Reasons why revolution is possible in Canada

[Eat the Rich]

I am doing an information meeting about the reasons why a revolution is possible in Canada. I would like it if people gave ideas on why a revolution in Canada (or any first world country) is possible. I'd like coherent arguments and not stuff like " Because the workers are exploited". The fact is that the workers are always exploited, but that by itself does not bring always the possibility of a revolution.

I'd like some historical, theoretical justification, also something in context with the present attacks by the Capitalists and how the aftermath of this crisis can mean an attack on workers' living standards.

A historical justification of the revolutionary potential of the masses in Canada, is the Winipeg general strike in the 1910s and the Common Front general strike in Quebec in 1972.

Please share.

[Lolshevik]

If you would like a historical precedent of revolution in a 1st world country, I would mention France '68 and Portugal '74 - though France is by far the more dramatic, inspiring and saddening tale.

[DDK]

I don't know how much this contributes, but in my opinion Canada is a very fertile place to plant the seeds of revolutionary thinking. People are more open to the idea of socialism here than in America for example. Not to mention our economy is going in the dump and people are recognizing the failures of the conservatives and liberals. Also we rely heavily on trade with America even though we are fully capable of instituting our own independent industry but do not do so because our current and recent past governments are driving us into complete integration with the united states. More and more Canadians are losing their jobs and becoming aware of the situation and what the bureaucrats in parliament are doing. I personally for-see a revolutionary situation in the not so distant future.

[Luisrah]

If you would like a historical precedent of revolution in a 1st world country, I would mention France '68 and Portugal '74 - though France is by far the more dramatic, inspiring and saddening tale.

As I am portuguese, I can tell you about it's revolution.

Started by a coup d'état, a fascist dictatorship was set in Portugal. Any communist, anarchist would be immediatly arrested. Any who opposed the dictator would be questioned, and if he didn't start crying and saying he didn't mean that, he would be arrested too. All things such as tortures happened there.
Some very conservative laws existed such as romance (a kiss) in public would get you a fine. Also, whenever the police saw 3 people in a corner, they had orders to clear them because it might be a conspiracy.

As the first dictator died, another one replaced him. This one was a bit more soft.
The socialists/communists gained support of the people, and most importantly of the military. A few attempts at revolution happened and failed. Many feared a right revolution because the dictator was being more soft than the first.

In 25th April of 1974, early morning, the military approached the center of Lisbon (capital) with tanks. Fascist military thanked them for their protection, to which the revolutionaires responded that they were now arrested.
As soon as the fascist politicians learned that a revolution was happening, they oppened a hole in the back of the presidential building to try and escape.

The revolutionaire military begged the people to stay home, but they came out of their homes in happiness and thanking the military for what they were doing.
The fascists still got a hold of a rifle and shot over the population that was at their door shouting.

The military were victorious. The dictator was sent to Brasil and Portugal's colonies were free. A few time later, when the news reached the colonies, white and black shaked hands some time after they were shooting each other. As the portuguese didn't want to be in the war, they were the first to take the portuguese flags from the ex-colonies.

At the end, when the political prisoners were free, reports show that 80% of them were socialists/communists.

Sadly, after the revolution, when the country was in conditions to progress towards socialism, people like Otelo (sort of stalinist) killed it by saying that they should shoot all fascists in the central square.
And more, the USA stepped in, doing a silent counter revolution and winning to their side one of the two main figures of the fascist resistence (Mário Soares turned a capitalist) (the other was Álvaro Cunhal, a communist who helped organise the revolution while the other showed the world how horrible it was in the country)
A bit later, in November of the same year, a counter revolution happened, the socialists were taken from power, and capitalism proliferated a bit after that, although the country was terribly close to a civil war.

[Invincible Summer]

I don't know how much this contributes, but in my opinion Canada is a very fertile place to plant the seeds of revolutionary thinking. People are more open to the idea of socialism here than in America for example. Not to mention our economy is going in the dump and people are recognizing the failures of the conservatives and liberals. Also we rely heavily on trade with America even though we are fully capable of instituting our own independent industry but do not do so because our current and recent past governments are driving us into complete integration with the united states. More and more Canadians are losing their jobs and becoming aware of the situation and what the bureaucrats in parliament are doing. I personally for-see a revolutionary situation in the not so distant future.

Yes, more Canadians are "open Socialism" than Americans, but that's not saying very much ;)... why hasn't the NDP ever been close to getting elected as the national party, then (not that they're the epitome of socialism)?

