Transmitting our ideas

[Pogue]

I'm ocming form a specifically anarchist position but this is relevant to all comrades on the board.

With anarchism especially, we hold the ideas of internationalism and the workers holding no nation or alleigances outside of their class. As such we'd call for workers to unite within some form of internationalist organisation so they can struggle together as a class. We also hold a number of other positions which call for a change in how the working class views themselves and the world.

Do comrades think in order to create a revolution we'll need all of the workers of the world to be bonafied anarchists themselves, believing in the theory or having that as a self-label? For example, when a revolution happens, will the majority of workers need to understand anachism or communism in itself for the revolution to happen, or will they just need to have a small degree of class udnerstanding. To what extent, basically, do workers have to be theoretically aware to make a succesful revolution?

[Tower of Bebel]

Do comrades think in order to create a revolution we'll need all of the workers of the world to be bonafied anarchists themselves, believing in the theory or having that as a self-label? To what extent, basically, do workers have to be theoretically aware to make a succesful revolution?
I don't think it's possible to have a fully theoretically aware majority in society because as long as capitalism remains the dominant mode of production liberalism and other capitalist ideologies will affect the minds of the proletarians. That's why Marx fought against ideologies. Ideologies of the past and present) were always capitalist (like French nationalism in 1789, 1792, 1830 and 1848) or feudal ideologies that can only serve the struggle of the ruling classes. The bourgeoisie had the possibility to elaborate their ideas when capitalism was economically growing out of feudalism. Communism however doesn't grow out of capitalism.

This doesn't mean that the proletariat can never consciously change society. The proletariat has two advantages. One is the phenomenon of capitalist crisis. Such a crisis weakens capitalism which in turn means a delegitimation of its ideologies (that's what's happening to neoliberalism today for instance). This is however not enough because pseudo-anticapitalism like fascism could replace liberalism without tackling capitalism itself. On the other hand the power of the proletariat lies in both it's majority position in society and it's organizational strength. This means that it can build strong organizations along class lines that could train the proletariat in class struggle and theory. yet as long as capitalism is the dominant mode of production the proletariat will remain devided. Not every worker will join, support or vote for a proletarian movement or party. But the crisis of capitalism forces the proletariat to take action. It depends on the course of this action whether or not they change society. It's up to the more conscious elements to persuade their comrades and colleagues to break with capitalism.

This is eventually the reason behind the vanguard concept. Instead of keeping the conscious elements unorganized communists try to organize these conscious proletarians in order to preserve their knowledge and experience. This vanguard can only be a vanguard when it is linked to the class it supports. When the so called vanguard has almost no real connections with the workers and their struggles we can only speak of a sect.

So in my opinion a strong anarcho-syndicalist union like the old CNT was a vanguard of the working class (and peasants). Its organization helped the proletarian to counter bourgeois efforts to crush the revolution.

[Rangi]

Until Marx puts out a music video or Lenin gets his own reality TV show then I'd guess that the proletariat will remain ignorant of such choices as what revolutionary label they should sport.

You are assuming that the proletariat read books. They don't. The real working class in western countries would rather watch boobies on the TV than participate in the restructuring of the status quo.

What Englishman would bother with politics when he can own a motor car?

-George B. Shaw

[Nwoye]

Do comrades think in order to create a revolution we'll need all of the workers of the world to be bonafied anarchists themselves, believing in the theory or having that as a self-label?

I don't believe it's possible for them to share an ideology. There are just too many cleavages in opinion which prevent the entire world from embracing communism/anarchism. I believe Marx granted that there were disparities in opinion among the bourgeoisie, so it makes sense that there would be disparities in opinion among the proletariat.

[Glorious Union]

Most people in the world are and prefer to be ignorant of the political process; they would rather pick a side depending upon basic news they hear rather than read a book or study about it. Therefor, because most people are ignorant, we have to be ignorant ourselves to convince them of the righteousness of our cause.

[Tzonteyotl]

There's quite a bit of derision in here aimed at the proletariat. Strange.

To start, the ignorance some have of political/economic/social issues isn't necessarily because they don't care. Also, the consumerism which some here have alluded to is part of their conditioning under capitalism. It's not like they're born wanting loads of material objects and hating politics. Given that they're taught in school from an early age that this (capitalism and bourgeois democracy) is it and there are no alternatives, it's quite understandable, if not expected, that many would choose to not even bother getting involved with it.

