TheGodlessUtopian
29th July 2012, 04:58
The following study guide has been taken and re purposed from the Young Communist League's websites (http://www.midlandscommunists.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=70:left-wing-communism-an-infantile-disorder-a-study-guide&catid=35:marxism-explained&Itemid=76). It is in relation to V.I Lenin's classic text Left-Wing Communism: An Infantile Disorder (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/pdf/Lenin_Left_wing_Communism.pdf).
Section I
Chapters 1-5 (23pp) The Dangers of Opportunism and Ultra-Leftism
pg. 7 Significance of the Russian Revolution
pgs. 10-11 Discipline and unity in the Communist Movement
pg. 17 Opportunism/anarchism/petty bourgeois revolutionaries
pgs. 20-23 Intro to formulating strategy and tactics
pgs. 27-28 Disunity only helps the bourgeoisie
Q1: 1. Can you note tendencies today to universalize or romanticize the strategy and tactics of different progressive and revolutionary movements around the world? If so, what dangers would this pose for the working class movement in the United States?
A1: Often, some on the Left, particularly youth, tend to romanticize the revolutions of the past or of other nations without really understanding what conditions brought such events or why revolutionary leaders (whether it be Lenin, Fidel Castro, Che Guevara, or whoever) followed the course they did. Simply trying to imitate the slogans, symbols, or tactics of other times and places does not serve to move the struggle forward in the United States today. This is not to say that there are not valuable lessons to be learned from the revolutionary experiences of other workers or from U.S. workers in the past. For example, Lenin says in the first chapter that a lot can be learned from the Russian Revolution, but it is not a model for all other countries to follow down to the last detail. Social change in the U.S. has to rise out of the conditions and struggles that the working class is facing today. If we don't look at our history and understand what people are willing to do in the movement, then we risk using tactics that alienate working people or do not actually further our struggle.
Q2: What are the three conditions that Lenin outlines for a revolutionary party of the working class to meet? What is the relationship between these three principles and the development of strategy and tactics?
(pgs. 10-11) Though not a schematic formula, Lenin provides some general ideas on how a Communist Party's discipline and effectiveness can be tested. He puts forward three fundamental conditions:
As the political organization of the working class, and consisting of the class's most dedicated fighters, the party should always display the highest level of class consciousness. This means that the Party should always uphold the interests of the whole working class and fight for those interests. Lenin says it should demonstrate "perseverance, self-sacrifice, and heroism." It should be devoted to and always raising awareness of the necessity for the working class struggle to free itself from capitalism--i.e. to fight for socialism.
Secondly, the party is tested by its ability to help build the broadest possible unity--first of all with the working class, but also just as importantly with the larger forces for social change. For example, in our country, this would include all African-Americans, Latinos, and other nationally and racially oppressed peoples, women, and youth, not just those that are working class.
Finally, Lenin says that the correctness of the Party's leadership in the working class is tested by whether or not working people become convinced by their own experience that the Party's strategy and tactics are correct. In other words, by how closely the Party's strategy and tactics are connected to the real needs and experiences of the whole class.
The three conditions that Lenin outlines give a guide to developing strategy and tactics. Are the tactics being used in the best interest of the working class or will they be setting the movement back? Are the tactics employed building the broadest unity possible or creating division and only resonating with a small group of people? Are the tactics being used getting working people involved in concrete struggles so they can become convinced of the need for socialism through their own experiences? We must be able to look at the tactics and strategy employed in our struggles and we would have to answer yes to all of these questions if we are truly being a revolutionary party for the working class.
When thinking about what the role and nature of the Communist Party is, there are more things that we would list. Lenin chose to focus on these three areas because they specifically deal with the issue of strategy and tactics. Other defining features of the Communist Party are:
1. A Party of Democratic Centralism
2. A Party of Socialism
3. A Party of Proletarian Internationalism
3. How might we define ultra-leftism? How might we define opportunism? What are some of the current manifestations of these political trends?
Ultra-leftism is a political trend that makes demands and uses tactics that are further left than where people are or may be willing to take. The demands and tactics put forward by ultra-leftists don't take into account the mood of the people and the objective circumstances. They are usually based more on desires and feelings rather than what is really possible and needed to make change. Some examples would be refusing to participate in elections because they are "bourgeois" in general, refusing to work with unions because they don't advocate for socialism or always take up causes that are Left.