However, it is easier to become unionized in Canada, and there is a strong union current in Canada (flawed it may be). Not to mention our economy is generally based in forestry, agriculture, fishing, and auto work... that's a lot of stereotypical "working class" jobs there.

[Black&Red]

I think that for true socialism to exist in Canada, there will be a need for religion to disappear. Religion is still a pillar in Canadian society and it has way to much influence on people(even though it's nothing compared to the US), plus Canada has to much partnership with the USA.
In order for a revolution to succeed in Canada, they must be a revolution in the USA. Because there is a very high risk that the US won't let a socialist revolution happen in a first world country(they can barely stand it when it happens in a third world country), and especially not in Canada who is their most loyal ally/dog.

[Red Saxon]

Like every first world country today, there will have to be a cultural change before a revolution will take place. The reason why Canada, as well as the United States, is not ripe for Revolution is because the people have become to used to the endless cycle of ...



Work->Earn->Buy Stuff-> Money back into corporation -> Corporation makes stuff -> Corporation sells stuff -> you buy stuff -> corporation makes money -> (repeat)


People have become to used to this cycle that they don't realize how horrific and dehumanizing it is, to be put into an endless cycle of energy powering the machine of capitalism.

My solution? Enough economic strife will shake up the system to where people realize the inherent flaws in Capitalism. But we can inform people that their only purpose in Capitalistic society is to keep feeding money back into the pockets of the corporate beast in order to keep pushing out new television shows and clothing. In Communism/Socialism, your work is actually valued for the whole, and you and your comrade next to you are the ones who make the clothes on your back and the house you sleep in.

[/communist rant]

Anywho, to sum it up in a few words: the culture needs to change from being materialistic to more thankful for what they do have.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Canadian RevLefters have too rosy a picture about the situation, which is not helped by the IMT and the NDP's "Socialist Caucus."

Unlike the US, with various left parties besides the official Communist party or two, we don't have any. The NDP doesn't count with its social-corporatist agenda borrowed from Tony Blair. The best we have are micro-groups not bothered to organize into proper electoral machines (let alone party-movements with "alternative culture" organization for the masses of workers) and left newspapers. :(

[Jonnydraft]

Canadian RevLefters have too rosy a picture about the situation, which is not helped by the IMT and the NDP's "Socialist Caucus."

Unlike the US, with various left parties besides the official Communist party or two, we don't have any. The NDP doesn't count with its social-corporatist agenda borrowed from Tony Blair. The best we have are micro-groups not bothered to organize into proper electoral machines (let alone party-movements with "alternative culture" organization for the masses of workers) and left newspapers. :(

Agreed.

What I find ironic is that many on here condemn Marxist academia (which I am apart of), when an argument could be made that it is such whom keep Marxism alive in the "developed" world.

Contend all you wish - if one took an unbiased view of Leftist thought in the world today, they would realize that much (if not all) of it continues to manifest itself within academic circles - no disrespect to revleft.

[Die Neue Zeit]

You can "keep Marxism alive" by starting a worker-members-only political party to the left of the NDP that doesn't have ties to the two official Communist Parties, that doesn't have to prostitute its political program to yellow trade unions and their head honchos just to get their affiliation (and, as implied above, "workers only" means that Identity Politics and other unreliable student politics are set aside at the door), and that is actually a party-movement attempt with alternative culture organizations like those provided by the pre-war SPD (food banks, recreational clubs, cultural societies, etc.). :(

[Prairie Fire]

Okay,

First of all non-Canadians and people who have never been to Canada need to stop typing and start reading. If you don't know the history and modern circumstances of what is now called Canada, why do you think that you are in a position to comment on it?

On the other hand, some of the responses that I am getting from fellow Canadians here...

Black and Red


I think that for true socialism to exist in Canada, there will be a need for religion to disappear. Religion is still a pillar in Canadian society and it has way to much influence on people


...Which is exactly what happened in Russia, 1917. A wave of athiesm had to sweep the country for a revolution to occur. :rolleyes:

Never mind the staunch Russian Orthodox faith of the masses of Russian workers who fought in the revolution of 1917.

So, the revolution hasn't arrived yet because people have incorrect ideas? Apparently ours is a clash of ideas rather than a clash of material realities and the realities of a class divided society.

Most of the Libertarian right, including venemous anti-communists like Bill Maher, also reject religion and embrace athiesm. Are they on a faster track to revolution than the Canadian working class?

