Red Economist
18th May 2009, 20:57
I am posting this first off because I am politically inexperienced (no history of being part of any socialist organisation and second I feel that these ideas are only useful if they are in general circulation of some sort. I feel obliged therefore to seek advice for more active and experienced leftists, as well as put these ideas out in the open.
(if you can reccommend any other websites worth posting this on, please feel free to let me know and I will do so to the best of my ability)
the central problem with socialism in the 20th century was that it always became elitist, either by a group of intellectuals thinking they know best (such as the Bolsheviks) and certain bureaucrats taking a ruined society and then rebuilding it to their own advantage (stalin, Mao etc). essentially these problems were limited to a specific technological era, when capital could only be controlled by a minority through a centralised system;
Russia broke free of capitalism, only to be trapped by the technological confines of the filing cabinet- proletarian democracy was simply filed away until futher notice and the party took over politics proffessionally and the proletariat lost control once more.
the revolution in Russia in febuary 1917 (which combined strikes, protests, mutinites and created the soviets) and october 1917 were proletarian in nature but not in outcome; the first established a liberal bourgeoisise system, and the second a bolshevik intellectual dictatorship (if in doubt- by the middle of 1918, virtually all factory committees in the soviet union had failed or been abolished- the direct control of production by the workers had failed and the soviets were under a bolshevik-SR monopoly).
taking this into account (which I realise is probably a controversial position; third campist at best), we know what a revolution looks like, but not how it is organised in the long run. hence, we end up having to find a decentralised medium for which each worker may communicate, discuss and vote as equals, rather than under the authority of a chairman (who ussally ends up deciding the debate). I do not doubt that their are good 'accountable' chairmans out there, simply that they are capable of allowing a truely communist system to develop.
[I fully accept that the above contains revisionist, pessemist and oppurtunist arguements, but i feel it nessacary to expalin why I am reccomending this position in the first place]
the internet is therefore the most current innovation which could provide such a medium, and remove a single individual from the job of counting/rigging the votes and controlling the debate, and give direct control of the democratic process to the workers themselves, and not an illusion of it.
the following set of principles are based on a combinition of marxist-leninist, trotskyist and e-democractic principles. as you will see, they do not take into account practical elements such as internationalism, inter-leftist solidarity and direct action- but are merely a layout for an internet based organisation or E-Soviet. in the simplest form; a group of people get together and use a forum to debate, direct political action and to co-ordinate agitation throughout the rest of the internet; a kind of electronic Internationale.
1. E-Direct Democracy
-The Internet is the most powerful and decentralised/ horizontalist medium of communication currently available to organise any association, since Centralised media (such as Television, Radio, The Printed Word and others) are dependent on a centralised and bureaucratic system of control and are also dependent on the capitalist system, since they are based on the ownership of capital and therefore ‘cost’ money, and frees a proletarian movement from the control of capitalist economy as far as possible.
-The Internet is also a global medium which appeals to everyone irrespective of nationality, but is still limited to actual internet access.
2. ‘Open and Equal Access’
-The Equality of Rights of members is essential to any socialist organisation, and amongst this membership there must be universal suffrage and access to information regarding policy and political questions.
-All Votes should be made in Public rather than in secrect. this in part safegaurds against oppurtunist, dogmatist and sectarian individuals entering an organisation, since it will make them exposed if they disagree.
3. Free Exchange, Enquiry and Discussion
-The Free exchange of media footage (images, video footage, text and downloads) must also form part of the process of a free process of enquiry and discussion within an association, since this ensures the direct provision and exchange of evidence to support or refute arguments as well as giving the potential for a much deeper cultural and intellectual life within an organisation.
4. Democratic Unity/Centralism
-Members must be allowed to democratically discuss decisions within an organisation, but then should/must comply to the decisions made by the majority of the membership, even if they do in fact disagree with them.
-individuals who refuse to accept to abide by the majority decision should be invited to leave the organisation, or be expelled in the event that inaction or indecision on their part becomes habitual and counter-productive.
5. Voluntary Labour and fluid Vanguardism
-the individual who proposes a policy, should in fact be the one who implements it.
This tries to prevent any specific individual from monopolising control and undermining the democratic structure through professionally administering a set of policies. the 'vangaurd' in this sense, should be the indivdiuals with the nessacary experience to deal with a problem- but inorder to work, this cannot be the same set of individuals (i.e lenin does all the thinking, stalin robs the banks etc.) each individual represents a specific historial nessecity, and is therefore the best at expressing it.
so certain individuals can deal with some situations better than others, but they can't deal with all situations all the time. hence there is a vangaurd (which leads), but it's membership is inconsistent and therefore 'fluid'.
6. Scientific Analysis of Society
-That each problem and situation be viewed with regards to the necessity of a solution and the practicality of each solution in turn.
-Decisions should not be made on ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ arguments, but instead should be deeply set with an understanding of the objective situation presented.
7. The Right and Duty of Political Education
-Each member of an organisation must be educated to understand the objective circumstances of a situation through historical and dialectical materialism and therefore upon a scientific basis in order to prevent unpractical, destructive or counter-productive modes of thought and action, and enhance the ability of members to understand the concrete nature of any situation.
-Political Education should take place through a method of self-education as opposed to an involuntary process of indoctrination by another party members in the name of ‘teaching’ them.
8. Criticism and Self-Criticism
-the continual application of the scientific method to personal, social, political and economic situations requires that it be a free, open and creative process built on a system of universally constructive criticism and self-criticism, that attempts to work to overcome contradictions in development and to subject the process of development to a better degree of conscious control.
please comment and I will try to reply as reguarly as I can.