Opportunism is a political trend that makes demands and formulates tactics that are behind what is possible This is usually in reference to right opportunism, making demands and formulating tactics that are move in a right wing direction. Examples of this would be not confronting racist attitudes, advocating for teach-ins when people are demanding direct action, not believing that the working class state power is necessary or believing that capitalism should be reformed and not abolished.
Q4: Can we have compromises and retreats and still move the struggle forward on whatever issue we are working on? If so, why would a revolutionary movement need to make a compromise or retreat? Could you think of any examples from today?
A4: We make compromises and retreats and still make progress on our goal. As Lenin stated, movements may need to actually make a retreat because the forces of social progress either aren't organized enough or are too weak to move forward. The important thing that Lenin noted when making a retreat or compromise is to analyze what the outcomes of making the retreat or compromise are. We would need to base this on a premise of whether or not a certain move would help or hinder the long term goal you are trying to reach. If a retreat is necessary in order to regroup and reorganize in order to further the movement for social progress down the road, then it would be acceptable. In the course of struggle, you are not always moving forward. You will move forward, zigzag and have to make retreats. We need to have tactics that correspond when the movement is going forward and when the movement is making a retreat.
Some examples from today are having teach-ins rather than large, national demonstrations because you need to regroup and build up a larger base. Today, the union movement is under severe attacks from the right wing and corporations. In negotiations, they are on the retreat fighting to give up only small concessions in order to hold the union together to move forward when there is a more union friendly climate. This would be another example of a necessary retreat and principled compromise.
Q5: Do we see modern manifestations of Lenin’s argument around the supposed difference between the leaders of movements and the masses?
A5: We do see modern day arguments of this type. Some people on the Left argue against union leaders instead of company bosses. They say that the union leadership has sold out and are only out to make money for themselves rather than protecting and fighting for the needs of their members. These arguments are attempts to split unions and put the blame of the current situation of the labour movement on the backs of workers rather than seeing the company bosses as the enemy.
Some on the Left argue against the leadership in general and of the Communist Party and other political organizations in particular. They promote the revolutionary nature of the “mass movement” in a vague sense. Others place more emphasis on the actions and revolutionary consciousness of the individual over collective struggle. These arguments lead to individualism that only splits and weakens the mass movements.
Q6: Could we achieve socialism without a political party of the working class?
A6: We would not be able to achieve socialism without a revolutionary political party of the working class. In mass struggle and through our own experiences, we are able to come to what Lenin called trade union consciousness (the understanding of organizing on the job to fight company bosses) and class consciousness (the understanding of the working class as an economic and political class and to become champions of it) but not necessarily socialist consciousness (becoming a Marxist and understanding and applying Marxism). Today, there is a great deal of literature put out by socialists and communists that is readily available and able to bring the ideas of Marxism to huge sections of the population. People, while in the course of struggle, and through reading these works are able to begin to develop what Lenin would categorize as a socialist consciousness. However, a person would not come to a full understanding of Marxism by only engaging in mass struggle and reading a few books here and there. You would need long study, both through mass struggle and learning Marxist theory, in order to fully develop a socialist consciousness. This is only accomplished through the work of a political party of the working class guided by Marxism.
A Communist Party doesn’t bring people to a socialist consciousness by just talking about socialism. People are won over by our strategic goal and tactics that we use in order to achieve what we are fighting for. It is through the Party’s strategic goal and the tactics used to go from where you are today to socialism in the future that will help develop people’s political consciousness and attract people to Marxism.
We have seen in some instances, such as in Cuba, where a revolutionary movement involved a Marxist-Leninist Party and another working class organizations. You can have revolutionary movements that are socialist in nature where Communist Parties can play a leading role with other socialist organizations that may not be Marxist-Leninist. You even have revolutionary governments that are trying to build socialism today that are not lead by a political party guided by Marxism. However, in the long run, you would still need a political party of the working class that is guided by Marxism in order to achieve socialism and develop a socialist consciousness among the vast majority of people.
Mass movements without political or organizational leadership are generally spontaneous in nature and not necessarily focused on the long term. To achieve socialism we would need a party that has a long-term perspective that connects the immediate struggles of today to a longer term plan to achieve socialism.
Mass movements, because of their very nature, have many different political trends and outlooks, even mass movements that are for socialism. We should welcome different perspectives and ideas as we are all working to a common goal. To achieve socialism though we need to a party that was specifically of the working class and pushing forward the demands of the entire class. If we were to achieve socialism, we would also need a place that would develop new leaders and organizers that would be able to carry on the struggle. A mass movement without a political party or leadership would not be able to do this.