Substituting ideology as the motive force of struggle and liberal crusades against theology don't trump material conditions.

Rise like lions:


Yes, more Canadians are "open Socialism" than Americans, but that's not saying very much http://www.revleft.com/vb/reasons-why-revolution-t118062/revleft/smilies/wink.gif... why hasn't the NDP ever been close to getting elected as the national party, then (not that they're the epitome of socialism)?

It's not that the NDP are not the "epitome of socialism";
It is that the NDP are not socialist.

Period.

They are a bourgeois party, straight up, which has betrayed the Canadian working class too many times. From my talks with Canadian workers, they remember every incident where the NDP sent them up the river.

Here, in this narrative, "Socialism" gets reduced to Social-democracy, and the more social-democratic a country is, the more succeptable the people of that country are supposed to be socialism, hmm?

In my experience Social-democrats are some of the most rabid anti-communists, especially in Canada. I had an NDP member chew me out in Victoria with all of the anger and zeal of a conservative, and every now and then Alberta NDP leader Brian Mason will go on a rant about how he isn't a communist, just to distance himself from scientific-socialism.

It is not "New Deal", "Welfare state" capitalist politics that make a society prepared and ready for revolution. On the contrary, these moves are specifically for the purpose of saving capitalism's ass from the dis-enfranchised masses.

Tommy Douglas and the CCF (Now called the NDP) arose at a time of the greatest proliferation of communism in Canada. Right from the very beginning, the CCF was an alternative to socialism, an alternative to Marxist revolution.

From the beginning, even in it's "radical" opening stage, the CCF was a bourgeois party to give concessions to the workers and extinguish the fires that threatened to blaze across the Canadian prairies.

The sort of "Canada= Left, America= Right" paradigm is not only ahistorical, but bourgeois to the core and spreading dangerous illusions that rationalize this or that bouyrgeois party in power. This "Left" and "Right" rhetoric has effectively converted so many of the Canadian communist left into voting auxileries for the NDP, just to "defeat the right" ( I had to criticize some Canadian Kruschevites last night for their almost uncritical praise of past NDP electoral victories. To this day, the Communist party of Canada is still a valuable recruiter for the NDP :lol:.).

Saying that people are more down for revolution because they are accustomed to social programs here is ridiculous. Even the conservative party keeps Canadian pseudo-nationalized healthcare in place, so while these programs do benefit Canadian workers, they are also a concession that breeds illusions in capitalism.



However, it is easier to become unionized in Canada, and there is a strong union current in Canada (flawed it may be).


...and these Unions also sell the workers out with as much zeal as the NDP.

Bourgeois definitions of traditional "Right" and "Left" institutions are inadequate to deal with the realities of class struggle.


Not to mention our economy is generally based in forestry, agriculture, fishing, and auto work... that's a lot of stereotypical "working class" jobs there.

Russia, although they did have a proletariat, had a much larger peasantry. Yet, they still had a socialist revolution.

Albania, China,Vietnam,Korea... all countries with a small working class membership, but all countries with succesful socialist revolutions.

While a proletarian majority can help to speed things along, and the proletariat is still the class for change, it is not necesarilly the determining factor in a revolution.

It is possible for the working class to still play a leadership roll, even if their numbers are small.

Jacob Ritcher:


Unlike the US, with various left parties besides the official Communist party or two, we don't have any. http://www.revleft.com/vb/reasons-why-revolution-t118062/revleft/smilies/sad.gif

I agree with Ritcher about the illusions sown by the IMT.

On the other hand, he is incorrect about the his other statements.

1. There are several "various left paries" across Canada aside from CPC and CPC-ML.
If you have never heard of them, it is most likely to do with their own bankrupt politics and lack of accomplishments.

You have heard of the CPC-ML because they are prominent for their work.

You know of the CPC because they play a vital role as the bourgeois states "official" communist party, the red loyal oppostion, to the Canadian state.

The other groups come and go (and even the CPC was in crisis during the 90's).

2. The issue is not "official" or "un-official", and is having a swampy multitude of tiny parties and sects a virtue? How does that helpf revolution?

I think that, from my experience, the Canadian left is in an enviable position to the American one. The American left is fractured into dozens of little sects, and the workers have nowhere to turn:

They can join the gradually disintegrating CP-USA, and become the left wing of the Democratic party,

They can join the RCP-USA, and take up the work of promoting Bob Avakian as a humyn being,

They can join the "I'm okay, you're okay" PSL, which seems to be the new kid on the block, but is rife with contradiction and their organizational structure seems flimsy,

Other than that, a dozen sects that you probably haven't heard of. Of Course Ritcher latches onto the Kautskyist sect (SP-USA), I latch onto the Hoxhaist sect (APL), but at the end of the day there is no mass party that is putting forward the politics needed in America today.

