Insurgent Notes No. 4 -August 2011

[Kadir Ateş]

I believe S. Artesian has already posted this, but couldn't hurt for another. In this month's issue:

Focus on the Middle East Anti-Imperialism and the Iranian Revolution (http://insurgentnotes.com/?p=1154)
PDF Version (http://insurgentnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Anti-Imperialism-and-the-Iranian-Revolution-72211.pdf)
Arya Zahedi

Taksim Is Not Tahrir- Yet (http://insurgentnotes.com/?p=1172)
PDF Version (http://insurgentnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Taksim-is-not-Tahrir-72211.pdf)
Kadir Ateş

On Egypt (http://insurgentnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Mouvement-Communiste-on-Egypt-72211.html)
PDF Version (http://insurgentnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Mouvement-Communiste-on-Egypt-72211.pdf)
Mouvement communiste and KpK

On Tunisia (http://insurgentnotes.com/?p=1184)
PDF Version (http://insurgentnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Mouvement-Communiste-on-Tunisia-72511.pdf)
Mouvement communiste and KpK

The Arab Revolts and the Cage of Political Economy (http://insurgentnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/The-Arab-Revolts-and-the-Cage-of-Political-Economy.html)
PDF Version (http://insurgentnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/The-Arab-Revolts-and-the-Cage-of-Political-Economy.pdf)
Benoit Challand

And Also…

The Murder of the Mon Valley (http://insurgentnotes.com/?p=1193)
PDF Version (http://insurgentnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/The-murder-of-the-Mon-Valley-72511.pdf)
R. S.

Of Forest and Trees Part Two (http://insurgentnotes.com/?p=1195)
PDF Version (http://insurgentnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Of-Forest-and-Trees-72211.pdf)
S. Artesian

Report from Spain: On the May 15th Movement (http://insurgentnotes.com/?p=1197)
PDF Version (http://insurgentnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Report-from-Spain-72211.pdf)
C. V.

Theses for Discussion (http://insurgentnotes.com/?p=1199)
PDF Version (http://insurgentnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Theses-for-Discussion-72511.pdf)
Loren Goldner

Letters

More on Madison (http://insurgentnotes.com/?p=1201)

Letter From Paris (http://insurgentnotes.com/?p=1203)


...As always, critical comments are welcomed.

[DaringMehring]

Thanks. I read a few bits including Loren Goldner's "Theses." I agreed with the political content almost completely.

Can you provide some basic information, on the history and philosophy of "Insurgent Notes," and its relationship to other left-communist groups, like the ICC, and the left in general? Would be interested to hear.

[HEAD ICE]

Great issue of Insurgent Notes. Loved your article Kadir.

As an aside, the author of the letter "More on Madison" is an ICTer :thumbup:

[Kadir Ateş]

Can you provide some basic information, on the history and philosophy of "Insurgent Notes," and its relationship to other left-communist groups, like the ICC, and the left in general? Would be interested to hear. Sure. The idea stemmed from three comrades: S. Artesian, Loren Goldner and John Garvey. They did not feel that there was a place for them in a particular left communist organization and so decided to establish their own. I joined the group after the initial meeting, as I also felt the same way. Others soon followed, each from different backgrounds within left communism, and we do not see ourselves as carrying on the political legacy of any particular tradition, i.e., the Dutch-German councilism or the Italian communist left. I wouldn't describe the collective as particularly hostile to Bolshevism but nor are we supportive of it.

We've only existed as a collective journal since June of 2010. We're still fleshing out some of the finer points of our theoretical position, and I would recommend you check out the editorial of Issue No. 1, entitled "Presenting Insurgent Notes" to get more of a sense of where we're coming from and our intentions:

http://insurgentnotes.com/2010/06/presenting-insurgent-notes/

I hope you find this helpful.

[Os Cangaceiros]

IN intimidates me. I tried reading an article about interest or something that S.Artesian wrote, then I got confused and/or couldn't understand it. Then I felt dumb and stopped reading.

Then I decided to listen to punk and read Fire To The Prisons.

[S.Artesian]

Haven't written about interest. Rent, yes, because Marx's theory of rent is torture, living hell, shot through with contradiction. But not interest.