Q7: How would the ultra-right and big business benefit from a split between the leaders and masses of progressive and revolutionary movements?
A7: Responsible leaders are behind a movement’s ability to progress because they give direction to progressive and revolutionary movements. Leaders are more likely to have long term goals in mind when analyzing necessary tactics in the short term.
Lenin, when critiquing this idea and outlining the dangers of causing a split between the masses and the leaders, says “, "What the opposition (those who argue against leadership, Ed/Lit), has come to is the repudiation of the party principle and of party discipline. And this is tantamount to completely disarming the proletariat for the benefit of the bourgeoisie. It is tantamount to that petty-bourgeois diffuseness, instability, incapacity for sustained effort, unity and organised action, which, if indulged in, must inevitably destroy every proletarian revolutionary movement."(p. 28)
~ ~ ~
Section II
Chapter 6-8 (29pp.) Marxist Strategy and Tactics: Moving the Struggle Forward
pgs. 35-38 Working at the level where the masses are
pgs. 40-42 The mistakes of the ultra-left's approach to electoral politics
pgs. 44-45 No tactic is permanent- Flexibility is key
pgs. 46-48 Foundation for correct strategies and tactics
pgs. 49-53 "There are compromises and there are compromises"
pgs. 56 Tactics that unite, not divide
Q1: Why is it important for a party of the working class to be active and have members of trade unions, even reactionary ones? What can Communists who are within a reactionary trade union do to change its direction in a unifying way?
A1: As Lenin argues in this chapter, Communists must work within the organizations of the working class and be struggling side by side with all working people. It is trade unions that unite all the different parts of the working class into one organization. (people of colour, women, youth, white workers, men etc.) To not work within these organizations would be to ignore the everyday struggles to make life better for working people. Communists must fight for the needs of the entire working class, even those that may not agree with us at first.
To make the argument that a person should not work within a trade union because it is "reactionary" would mean to leave the trade unionists at the mercy of the reactionaries and under the influence of conservative leaders. Lenin argues that Communists need an ever larger and more active presence in reactionary trade unions because we need to be there to struggle against the reactionary ideology and not concede that people can't be struggled with.
Q2: Can a Communist Party only work with the most "advanced" and "revolutionary" sections of the working class? Why do we need to struggle alongside people who do not have "Left" or progressive stances on different issues?
A2: A Communist Party is not a party of only one section of the working class. A Communist Party is a party of the entire class, even those that are not progressive or revolutionary. We struggle for the betterment of the entire class. This means we will have to work with people who are not the most revolutionary or progressive on all issues. We take principled stands against racism, sexism, homophobia and other forms of discrimination. We also reach out to struggle with people who may not be as advanced on these questions as we are. Writing people off and refusing to try and struggle together with them means that we are conceding that people can't change (that people who are racist will always be racist, for example). We know that we can only change the minds of people and win them over to being progressive and revolutionary if we struggle with them on different issues. You don't win people to the Communist Party and to socialism by telling them they are not good enough for the Communist Party.
Q3: Can we make fundamental, long-term social change in the United States without participating in electoral politics?
A3: Electoral struggle is one tactic that we have to make change. We have other tactics like boycotting, striking, mass protests, sit-ins and demonstrations. To make long-term fundamental change in the United States we need to be able to employ all of these at the right moment. We need to be able to gauge which tactic and form of struggle at the particular time is going to move the greatest amount of people into action for progressive change. For many issues, we need to combine electoral struggle along with the other tactics in order to make change. We need the protests, sit-ins, and demonstrations to make our voices heard by elected officials and others that we are struggling against as well as having elected officials that are pushing our demands forward in government.
If we solely use electoral struggle, then we are not doing enough to get people involved in mass movements and leaving it up to our elected officials to make change. This disempowers people and does not put people in charge of making the fundamental change they want. If we don't participate in electoral struggle, then we are forced to simply march in D.C. or sit-in the offices of a politician that refuses to listen to us. For many cases, we need people who are in government that are going to represent our demands and ensure that they get addressed. It would be ineffective to have a huge mass movement without people in power that are going to listen to (or be pressured to be listened to) the demands that we make and be forced to take action.
Q4: What are some of the arguments that Lenin makes for the need for Communists and revolutionaries to participate in electoral struggle, even if they personally feel that it is "obsolete"?
