Reclaimed Dasein
10th July 2009, 22:27
“You CLAIM to be a revolutionary so what are you doing? You believe in revolution so much, why aren't you picking up a rifle and fighting?”
This sounds a common attack by liberals, reformists, and ultra-leftists against revolutionary communists. The argument basically goes like this. You say you something is wrong with the world. You say we should change what is wrong with the world. Actions speak louder than worlds, so why aren't YOU doing something to change it.
A brief foray into history will prove instructive for illustrating the falsity of this attempt at emotional blackmail.
On the 22 of June 1941, Hitler launched an invasion of the Soviet Union in what was to be the bloodiest campaign in the history of the world. Panzers plunged like daggers towards Moscow, the capital city and vital hub for the entire war effort. The Soviet Union had not much time to devolop since Tsarist Russia and Moscow formed the core of all political, economic, and social institutions. In the Soviet Union, all roads lead to Moscow and if Moscow fell, so too would the Soviet Union.
The Soviets mounted a desperate defense. They conscripted every able body man and threw them against the advancing Nazi war machine. The tide first seemed to turn at Smolensk. The Soviets threw army after army until the Nazis encircled the city and the Soviet defenders fought their way through the lines to escape out of the encirclement. However, this bought time for the Soviets.
The Soviet leadership compelled every man, woman, and child to fight for the defense of Moscow. The leadership assigned them tasks which ran from training for combat to digging trenches and building fortification. The leadership waged a desperate defense. The Central Committee and other institutions went underground to conduct the governing of a nation from the sewers and subways. The Red Army fought a desperate battle refusing to surrender even when outnumbered, out gunned and surrounded.
The Soviet leadership called up forces and formed new armies from the Asian recruits behind the line of soldiers and fortifications. On November 7th, the Soviet Leadership held a parade of the new forces to raise moral and then promptly sent them to the front to defend against the Nazi onslaught.
The battle raged on, but ultimately the Nazi forces ground to a halt just outside of Moscow. The Soviets formed armies from Asian and surrounding areas with the time bought by the desperate defense. They threw them at the German forces. A counteroffensive began that wouldn't end until the German defeat at the Reichstag and the ultimate surrender of all Nazi forces.
What is the philosophical meaning of all of this?
1. All people live existentially.
What does it mean that all people live existentially? It means that all people live as though the future they imagine will come true. The fact that people live existentially doesn't mean that any particular future will come true. The Soviet soldiers who fought and died acted as though the future held the Nazis' defeat just as those soldiers who fought and lived. Those who fled the lines and advocated abandoning Moscow revealed they lived in a world of inevitable Soviet defeat.
A revolutionary lives as though there will be a revolution. He or she prepares the skills necessary for seizing the opportunities a crisis might present. Many proclaim the revolution, but act as if capitalism remains an internal fact of nature. We have a word for a revolutionary who professes communist ideals, has a mortgage, makes pragmatic career decisions, carefully manages an invest portfolio, and discourages others from taking action. The word for them is “capitalist.”
2. A victory may require a terrible price.
The Soviets could not defeat the Nazis without reforming the Red Army. The Soviets could not have formed the Red Army behind the lines without buying time. The Soviets paid for this time with the blood of the people.
One my may ask the relevances to our situation. Capitalism feeds on the blood of people across the world. IT starves millions though its system of finance and credit. It murders million through out right imperialism and the struggles to gain power. Finally, it enslaves and exploits billions for the sake of the wealthy few.
Only the revolutionary may justify this suffering. The revolutionary gambles, as all must gamble, on a future. The blood shed now must buy time for the creation of a revolutionary organization, a revolutionary movement. Only the universal overthrow of capitalism can justify the blood stained world just as only stopping the Nazis from engulfing the word could justify the carnage of so many lives thrown into the war machine.