Don't be intimidated. Read the other stuff-- on Madison, Wi etc. Or "Bring in the Paper, Bring on the Torches.

At my best, I'm an agitator, a trouble-maker, a malcontent.

[caramelpence]

I enjoyed the article from the first issue on the Chinese New Left, thank you.

[S.Artesian]

I enjoyed the article from the first issue on the Chinese New Left, thank you.


You're quite welcome. It's all a bit complicated. Loren and I have strong disagreements, but very productive disagreements. John and I have disagreements. There is a true "minimum basis for political agreement," but it isn't so much, IMO, in the characterization as this or that ideological notion of what's reactionary, what's revolutionary. Rather it's in the concrete assessment of what capitalism is doing right now, and what it will be compelled to do in the future.

So, for example, Loren and I have big disagreements about the accuracy of Rosa Luxemburg's conception of expanded reproduction {I think she misses the boat almost completely and from the getgo as her analysis really is based on a "disproportion" between production and consumption}, but we agree that what characterizes post 1970 [or 1973] capitalism is decline in the rate of expanded reproduction and the "substitution" of wealth transfer for capital creation. That tendency will only strengthen a capitalism works its way deeper into the hole of its own making as it attempts to dig out from mountains of non-performing assets, that is to say assets that cannot be valorized at a sufficient rate to offset the tendency of the rate of profit to decline.

I do not buy the "ongoing primitive accumulation as a source of wealth for capitalism" argument; at least not very much.

Most in IN adhere to some notion of "state capitalism" to describe the fSU and its allied economies. I do not. Do I know what the fSU was? Not really, but I know what it was not. It was not capitalism. Money could not command labor, disposing of it, through employment, unemployment, production, at will in response to the law of value.

Anyway, none of that, IMO is the "litmus test." What is, is what constitutes revolutionary activity, i.e. is part of the self-organization of the working class for the emancipation of labor and the expropriation of capital.

Again, in a way, we know what is revolutionary by knowing what is not, what does not lead to the self-organization of the working class for the expropriation of capital-- and that is nationalism, "self-determination" of abstract "peoples" or "nations," vanguardism in any and all iterations, etc. etc. etc.

[Zanthorus]

The article by Mouvemente Communiste on Egypt had me banging my head against the wall. It's just a stream of facts with barely any coherent narrative. Empricism at it's absolute worst. Some of the other stuff was ok.


vanguardism in any and all iterations,

This is a bit of a sweeping statement. Do you think that the Gorter/Schroder faction of the KAPD was counter-revolutionary?

[S.Artesian]

The article by Mouvemente Communiste on China had me banging my head against the wall. It's just a stream of facts with barely any coherent narrative. Empricism at it's absolute worst. Some of the other stuff was ok.



This is a bit of a sweeping statement. Do you think that the Gorter/Schroder faction of the KAPD was counter-revolutionary?


I'm glad some of the other stuff was OK. In general, I personally have problems with reproducing articles from established left groups for one or both of two reasons: either the article is sort of mind-numbing empiricism, and/or the article serves an ideological purpose, and only an ideological purpose.

My concern really is in relying on other "established" lefts for information when it is precisely the dissatisfaction with the left as a whole that is the primary basis of political agreement for producing IN at all.

Like I said, I'm a trouble-maker. But I don't dictate policy at IN.

As for sweeping statements-- see previous remarks about agitator, malcontent, trouble-maker. As for the Gorter faction of the KAPD... what.. a faction of a minority is supposed to be a counter to what is the overall established historical record?

And did that faction of a minority claim for itself a status, the "privileges" associated with being a "vanguard." Did it even have a pretense of being a "vanguard"? A self-constituted, self-affirming, "advanced guard"? Been a long time since I've read the record of the KAPD, so maybe I don't recall that part.

[Jose Gracchus]

The article by Mouvemente Communiste on China had me banging my head against the wall. It's just a stream of facts with barely any coherent narrative. Empricism at it's absolute worst. Some of the other stuff was ok.

What Mouvemente Communiste article on China? I don't see any such article.

[Zanthorus]

Egypt, sorry, no idea where that came from.