Also, what are these assumptions about the working class people have made here based upon? I'm working class and I read quite a lot. I know plenty of working class people who read and have an interest in politics (though not necessarily in a radical sense). To speak about the proletariat in this derogatory fashion is to solidify our defeat before we even try.

[Kibbutznik]

Part of what we have to do, at least for the interim, is find more subtle ways of spreading our ideas. This means trying to use artistic media as a way of raising socialist consciousness. I know it seems like a repulsive idea, but given the state that the modern left is in America, it's going to have to be part of our overall agitation.

More decentralised art forms are more ideal for this. There is still room to spread some of our ideas through media like music, novels and comics. It's no substitute for labour unions and overtly political action, but sometimes just planting a gnawing little idea in some kid's head that there might be a better way is enough to get him to go to the library and pick up a book on the subject.

[cenv]

I'm ocming form a specifically anarchist position but this is relevant to all comrades on the board.

With anarchism especially, we hold the ideas of internationalism and the workers holding no nation or alleigances outside of their class. As such we'd call for workers to unite within some form of internationalist organisation so they can struggle together as a class. We also hold a number of other positions which call for a change in how the working class views themselves and the world.

Do comrades think in order to create a revolution we'll need all of the workers of the world to be bonafied anarchists themselves, believing in the theory or having that as a self-label? For example, when a revolution happens, will the majority of workers need to understand anachism or communism in itself for the revolution to happen, or will they just need to have a small degree of class udnerstanding. To what extent, basically, do workers have to be theoretically aware to make a succesful revolution?
Communism and anarchism are based on empowering the working class. Thing is, it's kind of hard to empower the working class if the working class doesn't know they're being empowered. This isn't to say that any given worker needs to know the finer points of Marxist or anarchist theory -- in fact, being firmly rooted in ideologies can only hurt the revolution. However, workers need to know what they are fighting for, what their concrete goals are, and how they intend to get there. Reorganizing society along the lines of working-class power does entail the working class being self-aware and self-possessed. Otherwise, the revolution will disintegrate into traditional state capitalism, with a strong leadership calling all the shots and the working class playing the blind follower.

There's no need for every worker to know the difference between anarcho-syndicalism and anarcho-communism, but there's nothing "small" about the role the working class needs to play in a successful revolution. It's just a different kind of thought... rather than being able to regurgitate the Das Kapital, workers will need to be able to be able to think independently and creatively about where they want to go and how to get there.


Part of what we have to do, at least for the interim, is find more subtle ways of spreading our ideas. This means trying to use artistic media as a way of raising socialist consciousness. I know it seems like a repulsive idea, but given the state that the modern left is in America, it's going to have to be part of our overall agitation.

More decentralised art forms are more ideal for this. There is still room to spread some of our ideas through media like music, novels and comics. It's no substitute for labour unions and overtly political action, but sometimes just planting a gnawing little idea in some kid's head that there might be a better way is enough to get him to go to the library and pick up a book on the subject.

I don't think it's a repulsive idea... we need to embrace different ways of spreading our ideas. If we can't present our ideas in creative ways that get people to question themselves and their ideas, we're toast. Part of this is also taking advantage of technology.

[MarxSchmarx]

Part of what we have to do, at least for the interim, is find more subtle ways of spreading our ideas. This means trying to use artistic media as a way of raising socialist consciousness. I know it seems like a repulsive idea, but given the state that the modern left is in America, it's going to have to be part of our overall agitation.

More decentralised art forms are more ideal for this. There is still room to spread some of our ideas through media like music, novels and comics. It's no substitute for labour unions and overtly political action, but sometimes just planting a gnawing little idea in some kid's head that there might be a better way is enough to get him to go to the library and pick up a book on the subject.

I would add video games to your list. This is a field that is still relatively wide open and has immense influence on the youth today.

As to the OP's point, I don`t think it`s necessary that most workers consider themselves "communists" or what have you. But I think it is necessary that they be committed to the self-liberation of the working class. For instance, most workers in occupied factories probably haven`t read the "18th brumaire of louis bonaparte." At a deep level, most workers understand perfectly well that they are being screwed. In some respects, a focus on history and political theory can be a smoke screen to get directly to that inherent sense of injustice. Sure, knowledge of theory and history is crucial, but it shouldn't be the only, or even prominent, means to spread our ideas.