A4: As with the crafting of all other tactics, Communists have to take a sober look at the current conditions to determine the correctness of electoral policies. Simply because some Communists or people on the Left may feel that the time for engaging in electoral politics has passed or that being "in the streets" is the only way to challenge capitalism does not make it so.
Lenin cautions revolutionaries to avoid confusing what they wish was the political situation for what it really is. Tactics that are either too advanced or too far behind existing conditions will leave us out in the cold and isolated from the broad movements. This is just as true for electoral tactics as for any other. Lenin reminds Communists that they must never ignore any area of struggle simply because they think it may not be revolutionary enough. As he says, denouncing capitalist politicians and elections can be easy, but true "revolutionary tactics cannot be built up on revolutionary moods alone."
Lenin also talks about the need for a Communist Party to be where the masses of people are.
Today in the United States, the vast majority of people participates in elections and uses it as a way to voice their support or opposition to what’s happening politically. People also view elections as the most legitimate way to make changes in government or policy. To not get involved in electoral struggle then would be to separate ourselves from where working class people and the forms of the struggle that bring together the broadest section people.
~ ~ ~
Section III.
Chapters 9-10 (25pp.) Revolutionary Enthusiasm: Avoiding the Mistakes of the Past
pgs. 61-62 Revolutionary Enthusiasm
pgs. 65-66 Realistic necessities for revolutionary change
Q1: Why is it important for people to have their own practical experience in political struggle? How does participating in different areas of struggle such as elections and in trade unions help to elevate and sharpen people's class-consciousness?
A1: People will not come to socialism simply through reading books or listening to speeches. For many people that do come to socialism through this vehicle, they tend to not have a grasp on the practical work needed to achieve socialism and end up formulating tactics and strategies that don't correspond to where people are. People can't learn to organize unions, how to run large campaigns, or how to run for office if they don't have the practical and everyday experience in doing this.
In having the everyday experience, people are able to elevate their own consciousness and understanding of why socialism is necessary. For example, working in your union gives you practical experience in the ways in which a company tries to exploit workers and the ways in which unions fight for the rights of working people. You wouldn't learn how to lead a union campaign or strike by simply reading a book, nor would you gain the experience and understanding of how capitalism works from reading a book. People need to be convinced of the negative impacts of capitalism on their everyday life. The only way to do that is to have people engaged in practical struggles on the issues that impact them and the working class.
Q2: Throughout the book, Lenin outlines some key characteristics that a revolutionary party should meet in order to be capable of leading the working class to socialism:
a. Be a party of the entire working class, not just the most "revolutionary" section
b. Help working people convince themselves by their own personal experiences of the need for socialism
c. Must use and have experience in all means of struggle that move the working class forward towards socialism
d. Be immersed and active in all the struggles of the working class
How do inflexible or ultra-left tactics help or hinder a revolutionary party from fulfilling these characteristics?
A2: Ultra-left tactics isolate us from the masses of working people so that we end up not being able to work with all working people, but only people who agree with us or the tactic that we are using. Ultra-left tactics such as not participating in elections or reactionary trade unions deprive people of the necessary practical and everyday experience that is needed in order to convince themselves of how messed up capitalism is. If we only use tactics that are deemed "revolutionary" like boycotting or striking, then we are limiting what tactics we can use to move the struggle forward. If we aren't involved in the forms of struggle that bring together the broadest sections of working people or involved in the organizations that broad sections of working people are in, then we are cutting ourselves off from working people and the issues that the majority of the working class feels is important.
Q3: Are elections just about getting a Communist or progressive elected to office? What ways does Lenin outline that Communists should use elections to as a way to further the ideas of socialism while at the same time helping to meet the immediate needs of working people?
A3: For Communists, elections are not just about getting a Communist or progressive into office. While we can't discount the importance of getting a progressive elected to office and what that would mean for the immediate struggles, we know that elections are a means to further the struggle for socialism, not just an end. Elections provide a unique time and political situation that we can capitalize on. Everyone will be talking about politics, what the issues facing our country are and how to solve them. This provides the perfect opportunity for Communists to get our own ideas and slogans out on what we think are the problems and the solutions that we demand. This gives us a chance to talk about needed reforms but not in a reformist way. We are able to use the issues impacting people and what is needed to change them in order deepen political consciousness and understanding In order to take advantage of this, Lenin writes that we need to be everywhere that the masses are (in unions, taverns, communities) knocking on doors and talking with people. We need to be discussing the issues with people and elevating people's consciousness. We need to be pulling new people into the political struggle so that they can have their own experiences to help raise their understanding.