[Die Neue Zeit]

They did not feel that there was a place for them in a particular left communist organization and so decided to establish their own.

Finally, a long-belated admission of the paper's left-com orientation.

[Kadir Ateş]

Finally, a long-belated admission of the paper's left-com orientation.

I didn't realize it was such a mystery (?) as the first editorial laid out some positions to the left of Lenin. For now, we want to scrutinize them more closely so as to not just appear as if we're rattling off a left communist laundry-list.

[The Douche]

Then I decided to listen to punk and read Fire To The Prisons.


Somebody talking about me in here?

[Die Neue Zeit]

I didn't realize it was such a mystery (?) as the first editorial laid out some positions to the left of Lenin. For now, we want to scrutinize them more closely so as to not just appear as if we're rattling off a left communist laundry-list.

Just because one supports "some positions to the left of Lenin" doesn't make one a left-com. It depends on what those positions are.

[Savage]

I would have thought that it was pretty obvious that IN had a left communist orientation based on the fact that the majority of its writers are left communists

[S.Artesian]

I didn't realize it was such a mystery (?) as the first editorial laid out some positions to the left of Lenin. For now, we want to scrutinize them more closely so as to not just appear as if we're rattling off a left communist laundry-list.


That's because DNZ doesn't read. He's too busy with his infinite schemes for fully socialized state capitalism, fully socialized military-industrial complex, fully socialized finance capital, fully socialized weapons of mass destruction, fully socialized slave labor, to actually pay attention to anything which can't be twisted into a discussion about.......DNZ.

My advice, comrades? Ignore DNZ. Discussing anything with him is like arguing with a psychotic that Napoleon is dead when the psychotic knows that he's the real Napoleon.

[Die Neue Zeit]

That's because DNZ doesn't read.

Except for Bordigism, I'm not exactly fond of left-communist strategies. :glare:

When I said "a long-belated admission of the paper's left-com orientation," that has certain implications for how I regard such a paper.

[RED DAVE]

Except for Bordigism, I'm not exactly fond of left-communist strategies. :glare:Did it ever occur to you that (a) left-communist strategists are not exactly fond of you? (b) Are you aware that in 1878, LaSalle, wrote on the wall of a john in Trier, using his own shit, with the index finger of his left hand: "Die Linkische Kommunist Partei est der Partei fur mir!"


When I said "a long-belated admission of the paper's left-com orientation," that has certain implications for how I regard such a paper.OOOOOOOOooooooooow ... implications. :rolleyes:

RED DAVE

[Die Neue Zeit]

Did it ever occur to you that (a) left-communist strategists are not exactly fond of you?

My experience on this board has demonstrated that hardcore left-com strategists (of the non-Bordigist kind) are unwilling to discuss revolutionary strategy, really sticking to their guns of state capitalism, decadence, mass strikes, the usual councilism, or even the anti-"permanent workers organization" position. The tone of my posts re. those positions over the past year merely reflects that sad experience.

[S.Artesian]

In 1878, Lassalle had been dead for 14 years.

Notice how every thread turns into a thread about DNZ as soon as he shows up? This is indicative of his personality pathology: not a single comment on anything that IN has ever produced, correctly or incorrectly, just his "experiences."

What a narcissistic goon; he might even be what is described clinically as an ambulatory psychotic.

[Zanthorus]

(of the non-Bordigist kind)

I really wish that Bordigists posted on this board. With your workerism, eclecticism, hostility to crisis theory, rampant organisational fetishism, methodological formalism and manner of constructing arguments that would embarrass a lawyer they could have a field day.

[Devrim]

Notice how every thread turns into a thread about DNZ as soon as he shows up? This is indicative of his personality pathology: not a single comment on anything that IN has ever produced, correctly or incorrectly, just his "experiences."

Yes, it is really boring. I will try to return to the topic at hand. I have just read the article in your magazine about Turkey and two things struck me:


Regardless of the fact that Taksim Square1 did not transform itself into Tahrir Square, there has been a major upswing in labor militancy in the past few years which seems to have no clear end in sight. Reports of yet another strike or demonstration in the past several months have managed to drown out even the more stentorian accolades to Turkey’s successful weathering of the current crisis.

