LETSFIGHTBACK
30th July 2010, 21:24
From having been a member of 3 parties, [which is why I'm an anarchist communist] I've noticed something, they love subservience. Let me explain:social revolutions are not made by parties, groups or cadres they occure as a result of deep-seated historical forces and contradictions that activate large sections of the population. They occure not because the "masses" find the existing society intolerable, but because of the tension between the actual and the possible, what is and what could be[what this society doesn't question]. abject misery, poverty does not produce revolutions, it produces aimless demoralization, racism, greed and a private, personalized struggle to survive. at this point, what roll the "revolutionary party" plays in these developments, it tends to have an inhibitory function, not a "vanguard" role.Ill explain:The party is structured along hierarchical lines that reflect the very society it professes to oppose. Dispite it's theoretical babblings, it is a bourgeois organisim, a miniature state, with an apparatus, a cadre whose fuction it is to seize power, NOT to disssolve power. it co-ops, assimilates all forms, techniqes and mentality of bureaucracy. it's membership is schooled in obedience and is subservient to the preconceptions of a rigid dogma and is also taught to revere leadership, it's hierarchy.And if the hierarchy says it, everyone marches in step. The party is efficient in only one respect-in molding society in it's own hierarchical image, if the revolution is successful, it will create a bureaucracy, centralization and the state. it fosters the very social conditions which justify this kind of society. therefore, instead of"withering away", the state controlled by the "glorious party" preserves the very conditions which necessitate the existence of a state-and a party to guide it.