Section I
Chapters 1-5 (23pp) The Dangers of Opportunism and Ultra-Leftism
pg. 7 Significance of the Russian Revolution
pgs. 10-11 Discipline and unity in the Communist Movement
pg. 17 Opportunism/anarchism/petty bourgeois revolutionaries
pgs. 20-23 Intro to formulating strategy and tactics
pgs. 27-28 Disunity only helps the bourgeoisie
Q1: 1. Can you note tendencies today to universalize or romanticize the strategy and tactics of different progressive and revolutionary movements around the world? If so, what dangers would this pose for the working class movement in the United States?
A1: Often, some on the Left, particularly youth, tend to romanticize the revolutions of the past or of other nations without really understanding what conditions brought such events or why revolutionary leaders (whether it be Lenin, Fidel Castro, Che Guevara, or whoever) followed the course they did. Simply trying to imitate the slogans, symbols, or tactics of other times and places does not serve to move the struggle forward in the United States today. This is not to say that there are not valuable lessons to be learned from the revolutionary experiences of other workers or from U.S. workers in the past. For example, Lenin says in the first chapter that a lot can be learned from the Russian Revolution, but it is not a model for all other countries to follow down to the last detail. Social change in the U.S. has to rise out of the conditions and struggles that the working class is facing today. If we don't look at our history and understand what people are willing to do in the movement, then we risk using tactics that alienate working people or do not actually further our struggle.
Q2: What are the three conditions that Lenin outlines for a revolutionary party of the working class to meet? What is the relationship between these three principles and the development of strategy and tactics?
(pgs. 10-11) Though not a schematic formula, Lenin provides some general ideas on how a Communist Party's discipline and effectiveness can be tested. He puts forward three fundamental conditions:
As the political organization of the working class, and consisting of the class's most dedicated fighters, the party should always display the highest level of class consciousness. This means that the Party should always uphold the interests of the whole working class and fight for those interests. Lenin says it should demonstrate "perseverance, self-sacrifice, and heroism." It should be devoted to and always raising awareness of the necessity for the working class struggle to free itself from capitalism--i.e. to fight for socialism.
Secondly, the party is tested by its ability to help build the broadest possible unity--first of all with the working class, but also just as importantly with the larger forces for social change. For example, in our country, this would include all African-Americans, Latinos, and other nationally and racially oppressed peoples, women, and youth, not just those that are working class.
Finally, Lenin says that the correctness of the Party's leadership in the working class is tested by whether or not working people become convinced by their own experience that the Party's strategy and tactics are correct. In other words, by how closely the Party's strategy and tactics are connected to the real needs and experiences of the whole class.
The three conditions that Lenin outlines give a guide to developing strategy and tactics. Are the tactics being used in the best interest of the working class or will they be setting the movement back? Are the tactics employed building the broadest unity possible or creating division and only resonating with a small group of people? Are the tactics being used getting working people involved in concrete struggles so they can become convinced of the need for socialism through their own experiences? We must be able to look at the tactics and strategy employed in our struggles and we would have to answer yes to all of these questions if we are truly being a revolutionary party for the working class.
When thinking about what the role and nature of the Communist Party is, there are more things that we would list. Lenin chose to focus on these three areas because they specifically deal with the issue of strategy and tactics. Other defining features of the Communist Party are:
1. A Party of Democratic Centralism
2. A Party of Socialism
3. A Party of Proletarian Internationalism
3. How might we define ultra-leftism? How might we define opportunism? What are some of the current manifestations of these political trends?
Ultra-leftism is a political trend that makes demands and uses tactics that are further left than where people are or may be willing to take. The demands and tactics put forward by ultra-leftists don't take into account the mood of the people and the objective circumstances. They are usually based more on desires and feelings rather than what is really possible and needed to make change. Some examples would be refusing to participate in elections because they are "bourgeois" in general, refusing to work with unions because they don't advocate for socialism or always take up causes that are Left.
Opportunism is a political trend that makes demands and formulates tactics that are behind what is possible This is usually in reference to right opportunism, making demands and formulating tactics that are move in a right wing direction. Examples of this would be not confronting racist attitudes, advocating for teach-ins when people are demanding direct action, not believing that the working class state power is necessary or believing that capitalism should be reformed and not abolished.