The article appears to have been written just before the last elections (June 2011), and this is certainly not the impression that I have got. To put it quite bluntly there seems to have been an absence of labour militancy since the defeat of the TEKEL strike when it could be said that there was a strike wave and people were talking about a workers' spring.

Apart from the two day health workers strike in April, I can't think of any major strikes this year.


Why the Tekel strike was so remarkable, beyond its militancy—which included hunger strikes, occupations, the formation of a tent commune in the middle of the capital city of Ankara—was the background of the workers themselves. Most closely aligned themselves to the Islamist AK Party (AKP) or the fascist Nationalist Action Party (MHP), and had otherwise been staunch anti-leftists.

I am not sure how true this is. Most of the TEKEL workers that I had close contacts with personally leaned more towards Kurdish nationalism though I realise that this obviously wasn't true for the workforce as a whole, but three of the five factories were in the South East.

I can also remember the MHP coming down to address the workers very early in the struggle, and them not getting a particularly enthusiastic response, and basically being ignored, which one would presume wouldn't have happened if many workers had been 'closely aligned' with them.

Devrim

[Kadir Ateş]

The article appears to have been written just before the last elections (June 2011), and this is certainly not the impression that I have got. To put it quite bluntly there seems to have been an absence of labour militancy since the defeat of the TEKEL strike when it could be said that there was a strike wave and people were talking about a workers' spring.

Apart from the two day health workers strike in April, I can't think of any major strikes this year.

It was written before the June election, yes. Since Tekel there have been plenty of strikes in different trades, the metal workers, transit/RR workers in places like Eskisehir and Gebze. They may not be as big as Tekel, but there is a notable upsurge in trade-union led activities, particularly protests and demonstrations as well. There were even attempts back in late summer of 2010 and into the fall of Tekel workers attempting to rally their forces again.

I agree in so far as these other strikes are not necessarily breaking with the trade unions, sure. These aren't necessarily major, crippling strikes, but they are strikes nonetheless (never made the claim that they were major).


I am not sure how true this is. Most of the TEKEL workers that I had close contacts with personally leaned more towards Kurdish nationalism though I realise that this obviously wasn't true for the workforce as a whole, but three of the five factories were in the South East.

I can also remember the MHP coming down to address the workers very early in the struggle, and them not getting a particularly enthusiastic response, and basically being ignored, which one would presume wouldn't have happened if many workers had been 'closely aligned' with them.

As far as the second charge, I was referring to the voting background of many of the Turkish workers, not so much the ones from the east, although there is some (not sure about now) sympathy towards AKP. I can't claim to have scoured all the Tekel workers for their political affiliations or voting patterns, but from my own work and through contacts, it seems that many had Islamist and/or hard-right sympathies. It was clear that during the strike and even the initial stages of it, many were shocked to see how the very parties they had supported were now turning against them (I can recall an article by a pro-MHP publication which denounced the Tekel strike as have something to do with the PKK). We're literally talking about men and women who loathed the established left (quite frankly, I don't blame them) and saw them as a menace. This changed significantly, and through their own wildcat strike as well as the various "leftist" outfits which were among them in the tent commune.

[Devrim]

It was written before the June election, yes. Since Tekel there have been plenty of strikes in different trades, the metal workers, transit/RR workers in places like Eskisehir and Gebze. They may not be as big as Tekel, but there is a notable upsurge in trade-union led activities, particularly protests and demonstrations as well. There were even attempts back in late summer of 2010 and into the fall of Tekel workers attempting to rally their forces again.

I agree in so far as these other strikes are not necessarily breaking with the trade unions, sure. These aren't necessarily major, crippling strikes, but they are strikes nonetheless (never made the claim that they were major).

I think that you are writing from outside Turkey, and perhaps from afar have picked up a very different impression of what is actually going on. Of course there are always strikes.

I can remember arguing with some Arab leftists earlier this year. They were saying that Egypt was in the period of the mass strike as there wasn't a day between the last big movement at al-Mahala and the start of events in Tahir square when there wasn't a strike somewhere. I remember when I was working in the London Post Office in the late 80s and there was a period then where there wasn't a day without a strike somewhere in the London Post Office for two years. That didn't mean that there was a 'mass strike' in the London Post Office.