Even organizations with revolutionary politics (APL, USMLO,) are still tiny sects which have done little to expand.

In this respect, Canada is actually in an enviable position. I think that Canada has more stable, hard working and viable revolutionary organizations in place than the fly-by-night sects of the US (although, Canada does have those too, but their lifes span is short).

I digress. The Question becomes does having these "unofficial" various left groups actually help to build a revolutionary left, or does it do harm to the construction allready in place?


The best we have are micro-groups not bothered to organize into proper electoral machines (let alone party-movements with "alternative culture" organization for the masses of workers) and left newspapers. http://www.revleft.com/vb/reasons-why-revolution-t118062/revleft/smilies/sad.gif

Again, while you are right that these grups have not organized electorally, the rest is incorrect.

Most of these useless "unofficial" left groups primarly organize around a paper.

Fightback, New Socialist, Socialist Worker, Fire this time...

The problem is that their papers are not relevant to the working class.

The issue about elections is not that they are not getting involved in them, but what would they accomplish if they did?

In my opinion, they would elevate allready bankrupt politics onto the municipal/provincial/national stage, instead of just the local pub on their campus.

Also, Jake, your fixation with "alternative culture" smacks of that Maoist metaphysics that I was criticizing earlier. This is not a clash of ideas, it is a clash of antagonistic classes; ideas are simply the forms of expression for the desires of these classes in conflict.

As for why revolution is possible in Canada, there is the short answer which is that revolution is possible almost everywhere that there is capitalist exploitation.

On other hand, as you pointed out a bit, Canada has a long and prestigious history of struggle on the part of workers and oppressed peoples, often armed:

- Upper Canada Rebellion
-Lower Canada Rebellion
-Red River rebellion
-Northwest Rebellion
- Various armed struggles along the coast of BC
-Winnipeg General strike
- Estevan Riot (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estevan_Riot)
-Alberta coal miners strike (http://www.coalking.ca/challenges/strikes_drumheller_2.html)
- On to Ottawa trek (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regina_Riot#Regina_Riot)
-The october crisis
-Oka (Kanesatake)
-Gustafsen Lake
-Ipperwash
-Caledonia (still in progress)

There are a dozen reasons that revolution is possible in Canada, many of which lie in the shakey foundations upon which it was built, in the crisis of the party dominated system of the bourgeoisie, the struggling economy the world over, etc.

Any one of these various sparks could do the trick, but what is more important is to organize the political force necesary to carry this work out, and to build social conciousness among the people so that they will attain revolution.

[Invincible Summer]

Rise like lions:

It's not that the NDP are not the "epitome of socialism";
It is that the NDP are not socialist.

Period.



I was being sarcastic; i was responding to DDK's statement that "Canada is more open to socialism," and since many (non-Leftists) see the NDP as a "socialist party," I sort of didn't buy DDK's statement because the NDP hasn't been close to becoming elected.

Trust me, I don't think Layton is the next Lenin or anything, although if he extended his moustache and added a beard, I may reconsider.


The sort of "Canada= Left, America= Right" paradigm is not only ahistorical, but bourgeois to the core and spreading dangerous illusions that rationalize this or that bouyrgeois party in power. This "Left" and "Right" rhetoric has effectively converted so many of the Canadian communist left into voting auxileries for the NDP, just to "defeat the right" ( I had to criticize some Canadian Kruschevites last night for their almost uncritical praise of past NDP electoral victories. To this day, the Communist party of Canada is still a valuable recruiter for the NDP :lol:.).

Saying that people are more down for revolution because they are accustomed to social programs here is ridiculous. Even the conservative party keeps Canadian pseudo-nationalized healthcare in place, so while these programs do benefit Canadian workers, they are also a concession that breeds illusions in capitalism.

I don't think I said anything like that...




...and these Unions also sell the workers out with as much zeal as the NDP.

Bourgeois definitions of traditional "Right" and "Left" institutions are inadequate to deal with the realities of class struggle.

Yes, this is true. But the workers in the Unions are more "militant" than those who don't believe unions do anything, wouldn't they? I'm not saying that the union leadership are doing anythign to help, but the fact that there are lots of unionized workers in the jobs that I mentioned shows that there is some sliver of "class consciousness," I think.