[Bitter Ashes]

I would add video games to your list. This is a field that is still relatively wide open and has immense influence on the youth today.

I actualy had the exact same thought yesterday you know? Specifically with EVE Online. Probably the best way to show people that communism works would be to give them a working example.
See if you can get a revolution going in one of the 0.0 territories in EVE and start up a commune there. Use it as a working model of the comparisons in lifestyle between a capitalist and communist state.
I'd help! I'd be intrested to see how it turns out! ^^

[Pogue]

I actualy had the exact same thought yesterday you know? Specifically with EVE Online. Probably the best way to show people that communism works would be to give them a working example.
See if you can get a revolution going in one of the 0.0 territories in EVE and start up a commune there. Use it as a working model of the comparisons in lifestyle between a capitalist and communist state.
I'd help! I'd be intrested to see how it turns out! ^^

That wont work because this isn't a matter of 'showing people communism works'. We're not trying to forward our 'product' of communism and trying to get people to buy into it, i.e. wear a hammer and sickle, wear a red shirt etc. We're trying to show them they could organise society radiclaly differently, show them their class power and unity, and the better way to live, which will eventually lead to communism.

This is why its pointless to try and convince people of 'communism'. Theres no need to do that. You need to just them to realise we need a revolution to fix society.

And showing people a commune working on an online game isn't going to convert anyone is it? Lets be serious. Even if it did, it'd be one or two people, and its an ONLINE GAME. It has no relevancy to reality.

I'm sorry but its an awful idea, completely futile.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Until Marx puts out a music video or Lenin gets his own reality TV show then I'd guess that the proletariat will remain ignorant of such choices as what revolutionary label they should sport.

You are assuming that the proletariat read books. They don't. The real working class in western countries would rather watch boobies on the TV than participate in the restructuring of the status quo.


Fuck you.

If people feel threatened they look for alternatives as can be seen by the fact that people are more open to leftism then before. During times of crises people start to sort there shit out.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

I actualy had the exact same thought yesterday you know? Specifically with EVE Online. Probably the best way to show people that communism works would be to give them a working example.
See if you can get a revolution going in one of the 0.0 territories in EVE and start up a commune there. Use it as a working model of the comparisons in lifestyle between a capitalist and communist state.
I'd help! I'd be intrested to see how it turns out! ^^

Sorry but this seems like an excuse to sit on your arse and play computer games for the revolution.

[Pogue]

Fuck you.

If people feel threatened they look for alternatives as can be seen by the fact that people are more open to leftism then before. During times of crises people start to sort there shit out.

True but people will only buy our ideas if we make it relevant to them, and so for most people, considering reading Kapital or The Conquest of Bread will not come into there head, and if it did, its unlikely to convert your average person to communism. You need to make them clear of their class role, and how to solve it.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

True but people will only buy our ideas if we make it relevant to them, and so for most people, considering reading Kapital or The Conquest of Bread will not come into there head, and if it did, its unlikely to convert your average person to communism. You need to make them clear of their class role, and how to solve it.

Yes this is true. Politics needs to be interesting either because its relevant or good to read (should be both).

This does not mean playing online space simulators while thinking its anything other then entertainment.

[Tower of Bebel]

If only it were that easy to make the workers think for themselves instead of being dependent of bourgeois liberalism, nationalism or the ideas of socialist betrayers.

[Rawthentic]

Communism and anarchism are based on empowering the working class. Thing is, it's kind of hard to empower the working class if the working class doesn't know they're being empowered. This isn't to say that any given worker needs to know the finer points of Marxist or anarchist theory -- in fact, being firmly rooted in ideologies can only hurt the revolution. However, workers need to know what they are fighting for, what their concrete goals are, and how they intend to get there. Reorganizing society along the lines of working-class power does entail the working class being self-aware and self-possessed. Otherwise, the revolution will disintegrate into traditional state capitalism, with a strong leadership calling all the shots and the working class playing the blind follower.

