dimanche 11 décembre 2016


U.S.A., what’s next?

The sharpening of the class struggles

By Daniel Paquet                            dpaquet1871@gmail.com

                                                               La Nouvelle Vie Réelle: lnvr.blogspot.com

 

« Those who have the slightest acquaintance with the actual state of our movement cannot but see that the wide spread of Marxism was accompanied by a certain lowering of the theoretical level.  Quite a number of people with very little, and even a total lack of theoretical training joined the movement because of its practical significance and its practical successes.  (…)  Without a revolutionary theory there can be no revolutionary movement. This thought cannot be insisted upon too strongly at a time when the fashionable preaching of opportunism goes hand in hand with an infatuation for the narrowest forms of practical activity.   Yet, for Russian Social-Democrats (i.e. communists) the importance of theory is enhanced by there more circumstances, which are often forgotten:  firstly, by the fact that our Party is only in process of formation, its features are only just becoming outlined, and it is yet far from having, settled accounts with other trends of revolutionary thought, which threaten to divert the movement from the correct path. (…)  Secondly, the Social-Democratic movement (communist) is in its very essence an international movement.  This means not only that we must combat national chauvinism, but also that a movement that is starting in a young country can be successful only if is implement the experience of other countries.  And in order to implement that his experience, it is not enough merely to be acquainted with it, or simply to transcribe the latest resolutions.  What it requires is the ability to treat this experience critically and to test it independently. (…)  Let us quote what Engels said in 1874 concerning the significance of theory in the Social-Democratic movement: ‘it will be the duty of the leaders to gain an ever clearer insight into all theoretical questions, to free themselves more and more from the influence of traditional phrases inherited from the old world outlook, and constantly to keep in mind that Socialism, since it has become a science, demands that it be pursued as a science, i.e., that it be studied.  The task will be to spread with increased zeal among the masses of the workers the ever more clarified understanding thus acquired, to knit together ever more firmly the organization both of the party and of the trade unions.”[1]

“From this moment in society’s historical development, not a single social phenomenon or change can be comprehended out of the context of classes, and the interrelations and struggle between them.  The class approach is therefore the fundamental methodological principle fo any social study in historical materialism, and an essential condition or probing into any social event. (…)  Lenin gave the classical definition of classes.  ‘Classes,’ he wrote, ‘are large groups of people differing form each other by the place they occupy in a historically determined system of social  production, by their relation (in most cases fixed and formulated in law) to the means of production, by their role in the social  organization of labour, ad, consequently, by the dimensions of the share of social wealth of which they dispose and the mode of acquiring it.  Classes are groups of people one of which can appropriate the labour of another owing to the different places they occupy in a definite system of social economy.’ (V.I. Lenin, Collected Works, vol. 29, p. 421). (…)  Marxism was the first theory to reveal  the interconnection between the development of production and society’s class structure.  This interconnection consists, above all, in the fact that a definite level of development of labour productivity is essential before there is a real opportunity for a man to exploit man. For, indeed, when man produces only the minimum of products required to maintain his physical existence and reproduction, any systematic appropriation of someone else’s labour is out of the question. (…) By arbitrarily interpreting the concept ‘middle class,  bourgeois sociologists are trying to prove that capitalists and proletarians disappear in modern capitalist society, and that both these classes       turn into one ‘middle class’ which becomes the decisive force of modern society.  Accordingly, they claim, capitalist society is changing into a society of the ‘middle class’ with no class struggle and no dictatorship of the proletariat.”[2]

“We must also note that Engels is most definite in calling universal suffrage an instrument of bourgeois rule.  Universal suffrage, he says obviously summing up the long experience of German Social-Democracy, is the ‘gauge of the maturity of the working class.  It cannot and never will be anything more in the present day state.’ (…)  All the social-chauvinists and opportunists of Western Europe, expect just this ‘more’ from universal suffrage.  They themselves share and instill into the minds of the people the false notion that universal suffrage ‘in the modern state’ is really capable of ascertaining the will o the majority of the toilers and of securing its realization. Engels (added up that) the state will inevitably fall.  The society that will organize production on the basis of a free and equal association of the producers will put the whole machinery of state where it will then belong:  into the Museum of Antiquities, by the side of the spinning wheel and the bronze axe.’”[3]

On the other hand, already in 1903, “the Second Congress of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party welcomes the growing revolutionary initiative among the student youth and calls upon all organizations of the Party to give them every possible assistance in their efforts to organize.  It recommends that all student groups and study circles should, firstly, make it the prime object of their activities to imbue their members with an  integral and consistent socialist world outlook and give them a thorough acquaintance with Marxism, on the one hand, and with Russian Narodism and West-European opportunism, on the other, these being the principal currents among the conflicting advanced trends of today; secondly, that they  should beware of those false friends of the youth who divert them from a thorough revolutionary training through recourse to empty revolutionary or idealistic phrase-mongering and philistine complaints about the harm and uselessness of sharp polemics between the revolutionary and the opposition movements, for as a matter of fact these false friends are only spreading an unprincipled and unserious attitude towards revolutionary work; thirdly, that they should endeavour, when undertaking practical activities, to establish  prior contact with the Social-Democratic organizations, so as to have the  benefit of their advice and, as far as possible, to avoid serious mistakes at the very outset of their work.”[4]

It is essential to recall that “the theory of worshipping spontaneity is decidedly opposed to the revolutionary character of the working class  movement; it is opposed  to the movement taking the line of struggle against the foundations of capitalism; it is in favour of the movement proceeding exclusively along the  line of ‘realisable demands, of demands ‘acceptable’ to capitalism; it is wholly in favour of the ‘line of least resistance.’   The theory of spontaneity is the ideology of trade unionism.”[5]

The last word of this paper is to underscore the historical role played by comrade Fidel Castro.  “A courageous revolutionary and anti-imperialist fighter, comrade Castro ably led the Cuban people in the building of socialism in Cuba, wisely leading as the bellicose U.S.A. military attacked, otherwise provoked and imposed great hardship on the Cuban people through years of sanctions, not yet entirely lifted.  Comrade Fidel also survived scores of assassination attempts by the CIA as is well documented. (…)  Our sorrow at comrade Fidel’s passing will be turned into ever greater efforts to follow his example of courage in pursuing the goal of equitable societies in a safer, rational world community – the goal of world communism.”[6]

 

 

In French: La Nouvelle Vie Réelle                            www.lnvr.blogspot.com

In English: Communist News     www.dpaquet1871.blogspot.com

 



[1] Lenin, V. I., What is to be done, Foreign Languages Press, Peking, 1973, pages 21-22, 24
[2] Sheptulin, A. P., Marxist-Leninist Philosophy, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1978, pages 359, 361, 366-367, 376-378
[3] Lenin, V.I., The State and Revolution, Foreign Languages Press, Peking, 1970/Reprinted by Red Stars Publishers, U.S.A., 2014, page 10-11
[4] Lenin, V. I., Collected Works, vol. 6, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1977, page 469
[5] Stalin, J. V., The foundations of Leninism, Foreign Languages Press, Peking, 1975, page21
[6] Executive Committee, Comrade Fidel was truly an internationalist, NorthStar Compass, International Council for Friendship and Solidarity with Soviet People, Toronto, November 2016

Aucun commentaire:

Enregistrer un commentaire