3. All lives are equally valuable.
It seems that one must assert that all lives are equally valuable so that it appears hypocritical to risk the life of a soldier while the Soviet leadership remains safely protected. However, this shows a lack of historical knowledge and philosophical nuance. One should not ignore the numerous times the Soviet individuals in the leadership personally risked their lives to secure the Revolution. Moreover, the Battle of Moscow highlights the fundamental difference between the proletarian leadership of the Soviets and the elitism inherent in the Nazis.
Hitler sent the German people into danger. Yet, Hitler abandoned the German people when they were to suffer the humiliation of defeat. He risked his country and his people, but, in the end, he would not risk himself.
As the Nazi jaws closed around the Soviet capital, many of the Soviet leadership begged Stalin to abandon the city to the relative safety behind the Urals. Georgy Zukhov, the Russian General in command of the defense, told Stalin he could not assure the safety of the city. However, the leadership knew that they must remain united to save the Soviet Union. The decision fell into the hands of Joseph Stalin an Georgian ex-street tough who had risen to Secretary General.
He declared that the Soviet leadership would not retreat and Moscow would hold. He knew that no other location could coordinate the war as effectively and he hope the symbol of the Soviet government staying in Moscow could rally the people. The business of running a government at war moved from the Kremlin to the subways and sewers under Moscow. Stalin himself slept on his coat draped over a subway bench. He sacrificed millions of lives to save the Soviet Union, but from his position of privilege and leadership he gambled his own life for the greater good.
The same holds true for us now. We cannot allow our critics to blackmail us into abandoning organization or the necessary actions to build a revolution. However, we must gamble our lives along will all though standing on the front line against capitalism. I often hear brave talk of what people will do “when the revolution comes,” but how will one fight a revolution when one doesn't even know how to hold a rifle? How will one lead a nation when one doesn't know how to hold a meeting? They safely make such pledges because they believe they will never have to make good on them. They're right in fact. The burden revolution will fall to men and women much better than them.
The revolution is the task of those who will put themselves on a collision course capitalism. They do not retreat to the ivory tower of academia or the soft demands of some “alternative lifestyle.” Instead, they see where their work against capitalism puts them in solidarity with those suffering and dying today so as to best provoke a conflict and crisis. An academic with communist pretensions will rail against capitalism, but he or she will not train the students to resist it. A writer with communist pretensions will show the pain of our system, but her or she will not sacrifice any time or profits to change it. A worker with communist pretensions will point out exploitation inherent in the system, but they won't organize or unionize.
Thing about and raising awareness about the problem is not changing the problem. In the end, these people sacrifice nothing while clinging to a smug sense of moral authority. They believe that a revolution will never come, so they don't have to do anything now. They willingly admit their complicity with the system, but in they hearts they don't really believe all lives are equal. So they do nothing.
-
Let me make it clear. If you do not believe in a revolution and you reject my second premise then you have no justification for your life. You're reading this, which means you have money enough. Your life and family is not any more special than a family in Darfur. So you must give every excess dollar beyond food, shelter, and clothing. If you accept violence, but reject revolution you have no excuse for not firebombing every Wal-mart, assassinating every oil company CEO, or throwing bricks through every Starbuck's window.
So my response becomes
“You CLAIM there won't be a revolution so what are you doing? You don't believe in revolution so why aren't you sending all your money to Africa, joining the peace corp, or firebombing?”
In justification of the use of this historical example, I leave you with Benjamin's IV theses from On the Concept of History.
VI
To articulate what is past does not mean to recognize “how it really was.” It means to take control of a memory, as it flashes in a moment of danger. For historical materialism it is a question of holding fast to a picture of the past, just as if it had unexpectedly thrust itself, in a moment of danger, on the historical subject. The danger threatens the stock of tradition as much as its recipients. For both it is one and the same: handing itself over as the tool of the ruling classes. In every epoch, the attempt must be made to deliver tradition anew from the conformism which is on the point of overwhelming it. For the Messiah arrives not merely as the Redeemer; he also arrives as the vanquisher of the Anti-Christ. The only writer of history with the gift of setting alight the sparks of hope in the past, is the one who is convinced of this: that not even the dead will be safe from the enemy, if he is victorious. And this enemy has not ceased to be victorious.
