Declaration for revolutionary organization, Belgrade (2011)

3 posts / 0 new
Last post
Fred
Declaration for revolutionary organization, Belgrade (2011)
Printer-friendly version

The discussion that follows was prompted by the article: Declaration for revolutionary organization, Belgrade (2011). The discussion was initiated by Fred.
Below is the discussion so far. Feel free to add your own comments!

Fred
Emerging from what is left of

Emerging from what is left of the hell-hole that Yugoslavia became, this revolutionary declaration from Birov is especially welcome and heart-warming. It's also extremely coherent and easy to read. The "subversive potential which the existing workers' struggle holds today" is brought up and counter-posed against the repressive imprisonment of the Union's apparatus, which functions to stifle all worker-self-organization. Birov wants to work against this, through informal groups, and says that "workers' struggle must be founded in the workplace" which is the centre of production. But is there not a danger here, of workers becoming prisoners not just of the unions - a danger Birov is very aware of - but of their own factories. To spread the revolution, and realize the "subversive potential" of the working class, surely we have to take to the streets as well, and engage the wider population?

Birov is also (I think) wary of the political party. After mentioning the October Revolutionary period, they talk about "victims of party instrumentation and suppression of any form of workers self-organization." Is this a reference to what happened with the Bolsheviks? I'm not sure. If it is then it's a pity that those who only too well register the mistakes the Bolsheviks made in the awful circumstances of revolutionary collapse, can't also recognize the immense achievement the Bolsheviks made in assisting the class to carry out the revolution in the first place.

A final point. Birov writes: "We see ourselves not as an organization which necessarily tends towards growth in numbers and thus puts itself as a goal, an idea which often results in radical activism; nor do we consider ourselves as a kind of vanguard of the working class which dictates its interests. " This sounds a bit like the ICC or ICT here. Though of course the communist left doesn't see itself as a vanguard that "dictates" the interests, or any other aspect, of the working class in it's fight against capital. It only seeks to intervene to point the way forward, which is what Birov wants to do as well.

So all the best to both Birov and the ICC if they are to meet and discuss. May the result be fruitful for the wider class. We need our revolutionary groups so much at this time.

Fred
In the post above I said that

In the post above I said that Birov was 'wary' of the proletarian party. I was wrong. Birov says: "We reject the party as completely inadequate for revolutionary organizing of the working class." So that's clear enough. Or is it? For Birov ( which describes itself as an 'anarcho-syndicalist propaganda organization') also states in the same piece: "In this imminent conflict revolutionaries must recognize autonomously organized workers as the revolutionary vanguard in the final and decisive battle against the old order and for the society of free producers.". Stirring stuff!

But pause a moment. Birov says that "revolutionaries" (like Birov presumably) must recognize some other self-organized workers, different from Birov, as being "the revolutionary vanguard". But isn't Birov itself a revolutionary vanguard? Well, at the present moment it certainly is; there being no autonomously organized workers around other than Birov.
So what is Birov saying? Is it saying that we need a revolutionary vanguard now - in the absence of a self-organized class - to point the way forward for the class. But that when the class is sufficiently conscious of it's task, and the revolution is achieved and the transition is well and safely underway, that Birov, and organizations of revolutionaries like them, can fade and wither away with the state so to speak, as the class becomes it's own vanguard....

Isn't this the same as saying we need a party? We need an organization of revolutionary vanguards on a global basis (the International Communist Party) to safeguard and guide the progress of the revolution; to ensure it doesn't get confused by bourgeois elements, until that moment when the party can recognize the job is done, and both party, all vanguard workers and all classes finally disappear. In short Birov has got it right. We must recognize "autonomously organized workers as the revolutionary vanguard". On a world basis this can only be the Party.