role of the >revolutionary party in a post-revolutionary situation where - as >the collective of the advanced elements of the working class - >it is defending the revolution and its gains against internal and >external threats? Again: Russia showed us that in the end only the workers themselves can do that. Yours Jorn ------- Jorn Andersen Internationale Socialister Denmark --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005