This sounds a common attack by liberals, reformists, and ultra-leftists against revolutionary communists. The argument basically goes like this. You say you something is wrong with the world. You say we should change what is wrong with the world. Actions speak louder than worlds, so why aren't YOU doing something to change it.
A brief foray into history will prove instructive for illustrating the falsity of this attempt at emotional blackmail.
On the 22 of June 1941, Hitler launched an invasion of the Soviet Union in what was to be the bloodiest campaign in the history of the world. Panzers plunged like daggers towards Moscow, the capital city and vital hub for the entire war effort. The Soviet Union had not much time to devolop since Tsarist Russia and Moscow formed the core of all political, economic, and social institutions. In the Soviet Union, all roads lead to Moscow and if Moscow fell, so too would the Soviet Union.
The Soviets mounted a desperate defense. They conscripted every able body man and threw them against the advancing Nazi war machine. The tide first seemed to turn at Smolensk. The Soviets threw army after army until the Nazis encircled the city and the Soviet defenders fought their way through the lines to escape out of the encirclement. However, this bought time for the Soviets.
The Soviet leadership compelled every man, woman, and child to fight for the defense of Moscow. The leadership assigned them tasks which ran from training for combat to digging trenches and building fortification. The leadership waged a desperate defense. The Central Committee and other institutions went underground to conduct the governing of a nation from the sewers and subways. The Red Army fought a desperate battle refusing to surrender even when outnumbered, out gunned and surrounded.
The Soviet leadership called up forces and formed new armies from the Asian recruits behind the line of soldiers and fortifications. On November 7th, the Soviet Leadership held a parade of the new forces to raise moral and then promptly sent them to the front to defend against the Nazi onslaught.
The battle raged on, but ultimately the Nazi forces ground to a halt just outside of Moscow. The Soviets formed armies from Asian and surrounding areas with the time bought by the desperate defense. They threw them at the German forces. A counteroffensive began that wouldn't end until the German defeat at the Reichstag and the ultimate surrender of all Nazi forces.
What is the philosophical meaning of all of this?
1. All people live existentially.
What does it mean that all people live existentially? It means that all people live as though the future they imagine will come true. The fact that people live existentially doesn't mean that any particular future will come true. The Soviet soldiers who fought and died acted as though the future held the Nazis' defeat just as those soldiers who fought and lived. Those who fled the lines and advocated abandoning Moscow revealed they lived in a world of inevitable Soviet defeat.
A revolutionary lives as though there will be a revolution. He or she prepares the skills necessary for seizing the opportunities a crisis might present. Many proclaim the revolution, but act as if capitalism remains an internal fact of nature. We have a word for a revolutionary who professes communist ideals, has a mortgage, makes pragmatic career decisions, carefully manages an invest portfolio, and discourages others from taking action. The word for them is “capitalist.”
2. A victory may require a terrible price.
The Soviets could not defeat the Nazis without reforming the Red Army. The Soviets could not have formed the Red Army behind the lines without buying time. The Soviets paid for this time with the blood of the people.
One my may ask the relevances to our situation. Capitalism feeds on the blood of people across the world. IT starves millions though its system of finance and credit. It murders million through out right imperialism and the struggles to gain power. Finally, it enslaves and exploits billions for the sake of the wealthy few.
Only the revolutionary may justify this suffering. The revolutionary gambles, as all must gamble, on a future. The blood shed now must buy time for the creation of a revolutionary organization, a revolutionary movement. Only the universal overthrow of capitalism can justify the blood stained world just as only stopping the Nazis from engulfing the word could justify the carnage of so many lives thrown into the war machine.
3. All lives are equally valuable.
It seems that one must assert that all lives are equally valuable so that it appears hypocritical to risk the life of a soldier while the Soviet leadership remains safely protected. However, this shows a lack of historical knowledge and philosophical nuance. One should not ignore the numerous times the Soviet individuals in the leadership personally risked their lives to secure the Revolution. Moreover, the Battle of Moscow highlights the fundamental difference between the proletarian leadership of the Soviets and the elitism inherent in the Nazis.