Q4: Can we have compromises and retreats and still move the struggle forward on whatever issue we are working on? If so, why would a revolutionary movement need to make a compromise or retreat? Could you think of any examples from today?
A4: We make compromises and retreats and still make progress on our goal. As Lenin stated, movements may need to actually make a retreat because the forces of social progress either aren't organized enough or are too weak to move forward. The important thing that Lenin noted when making a retreat or compromise is to analyze what the outcomes of making the retreat or compromise are. We would need to base this on a premise of whether or not a certain move would help or hinder the long term goal you are trying to reach. If a retreat is necessary in order to regroup and reorganize in order to further the movement for social progress down the road, then it would be acceptable. In the course of struggle, you are not always moving forward. You will move forward, zigzag and have to make retreats. We need to have tactics that correspond when the movement is going forward and when the movement is making a retreat.
Some examples from today are having teach-ins rather than large, national demonstrations because you need to regroup and build up a larger base. Today, the union movement is under severe attacks from the right wing and corporations. In negotiations, they are on the retreat fighting to give up only small concessions in order to hold the union together to move forward when there is a more union friendly climate. This would be another example of a necessary retreat and principled compromise.
Q5: Do we see modern manifestations of Lenin’s argument around the supposed difference between the leaders of movements and the masses?
A5: We do see modern day arguments of this type. Some people on the Left argue against union leaders instead of company bosses. They say that the union leadership has sold out and are only out to make money for themselves rather than protecting and fighting for the needs of their members. These arguments are attempts to split unions and put the blame of the current situation of the labour movement on the backs of workers rather than seeing the company bosses as the enemy.
Some on the Left argue against the leadership in general and of the Communist Party and other political organizations in particular. They promote the revolutionary nature of the “mass movement” in a vague sense. Others place more emphasis on the actions and revolutionary consciousness of the individual over collective struggle. These arguments lead to individualism that only splits and weakens the mass movements.
Q6: Could we achieve socialism without a political party of the working class?
A6: We would not be able to achieve socialism without a revolutionary political party of the working class. In mass struggle and through our own experiences, we are able to come to what Lenin called trade union consciousness (the understanding of organizing on the job to fight company bosses) and class consciousness (the understanding of the working class as an economic and political class and to become champions of it) but not necessarily socialist consciousness (becoming a Marxist and understanding and applying Marxism). Today, there is a great deal of literature put out by socialists and communists that is readily available and able to bring the ideas of Marxism to huge sections of the population. People, while in the course of struggle, and through reading these works are able to begin to develop what Lenin would categorize as a socialist consciousness. However, a person would not come to a full understanding of Marxism by only engaging in mass struggle and reading a few books here and there. You would need long study, both through mass struggle and learning Marxist theory, in order to fully develop a socialist consciousness. This is only accomplished through the work of a political party of the working class guided by Marxism.
A Communist Party doesn’t bring people to a socialist consciousness by just talking about socialism. People are won over by our strategic goal and tactics that we use in order to achieve what we are fighting for. It is through the Party’s strategic goal and the tactics used to go from where you are today to socialism in the future that will help develop people’s political consciousness and attract people to Marxism.
We have seen in some instances, such as in Cuba, where a revolutionary movement involved a Marxist-Leninist Party and another working class organizations. You can have revolutionary movements that are socialist in nature where Communist Parties can play a leading role with other socialist organizations that may not be Marxist-Leninist. You even have revolutionary governments that are trying to build socialism today that are not lead by a political party guided by Marxism. However, in the long run, you would still need a political party of the working class that is guided by Marxism in order to achieve socialism and develop a socialist consciousness among the vast majority of people.
Mass movements without political or organizational leadership are generally spontaneous in nature and not necessarily focused on the long term. To achieve socialism we would need a party that has a long-term perspective that connects the immediate struggles of today to a longer term plan to achieve socialism.
Mass movements, because of their very nature, have many different political trends and outlooks, even mass movements that are for socialism. We should welcome different perspectives and ideas as we are all working to a common goal. To achieve socialism though we need to a party that was specifically of the working class and pushing forward the demands of the entire class. If we were to achieve socialism, we would also need a place that would develop new leaders and organizers that would be able to carry on the struggle. A mass movement without a political party or leadership would not be able to do this.
Q7: How would the ultra-right and big business benefit from a split between the leaders and masses of progressive and revolutionary movements?