The point that I quoted was this:


Reports of yet another strike or demonstration in the past several months have managed to drown out even the more stentorian accolades to Turkey’s successful weathering of the current crisis.

To me it doesn't seem to at all reflect the situation that we are living through. At the time of TEKEL you could say that this was true. Certainly strikes were erupting in various sectors at the time. Since then, however, there has been a lull. During the run up to the election this wasn't the case. Certainly there weren't strike movements that drowned out the AKP's crowing about the economy.

In line with this I'd also mention that I was kind of surprised by the title. Taksim does not look anything like Tahir as you say, but the addition of the word yet seems to imply that we are moving in that direction. I certainly don't feel it.


There were even attempts back in late summer of 2010 and into the fall of Tekel workers attempting to rally their forces again.

These were particularly sad. The way you put it makes it sound like there was a real attempt by the workers to revitalise the struggle. In reality, it was the actions of a dwindling group around one person. That is not to say that small groups can't play an important role in struggles, but in this case it never seemed like they would manage to 'rally their forces'. They attempted two demonstrations in Ankara (and others in İstanbul, which I didn't attend) after the struggle was effectively over. The first of these attracted about fifty people (only about a dozen or so of whom were actually TEKEL workers) and the second far less. A far cry from the high point of the struggle when there were well over 100,000 people on a demonstration in Ankara.


As far as the second charge,

It was not a charge Kadir, merely a comment.


I was referring to the voting background of many of the Turkish workers, not so much the ones from the east,

Firstly, the majority of the TEKEL factories (3 of 5) were in the East, so those workers actually made up a significant proportion of those there, which was even more pronounced in the early days as they seemed to have been at the centre of organising it.

Secondly perhaps it gives a false impression to people who don't know Turkey when you say:


Most closely aligned themselves to the Islamist AK Party (AKP) or the fascist Nationalist Action Party (MHP), and had otherwise been staunch anti-leftists.

What it sounds like here is that these people are militants or sympathisers of extreme rightist political parties. As we both know, in the context of Turkish politics today these two parties actually draw the majority of the electorates votes. (50% and 13% respectively).

Then when you later say that you are talking about "the voting background of many of the Turkish workers", it would come as less of a surprise that the workers voted for the main bourgeois parties, but the way that you present it comes across as if these people were some sort of fascist or Islamicist militants. Maybe we could say that the phrase is just poorly worded.

You right though that:


We're literally talking about men and women who loathed the established left (quite frankly, I don't blame them) and saw them as a menace.

This maybe true for many of the workers. However, from my own experience, and I was there from the start, this loathing was never expressed at the demonstrations outside Türk-İş. On the contrary people seemed open and friendly to the left from the moment that the camp was established. Now of course, all of the 12,000 workers weren't there, and it would be unsurprising if the people willing to take militant action were at least not a little more influenced by the left, and added to this as ı said before the workers from the South Eastern factories played a major party in the initial stages of the struggle.

What I do remember though was that Kurdish was being openly spoken down there, which for those who aren't aware of the climate in Turkey, is something that is quite rare in Ankara, and that when the MHP came down to address the workers, there was a feeling of disinterestedness and even hostility. It was certainly a long way off a group of workers being 'closely aligned' to the MHP.

Devrim

[Kadir Ateş]

First, I am not saying these were "mass strikes" which went over and beyond any trade union, but stated that there has been an increase in strike activity since Tekel.

You're correct in that the contingent of Tekel workers which did attempt to revive the struggle or to at least keep it alive, were small, and did keep their suspicions of mainstream trade unions with them. That was my point there, I don't think I was implying anything beyond that. Other groups which struck earlier this year had answered calls from the union leaders.

You seem to be picky on my wording, and from my own experience, and those of my comrades as well as others, many of these workers did have right-wing and Islamist leanings for certain. They were no the "shock troops" of the gray wolves, but there was not much of a question as to know for whom to vote. Were there others which were more inclined towards the left--possibly, but that didn't seem to be the reading I had gotten. But I wouldn't say the majority were.