(if you can reccommend any other websites worth posting this on, please feel free to let me know and I will do so to the best of my ability)
the central problem with socialism in the 20th century was that it always became elitist, either by a group of intellectuals thinking they know best (such as the Bolsheviks) and certain bureaucrats taking a ruined society and then rebuilding it to their own advantage (stalin, Mao etc). essentially these problems were limited to a specific technological era, when capital could only be controlled by a minority through a centralised system;
Russia broke free of capitalism, only to be trapped by the technological confines of the filing cabinet- proletarian democracy was simply filed away until futher notice and the party took over politics proffessionally and the proletariat lost control once more.
the revolution in Russia in febuary 1917 (which combined strikes, protests, mutinites and created the soviets) and october 1917 were proletarian in nature but not in outcome; the first established a liberal bourgeoisise system, and the second a bolshevik intellectual dictatorship (if in doubt- by the middle of 1918, virtually all factory committees in the soviet union had failed or been abolished- the direct control of production by the workers had failed and the soviets were under a bolshevik-SR monopoly).
taking this into account (which I realise is probably a controversial position; third campist at best), we know what a revolution looks like, but not how it is organised in the long run. hence, we end up having to find a decentralised medium for which each worker may communicate, discuss and vote as equals, rather than under the authority of a chairman (who ussally ends up deciding the debate). I do not doubt that their are good 'accountable' chairmans out there, simply that they are capable of allowing a truely communist system to develop.
[I fully accept that the above contains revisionist, pessemist and oppurtunist arguements, but i feel it nessacary to expalin why I am reccomending this position in the first place]
the internet is therefore the most current innovation which could provide such a medium, and remove a single individual from the job of counting/rigging the votes and controlling the debate, and give direct control of the democratic process to the workers themselves, and not an illusion of it.
the following set of principles are based on a combinition of marxist-leninist, trotskyist and e-democractic principles. as you will see, they do not take into account practical elements such as internationalism, inter-leftist solidarity and direct action- but are merely a layout for an internet based organisation or E-Soviet. in the simplest form; a group of people get together and use a forum to debate, direct political action and to co-ordinate agitation throughout the rest of the internet; a kind of electronic Internationale.
1. E-Direct Democracy
-The Internet is the most powerful and decentralised/ horizontalist medium of communication currently available to organise any association, since Centralised media (such as Television, Radio, The Printed Word and others) are dependent on a centralised and bureaucratic system of control and are also dependent on the capitalist system, since they are based on the ownership of capital and therefore ‘cost’ money, and frees a proletarian movement from the control of capitalist economy as far as possible.
-The Internet is also a global medium which appeals to everyone irrespective of nationality, but is still limited to actual internet access.
2. ‘Open and Equal Access’
-The Equality of Rights of members is essential to any socialist organisation, and amongst this membership there must be universal suffrage and access to information regarding policy and political questions.
-All Votes should be made in Public rather than in secrect. this in part safegaurds against oppurtunist, dogmatist and sectarian individuals entering an organisation, since it will make them exposed if they disagree.
3. Free Exchange, Enquiry and Discussion
-The Free exchange of media footage (images, video footage, text and downloads) must also form part of the process of a free process of enquiry and discussion within an association, since this ensures the direct provision and exchange of evidence to support or refute arguments as well as giving the potential for a much deeper cultural and intellectual life within an organisation.
4. Democratic Unity/Centralism
-Members must be allowed to democratically discuss decisions within an organisation, but then should/must comply to the decisions made by the majority of the membership, even if they do in fact disagree with them.
-individuals who refuse to accept to abide by the majority decision should be invited to leave the organisation, or be expelled in the event that inaction or indecision on their part becomes habitual and counter-productive.
5. Voluntary Labour and fluid Vanguardism
-the individual who proposes a policy, should in fact be the one who implements it.
This tries to prevent any specific individual from monopolising control and undermining the democratic structure through professionally administering a set of policies. the 'vangaurd' in this sense, should be the indivdiuals with the nessacary experience to deal with a problem- but inorder to work, this cannot be the same set of individuals (i.e lenin does all the thinking, stalin robs the banks etc.) each individual represents a specific historial nessecity, and is therefore the best at expressing it.
so certain individuals can deal with some situations better than others, but they can't deal with all situations all the time. hence there is a vangaurd (which leads), but it's membership is inconsistent and therefore 'fluid'.
6. Scientific Analysis of Society
-That each problem and situation be viewed with regards to the necessity of a solution and the practicality of each solution in turn.
-Decisions should not be made on ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ arguments, but instead should be deeply set with an understanding of the objective situation presented.
7. The Right and Duty of Political Education
-Each member of an organisation must be educated to understand the objective circumstances of a situation through historical and dialectical materialism and therefore upon a scientific basis in order to prevent unpractical, destructive or counter-productive modes of thought and action, and enhance the ability of members to understand the concrete nature of any situation.
-Political Education should take place through a method of self-education as opposed to an involuntary process of indoctrination by another party members in the name of ‘teaching’ them.
8. Criticism and Self-Criticism
-the continual application of the scientific method to personal, social, political and economic situations requires that it be a free, open and creative process built on a system of universally constructive criticism and self-criticism, that attempts to work to overcome contradictions in development and to subject the process of development to a better degree of conscious control.
please comment and I will try to reply as reguarly as I can.