There's no need for every worker to know the difference between anarcho-syndicalism and anarcho-communism, but there's nothing "small" about the role the working class needs to play in a successful revolution. It's just a different kind of thought... rather than being able to regurgitate the Das Kapital, workers will need to be able to be able to think independently and creatively about where they want to go and how to get there.How is "being firmly rooted in ideologies" going to hurt the revolution?

Any revolutionary movement is necessarily led by specific politics, programs, and agendas, that entail the goals of that movement. It is our job to analyze not its intentions, but where those politics objectively lead.

There are countless things that spring up in the midst of struggle that require summation and theoretical engagement to arrive at (many times not conclusive) conclusions.

Take imperialism. Working people MUST grasp the differences between left-communist and a marxist leninist take on that issue. If they don't, how can they consciously build an anti-imperialist movement. This applies to other issues as well.

So, I think it is a bit agnostic and eclectic to say that workers don't need to be firmly rooted in ideologies. If you mean not being dogmatic, I definitely agree. But there is a need (it should be obvious) for intense and concrete theoretical engagement to solve the pressing problems that face humanity.

And, in fact, I like the part of your post where you say that a revolution that does not empower (theoretically and practically) the working class has the possibility of degenerating (as the chinese revolution dramatically proved - but thats for another thread).

This is the theoretical reason behind the maoist theory of cultural revolution. Within socialism, there NEEDS to be wave after wave of political struggle that engage the masses with the burning questions facing their society and state (capitalist restoration, imperialist encirclement and a host of other things). Mao broke from the methods stalin used to deal with the contradictions inherent in socialism. Instead of mao and the cpp pointing the gun at the the leaders within the ccp that were taking the capitalist road with their policies and programs, Mao (metaphorically) "gave the gun" to the masses to use and point at those who were deviating from socialist transformation. There is a world of difference between the two.

So, yes, working class empowerment is incredibly dear. Unlike those who believe that socialism is all about developing the productive forces, where working people exist to work, work, work, communist theory needs to understand that the masses make history, and, without developing their communist consciousness to transform social, property relations, communism can never be possible.

[Rawthentic]

also:

Both communism and anarchism profess to be based on "empowering the working class."

Fine.

But these two different theories have radically different means to do so, even when their intentions are nearly the same. So, what is needed is a scientific and critical appraisal of those politics and methods to see what they mean, who leads, it, and where they can end up (ie can this really make revolution?).

[Bitter Ashes]

Suit yourself. Just let me know when the majority are convinced about this revolution thingie. I'll be here until then.
*shrugs her shoulders and goes back to mining more asteroids*

[al8]

My position is that communists and anarchists need to have "all their claws out" to loan a native frase. Doing design work on a computer game indented to rais the profile and understanding of communism might suit the abilities and interest of some comrades. We don't know, and neither do I think we have the imagination to see all the broad spectrum of possible successes that endeavour could produce to desidedly regect it. So I don't think H-L-V-S and Comrade Joe should so carelessly dismiss that suggestion.

The name of this thread is; Transmitting our Ideas. And it should be filled with suggestions of avenues that we could take in that regard, rather than just do what I find so often is done; Nothing is stated but intentions and in very general terms what needs to happen, but specific means and goals are scuffed (as utopian, more often than not).

I think it ties to Marxist being way to mired in macro-history and oblivious to micro-history, how things happen down low. Or how they could happen down low. Theory won't help in this regard. So we need to get creative. And to be crative I suggest we take up an attitude rule of a crative profession, theater work. The rule is as follows; 1. You may never deny a suggestion, only say yes to it. 2. Unless you have a better suggestion of what should be done. That is you can say "Yes but" never "no".

[Plagueround]

My position is that communists and anarchists need to have "all their claws out" to loan a native frase. Doing design work on a computer game indented to rais the profile and understanding of communism might suit the abilities and interest of some comrades. So I don't think H-L-V-S and Comrade Joe should so carelessly dismiss that suggestion.


Indeed. Reaching people through these kinds of mediums also demonstrates that communists are ordinary people who have many of the same interests as others, and not crazed intellectuals on a power trip (which is the stereotype I've been met with by quite a few people).

[Pogue]

Indeed. Reaching people through these kinds of mediums also demonstrates that communists are ordinary people who have many of the same interests as others, and not crazed intellectuals on a power trip (which is the stereotype I've been met with by quite a few people).