[Devrim]

First, I am not saying these were "mass strikes" which went over and beyond any trade union, but stated that there has been an increase in strike activity since Tekel.

I didn't mean to suggest that you were saying that there were "mass strikes". My point there was that there are always some strikes. I don't think that there has been an increase in strike activity since TEKEL. I think that there has very clearly been a decrease.

Devrim

[Devrim]

You seem to be picky on my wording,

Maybe I am. I don't mean to be, sorry. It just seemed to come across to me as something a little exaggerated, which was my impression of the whole tone of the article.

Devrim

[S.Artesian]

Volume 1 (http://thewolfatthedoor.blogspot.com/2011/10/volume-1.html)






note: this analysis was originally intended to appear in Insurgent Notes 5 (http://insurgentnotes.com/). However it is unlikely that IN will appear before the end of December, 2011, and I do not believe that IN can be a significant weapon of analysis and agitation with this infrequency of appearance. I don't think TWR (http://thewolfatthedoor.blogspot.com/) (http://thewolfatthedoor.blogspot.com/) can become that weapon either, but at least there's less waiting. So I have "resigned my position," actually discontinued my presence on the editorial board of IN. I'm sure there will be further opportunities for collaboration and disagreement with the comrades of IN, and I certainly hope to remain personal friends with them.


Volume 1 (http://thewolfatthedoor.blogspot.com/)


Chapters, 7, 9, 11, 13


1. Radio Nowhere
By the time you re-read this, it will be obsolete. Greece will have declared bankruptcy, and the European Union will have to decide whether to issue EuroBrady bonds or implode, realizing too little and too late, that it, the European Union was an idea conspicuous only in its absence.




full here (http://thewolfatthedoor.blogspot.com)

[Lenina Rosenweg]

Very interesting article. I've had to read it 5 or 6 times to get the full meaning of it. As I understand the culmination of the current crisis (of course capitalism is crisis, an equilibrium is unusual), capitalists can extract profitability from assets which are no longer able to be fully engaged with labor power. Essentially finacialization has almost reached its limits, there's "nobody behind the curtain". This is more than just another crisis.

I kinda sort of understand. This is extremely important but a bit difficult for me.

Do you think B of A will be the next Lehman Brothers? There's an article in Counterpunch

http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/10/21/is-bank-of-america-headed-for-the-glue-factory/

I have mixed feelings about Mike Whitney.


The only reason I can come up with, is that they know that a lot of these complex instruments are undercapitalized and ready to implode, so they want to make sure they get their money back any way possible.

Let’s say the second biggest bank in the country is starting to teeter because it’s loaded with all manner of dodgy (toxic?) derivatives that could blow up at any minute and take down the entire global financial system. Would you (a) Wait until the bombshell exploded knowing that the only choice you would then have would be to further expand the Fed’s balance sheet by another couple trillion dollars or (b) Try to sleaze the whole thing off on Uncle Sam and let the taxpayers pick up the tab?
I’m not sure, but I think Bernanke may have chosen (b).






So we are in for another, very severe financial crisis, soon?

[S.Artesian]

I think BoA will be the next Lehman + the next Dexia + the next Bear Stearns + the next Washington Mutual + the next Ireland.

We are already in the structural inability of capitalism to "correct" "adjust" devalue enough assets to support re-expansion.

This is way more than a financial "crisis" although there is no doubt that the financial sector, concentrating as it does everything that capital wishes to become, is in desperate circumstances.

[Paulappaul]

I read your article and enjoyed it, S. Artesian. It is unfortunate to hear you have left the Insurgent Notes Collective though. Do you think there is any other way out of this crisis other then A) the direct destruction of the productive forces or B) Revolution? (I suppose this is the big question on everyone's mind though)

[S.Artesian]

I read your article and enjoyed it, S. Artesian. It is unfortunate to hear you have left the Insurgent Notes Collective though. Do you think there is any other way out of this crisis other then A) the direct destruction of the productive forces or B) Revolution? (I suppose this is the big question on everyone's mind though)

Yes, that's the big question. No, I think those are the two directions-- either destruction of productive forces or revolution.