Hitler sent the German people into danger. Yet, Hitler abandoned the German people when they were to suffer the humiliation of defeat. He risked his country and his people, but, in the end, he would not risk himself.
As the Nazi jaws closed around the Soviet capital, many of the Soviet leadership begged Stalin to abandon the city to the relative safety behind the Urals. Georgy Zukhov, the Russian General in command of the defense, told Stalin he could not assure the safety of the city. However, the leadership knew that they must remain united to save the Soviet Union. The decision fell into the hands of Joseph Stalin an Georgian ex-street tough who had risen to Secretary General.
He declared that the Soviet leadership would not retreat and Moscow would hold. He knew that no other location could coordinate the war as effectively and he hope the symbol of the Soviet government staying in Moscow could rally the people. The business of running a government at war moved from the Kremlin to the subways and sewers under Moscow. Stalin himself slept on his coat draped over a subway bench. He sacrificed millions of lives to save the Soviet Union, but from his position of privilege and leadership he gambled his own life for the greater good.
The same holds true for us now. We cannot allow our critics to blackmail us into abandoning organization or the necessary actions to build a revolution. However, we must gamble our lives along will all though standing on the front line against capitalism. I often hear brave talk of what people will do “when the revolution comes,” but how will one fight a revolution when one doesn't even know how to hold a rifle? How will one lead a nation when one doesn't know how to hold a meeting? They safely make such pledges because they believe they will never have to make good on them. They're right in fact. The burden revolution will fall to men and women much better than them.
The revolution is the task of those who will put themselves on a collision course capitalism. They do not retreat to the ivory tower of academia or the soft demands of some “alternative lifestyle.” Instead, they see where their work against capitalism puts them in solidarity with those suffering and dying today so as to best provoke a conflict and crisis. An academic with communist pretensions will rail against capitalism, but he or she will not train the students to resist it. A writer with communist pretensions will show the pain of our system, but her or she will not sacrifice any time or profits to change it. A worker with communist pretensions will point out exploitation inherent in the system, but they won't organize or unionize.
Thing about and raising awareness about the problem is not changing the problem. In the end, these people sacrifice nothing while clinging to a smug sense of moral authority. They believe that a revolution will never come, so they don't have to do anything now. They willingly admit their complicity with the system, but in they hearts they don't really believe all lives are equal. So they do nothing.
-
Let me make it clear. If you do not believe in a revolution and you reject my second premise then you have no justification for your life. You're reading this, which means you have money enough. Your life and family is not any more special than a family in Darfur. So you must give every excess dollar beyond food, shelter, and clothing. If you accept violence, but reject revolution you have no excuse for not firebombing every Wal-mart, assassinating every oil company CEO, or throwing bricks through every Starbuck's window.
So my response becomes
“You CLAIM there won't be a revolution so what are you doing? You don't believe in revolution so why aren't you sending all your money to Africa, joining the peace corp, or firebombing?”
In justification of the use of this historical example, I leave you with Benjamin's IV theses from On the Concept of History.
VI
To articulate what is past does not mean to recognize “how it really was.” It means to take control of a memory, as it flashes in a moment of danger. For historical materialism it is a question of holding fast to a picture of the past, just as if it had unexpectedly thrust itself, in a moment of danger, on the historical subject. The danger threatens the stock of tradition as much as its recipients. For both it is one and the same: handing itself over as the tool of the ruling classes. In every epoch, the attempt must be made to deliver tradition anew from the conformism which is on the point of overwhelming it. For the Messiah arrives not merely as the Redeemer; he also arrives as the vanquisher of the Anti-Christ. The only writer of history with the gift of setting alight the sparks of hope in the past, is the one who is convinced of this: that not even the dead will be safe from the enemy, if he is victorious. And this enemy has not ceased to be victorious.