Its so irrelevant though. You think by looking at a video game operating according to communist principles they're going to be inspired to risk it all in a revolution to liberate their class?

What happens in a video game has no real reflection on real life, its just a silly idea, it wont convince anyone. Imagine it.

OK guys we're setting up communism on EVE. Everyone come to this location and see it working.

*Bunch of EVE players, MMORPG players come along, see a GAME where apparently the player oprate accroding to communist principles*

Oh wow, look, those spaceships are sharing the wealth of the in game society, suddenly I realise my nation is irrelevant, and I must be united with my fellow workers across the world and organise in this manner to overthrow opprsion.

No way, thats stupid, and it wont work.

[Plagueround]

Its so irrelevant though. You think by looking at a video game operating according to communist principles they're going to be inspired to risk it all in a revolution to liberate their class?

Inspiration comes from the strangest of places. I certainly am glad I don't spend so much time playing video games anymore and have many other things I devote my time to (hopefully more so once I get into a day job that doesn't have such stupid hours), but I can tell you I've met some extremely influential people who's ideas are just as valid as anyone I've met elsewhere.


What happens in a video game has no real reflection on real life, its just a silly idea, it wont convince anyone. Imagine it.

Video games, especially MMORPGS, can have a drastic effect on people's social views. You're essentially playing an adventure game with an integrated chat room.


OK guys we're setting up communism on EVE. Everyone come to this location and see it working.

*Bunch of EVE players, MMORPG players come along, see a GAME where apparently the player oprate accroding to communist principles*

Oh wow, look, those spaceships are sharing the wealth of the in game society, suddenly I realise my nation is irrelevant, and I must be united with my fellow workers across the world and organise in this manner to overthrow opprsion.

I think you're over thinking this. I simply meant not being afraid to express one's views in game. If you've ever played such games (given that you went so far as to read the WoW manga I'd say you probably have), you should know that you have the opportunity to strike up conversations with numerous people you'd never have a chance to talk to otherwise.

As a side note however, since you brought it up...my siblings and my sister's boyfriend run a casual WoW guild together (In b4 LOLWOWNERD). We decided to run our guild bank on communist priniciples after I outlined how it would work. Everyone agreed and it's been a big success for us, and we enjoy that we don't have to live in that fucking game to have fun and get the things we need. As someone who has little time for gaming these days, it's rather nice. My sister's boyfriend in particular is impressed with how little gold he has to spend on things he normally had to spend hours farming for because it's all there for him to use and contribute to. He is now asking me more about my politics every time I see him.


No way, thats stupid, and it wont work.

It would be a terrible idea for someone to take these principles, attempt to implement them in a video game, and have that be the extent of their "contribution" to our goals ("Socialism in One Video Game" is a rather sad goal), but I also don't think you should dismiss the potential for communication they offer.

[Bitter Ashes]

I think I may have opened up a can of worms so I'll just be quiet :(

[Killfacer]

Until Marx puts out a music video or Lenin gets his own reality TV show then I'd guess that the proletariat will remain ignorant of such choices as what revolutionary label they should sport.

You are assuming that the proletariat read books. They don't. The real working class in western countries would rather watch boobies on the TV than participate in the restructuring of the status quo.

What Englishman would bother with politics when he can own a motor car?

-George B. Shaw
:thumbdown:

People aren't interested in revolutionary lables. That's the problem with a lot of people on this site. They don't want to be anarchists/communists/technocrats. People want stuff which is tangibly beneficial to them and others like them and having lefties squabbling over some book 24 hours is clearly not beneficial to them. Until the left gets over its petty arguments and starts trying to appeal the the workers, it's going no where.

You're another "socialist" with contempt for the working classes. Why are you even here?

[al8]

And people aren't interested in pessimism, vague goals and poverty of ideas and methods.

[cenv]

How is "being firmly rooted in ideologies" going to hurt the revolution?

Any revolutionary movement is necessarily led by specific politics, programs, and agendas, that entail the goals of that movement. It is our job to analyze not its intentions, but where those politics objectively lead.

There are countless things that spring up in the midst of struggle that require summation and theoretical engagement to arrive at (many times not conclusive) conclusions.