A7: Responsible leaders are behind a movement’s ability to progress because they give direction to progressive and revolutionary movements. Leaders are more likely to have long term goals in mind when analyzing necessary tactics in the short term.
Lenin, when critiquing this idea and outlining the dangers of causing a split between the masses and the leaders, says “, "What the opposition (those who argue against leadership, Ed/Lit), has come to is the repudiation of the party principle and of party discipline. And this is tantamount to completely disarming the proletariat for the benefit of the bourgeoisie. It is tantamount to that petty-bourgeois diffuseness, instability, incapacity for sustained effort, unity and organised action, which, if indulged in, must inevitably destroy every proletarian revolutionary movement."(p. 28)
~ ~ ~
Section II
Chapter 6-8 (29pp.) Marxist Strategy and Tactics: Moving the Struggle Forward
pgs. 35-38 Working at the level where the masses are
pgs. 40-42 The mistakes of the ultra-left's approach to electoral politics
pgs. 44-45 No tactic is permanent- Flexibility is key
pgs. 46-48 Foundation for correct strategies and tactics
pgs. 49-53 "There are compromises and there are compromises"
pgs. 56 Tactics that unite, not divide
Q1: Why is it important for a party of the working class to be active and have members of trade unions, even reactionary ones? What can Communists who are within a reactionary trade union do to change its direction in a unifying way?
A1: As Lenin argues in this chapter, Communists must work within the organizations of the working class and be struggling side by side with all working people. It is trade unions that unite all the different parts of the working class into one organization. (people of colour, women, youth, white workers, men etc.) To not work within these organizations would be to ignore the everyday struggles to make life better for working people. Communists must fight for the needs of the entire working class, even those that may not agree with us at first.
To make the argument that a person should not work within a trade union because it is "reactionary" would mean to leave the trade unionists at the mercy of the reactionaries and under the influence of conservative leaders. Lenin argues that Communists need an ever larger and more active presence in reactionary trade unions because we need to be there to struggle against the reactionary ideology and not concede that people can't be struggled with.
Q2: Can a Communist Party only work with the most "advanced" and "revolutionary" sections of the working class? Why do we need to struggle alongside people who do not have "Left" or progressive stances on different issues?
A2: A Communist Party is not a party of only one section of the working class. A Communist Party is a party of the entire class, even those that are not progressive or revolutionary. We struggle for the betterment of the entire class. This means we will have to work with people who are not the most revolutionary or progressive on all issues. We take principled stands against racism, sexism, homophobia and other forms of discrimination. We also reach out to struggle with people who may not be as advanced on these questions as we are. Writing people off and refusing to try and struggle together with them means that we are conceding that people can't change (that people who are racist will always be racist, for example). We know that we can only change the minds of people and win them over to being progressive and revolutionary if we struggle with them on different issues. You don't win people to the Communist Party and to socialism by telling them they are not good enough for the Communist Party.
Q3: Can we make fundamental, long-term social change in the United States without participating in electoral politics?
A3: Electoral struggle is one tactic that we have to make change. We have other tactics like boycotting, striking, mass protests, sit-ins and demonstrations. To make long-term fundamental change in the United States we need to be able to employ all of these at the right moment. We need to be able to gauge which tactic and form of struggle at the particular time is going to move the greatest amount of people into action for progressive change. For many issues, we need to combine electoral struggle along with the other tactics in order to make change. We need the protests, sit-ins, and demonstrations to make our voices heard by elected officials and others that we are struggling against as well as having elected officials that are pushing our demands forward in government.
If we solely use electoral struggle, then we are not doing enough to get people involved in mass movements and leaving it up to our elected officials to make change. This disempowers people and does not put people in charge of making the fundamental change they want. If we don't participate in electoral struggle, then we are forced to simply march in D.C. or sit-in the offices of a politician that refuses to listen to us. For many cases, we need people who are in government that are going to represent our demands and ensure that they get addressed. It would be ineffective to have a huge mass movement without people in power that are going to listen to (or be pressured to be listened to) the demands that we make and be forced to take action.
Q4: What are some of the arguments that Lenin makes for the need for Communists and revolutionaries to participate in electoral struggle, even if they personally feel that it is "obsolete"?
A4: As with the crafting of all other tactics, Communists have to take a sober look at the current conditions to determine the correctness of electoral policies. Simply because some Communists or people on the Left may feel that the time for engaging in electoral politics has passed or that being "in the streets" is the only way to challenge capitalism does not make it so.