Russia, although they did have a proletariat, had a much larger peasantry. Yet, they still had a socialist revolution.

Albania, China,Vietnam,Korea... all countries with a small working class membership, but all countries with succesful socialist revolutions.

While a proletarian majority can help to speed things along, and the proletariat is still the class for change, it is not necesarilly the determining factor in a revolution.

It is possible for the working class to still play a leadership roll, even if their numbers are small.

I'm not saying that countries without working-class jobs like in Canada cannot have revolutions; the OP asked why we thought Canada could have a revolution, and I stated what I thought might contribute to the situation in Canada.
Besides, the revolutions you mentioned happened in different time periods w/ different levels of industrialization so I don't think it's a good comparison, but I understand and agree with your point.

[Black&Red]

There is two reasons why a revolution can never succeed in any first world country what so ever.
The first one, as I stated is the fact that US imperialist pigs wont let such a thing happen.
The second one is the fact most of the population of first world countries are middle class, which means subject to the bourgeois ideals, they want to be rich to and they have been blinded by material promises of happiness. In order for this to change, their will need to be a drastic change in the Canadian economy that'll have to send most of the middle class into a working class situation. Which has a very low chance to actually happen, since most of the jobs in these sectors are being delocalized in third world countries, in the end the only jobs that will be left will be retail jobs, administration jobs and a few agricultural ones.

Sad? Yes, but very likely to happen.

[Die Neue Zeit]

On the other hand, he is incorrect about the his other statements.

1. There are several "various left paries" across Canada aside from CPC and CPC-ML.
If you have never heard of them, it is most likely to do with their own bankrupt politics and lack of accomplishments.

You have heard of the CPC-ML because they are prominent for their work.

You know of the CPC because they play a vital role as the bourgeois states "official" communist party, the red loyal oppostion, to the Canadian state.

The other groups come and go (and even the CPC was in crisis during the 90's).

2. The issue is not "official" or "un-official", and is having a swampy multitude of tiny parties and sects a virtue? How does that helpf revolution?

I think that, from my experience, the Canadian left is in an enviable position to the American one. The American left is fractured into dozens of little sects, and the workers have nowhere to turn:

They can join the gradually disintegrating CP-USA, and become the left wing of the Democratic party,

They can join the RCP-USA, and take up the work of promoting Bob Avakian as a humyn being,

They can join the "I'm okay, you're okay" PSL, which seems to be the new kid on the block, but is rife with contradiction and their organizational structure seems flimsy,

Other than that, a dozen sects that you probably haven't heard of. Of Course Ritcher latches onto the Kautskyist sect (SP-USA), I latch onto the Hoxhaist sect (APL), but at the end of the day there is no mass party that is putting forward the politics needed in America today.

The multi-tendency SP-USA isn't a sect, and I mentioned in another thread the Peace and Freedom party's attempts to expand beyond California before suggesting a merger of the two parties on a workers-only-as-members principle. Both parties stand in elections, while the various Canadian protest sects and discussion groups don't.

Of course, as a "neo-Kautskyist" I'd like more organization beyond elections (food banks, recreational clubs, cultural societies, etc.), but elections are far superior to protest sectism and discussion-isms - as you yourself noted.


Most of these useless "unofficial" left groups primarly organize around a paper.

Fightback, New Socialist, Socialist Worker, Fire this time...

The problem is that their papers are not relevant to the working class.

"And left newspapers" was a separate phrase to imply mere newspapers without any pretenses to political organization. I apologize for confusing you.

My ammunition is actually aimed at the spineless Socialist Project group, which currently states on its website that it is "more than a movement but less than a party."


Also, Jake, your fixation with "alternative culture" smacks of that Maoist metaphysics that I was criticizing earlier. This is not a clash of ideas, it is a clash of antagonistic classes; ideas are simply the forms of expression for the desires of these classes in conflict.

"Alternative culture" doesn't refer to culture but rather the organizations and network of organizations promoting it. Lenin's role model, the pre-war SPD, had recreational clubs, cultural societies, consumer societies, cooperatives, and such.

[FreeFocus]

Canada is certainly more fertile than the United States, but don't lose the fact that Canada is also a settler state, and the junior partner of the US in imperialism. Even with the working class, seeing people in white working class communities pelt the vehicles of young and old Mohawk civilians with rocks during Oka in such a disgusting, racist way that was intended to inflict harm upon them gives you some insight into the settler nature of Canadian society.