Take imperialism. Working people MUST grasp the differences between left-communist and a marxist leninist take on that issue. If they don't, how can they consciously build an anti-imperialist movement. This applies to other issues as well.

So, I think it is a bit agnostic and eclectic to say that workers don't need to be firmly rooted in ideologies. If you mean not being dogmatic, I definitely agree. But there is a need (it should be obvious) for intense and concrete theoretical engagement to solve the pressing problems that face humanity.

And, in fact, I like the part of your post where you say that a revolution that does not empower (theoretically and practically) the working class has the possibility of degenerating (as the chinese revolution dramatically proved - but thats for another thread).

This is the theoretical reason behind the maoist theory of cultural revolution. Within socialism, there NEEDS to be wave after wave of political struggle that engage the masses with the burning questions facing their society and state (capitalist restoration, imperialist encirclement and a host of other things). Mao broke from the methods stalin used to deal with the contradictions inherent in socialism. Instead of mao and the cpp pointing the gun at the the leaders within the ccp that were taking the capitalist road with their policies and programs, Mao (metaphorically) "gave the gun" to the masses to use and point at those who were deviating from socialist transformation. There is a world of difference between the two.

So, yes, working class empowerment is incredibly dear. Unlike those who believe that socialism is all about developing the productive forces, where working people exist to work, work, work, communist theory needs to understand that the masses make history, and, without developing their communist consciousness to transform social, property relations, communism can never be possible.
I agree that the working class needs to be theoretically engaged. As you point out, working-class empowerment implies that the masses are discussing and debating burning issues. In fact, this is one reason socialist parties that focus on working within the system crumble so easily -- because they fail to engage workers theoretically. Working-class cultural revolution (and I'm using this term generally, since I'm not a Maoist) is all about the working class becoming theoretically active, since bourgeois culture is all about the working class passively consuming ideologies.

Of course, the working class can't become theoretically engaged without becoming independent. We have a lot to learn from the great thinkers of the past, but we also need to be able to apply communist theory to the material circumstances we face. Communism is rooted in reality. The working class really is exploited. Revolution really is the only practical way to build a society based on working-class power. The class struggle does exist. So when I say that we can't be rooted in ideology, I don't mean theoretical engagement isn't important. I mean that our theory is a reflection of the concrete world we live in, not the other way around.

The difference between bourgeois and proletarian culture is that bourgeois culture distorts the way people view reality by forcing them to look through the lens of bourgeois ideology. Proletarian culture makes thought a tool for understanding and changing the world.

And I think being theoretically engaged really comes down to actively participating in political discussion, debate, learning, thinking, etc. It doesn't mean everyone has to read Das Kapital -- this isn't going to happen, ever. It means being able to dig into pressing issues without having to use ideological mediations.


This is the theoretical reason behind the maoist theory of cultural revolution. Within socialism, there NEEDS to be wave after wave of political struggle that engage the masses with the burning questions facing their society and state (capitalist restoration, imperialist encirclement and a host of other things). Mao broke from the methods stalin used to deal with the contradictions inherent in socialism. Instead of mao and the cpp pointing the gun at the the leaders within the ccp that were taking the capitalist road with their policies and programs, Mao (metaphorically) "gave the gun" to the masses to use and point at those who were deviating from socialist transformation. There is a world of difference between the two.
I like the idea of spreading theoretical awareness being like "giving the gun to the masses." I don't know much about how this worked in Maoist China though...d'you know of any good places to read up on this?

[Rawthentic]

The difference between bourgeois and proletarian culture is that bourgeois culture distorts the way people view reality by forcing them to look through the lens of bourgeois ideology. Proletarian culture makes thought a tool for understanding and changing the world.
This is a good way of putting it.


I like the idea of spreading theoretical awareness being like "giving the gun to the masses." I don't know much about how this worked in Maoist China though...d'you know of any good places to read up on this?
Sure.

I made a thread a while back titled "Major Study on the Cultural Revolution in China", it can easily be found typing it in on the search feature.

I also recommend reading Zhang Chunquiao's "On Exercising All-Around Dictatorship Over the Bourgeoisie."

These two pieces are pretty important and in-depth. They'll give you a fresh take at this event that you probably haven't been exposed to.

[cenv]

Looking into those. Thanks.:)

[Rawthentic]

Let me know your thoughts on them (pm preferably).