Lenin cautions revolutionaries to avoid confusing what they wish was the political situation for what it really is. Tactics that are either too advanced or too far behind existing conditions will leave us out in the cold and isolated from the broad movements. This is just as true for electoral tactics as for any other. Lenin reminds Communists that they must never ignore any area of struggle simply because they think it may not be revolutionary enough. As he says, denouncing capitalist politicians and elections can be easy, but true "revolutionary tactics cannot be built up on revolutionary moods alone."
Lenin also talks about the need for a Communist Party to be where the masses of people are.
Today in the United States, the vast majority of people participates in elections and uses it as a way to voice their support or opposition to what’s happening politically. People also view elections as the most legitimate way to make changes in government or policy. To not get involved in electoral struggle then would be to separate ourselves from where working class people and the forms of the struggle that bring together the broadest section people.
~ ~ ~
Section III.
Chapters 9-10 (25pp.) Revolutionary Enthusiasm: Avoiding the Mistakes of the Past
pgs. 61-62 Revolutionary Enthusiasm
pgs. 65-66 Realistic necessities for revolutionary change
Q1: Why is it important for people to have their own practical experience in political struggle? How does participating in different areas of struggle such as elections and in trade unions help to elevate and sharpen people's class-consciousness?
A1: People will not come to socialism simply through reading books or listening to speeches. For many people that do come to socialism through this vehicle, they tend to not have a grasp on the practical work needed to achieve socialism and end up formulating tactics and strategies that don't correspond to where people are. People can't learn to organize unions, how to run large campaigns, or how to run for office if they don't have the practical and everyday experience in doing this.
In having the everyday experience, people are able to elevate their own consciousness and understanding of why socialism is necessary. For example, working in your union gives you practical experience in the ways in which a company tries to exploit workers and the ways in which unions fight for the rights of working people. You wouldn't learn how to lead a union campaign or strike by simply reading a book, nor would you gain the experience and understanding of how capitalism works from reading a book. People need to be convinced of the negative impacts of capitalism on their everyday life. The only way to do that is to have people engaged in practical struggles on the issues that impact them and the working class.
Q2: Throughout the book, Lenin outlines some key characteristics that a revolutionary party should meet in order to be capable of leading the working class to socialism:
a. Be a party of the entire working class, not just the most "revolutionary" section
b. Help working people convince themselves by their own personal experiences of the need for socialism
c. Must use and have experience in all means of struggle that move the working class forward towards socialism
d. Be immersed and active in all the struggles of the working class
How do inflexible or ultra-left tactics help or hinder a revolutionary party from fulfilling these characteristics?
A2: Ultra-left tactics isolate us from the masses of working people so that we end up not being able to work with all working people, but only people who agree with us or the tactic that we are using. Ultra-left tactics such as not participating in elections or reactionary trade unions deprive people of the necessary practical and everyday experience that is needed in order to convince themselves of how messed up capitalism is. If we only use tactics that are deemed "revolutionary" like boycotting or striking, then we are limiting what tactics we can use to move the struggle forward. If we aren't involved in the forms of struggle that bring together the broadest sections of working people or involved in the organizations that broad sections of working people are in, then we are cutting ourselves off from working people and the issues that the majority of the working class feels is important.
Q3: Are elections just about getting a Communist or progressive elected to office? What ways does Lenin outline that Communists should use elections to as a way to further the ideas of socialism while at the same time helping to meet the immediate needs of working people?
A3: For Communists, elections are not just about getting a Communist or progressive into office. While we can't discount the importance of getting a progressive elected to office and what that would mean for the immediate struggles, we know that elections are a means to further the struggle for socialism, not just an end. Elections provide a unique time and political situation that we can capitalize on. Everyone will be talking about politics, what the issues facing our country are and how to solve them. This provides the perfect opportunity for Communists to get our own ideas and slogans out on what we think are the problems and the solutions that we demand. This gives us a chance to talk about needed reforms but not in a reformist way. We are able to use the issues impacting people and what is needed to change them in order deepen political consciousness and understanding In order to take advantage of this, Lenin writes that we need to be everywhere that the masses are (in unions, taverns, communities) knocking on doors and talking with people. We need to be discussing the issues with people and elevating people's consciousness. We need to be pulling new people into the political struggle so that they can have their own experiences to help raise their understanding.