The Bloc of Four Classes

[Flying Purple People Eater]

I've been reading about recent maoist positions lately, and one aspect that is puzzling me is their position on the BoFC.

Do maoists only support the bloc in underdeveloped countries where the proletariat are a minority, or do they also wish to utilise it in completely industrialised states as well?

[Geiseric]

The proletariat is a minority in basically every imperialised country, including the fSU, so the bloc of four classes isn't honestly applicable to anywhere on the planet, if your goals are overthrowing capitalism.

[GoddessCleoLover]

I am no Maoist, but it is my understanding that the bloc of four classes pertained specifically to the situation in China back in the 1940's.

[the last donut of the night]

The proletariat is a minority in basically every imperialised country, including the fSU, so the bloc of four classes isn't honestly applicable to anywhere on the planet, if your goals are overthrowing capitalism.

yeah that ain't true

[Geiseric]

Russia had a population that was about 15% working class, the rest was peasantry. China had a little less than that, however there were huge working class centers in Canton, who actually developed class consciousness and were doing the same actions against the Chinese state as the Bolsheviks were doing in Russia, or the German workers were doing during the Ruhr occupation. There was no bloc of four classes in Russia, and in every socialist revolution, we've seen time and time again that the working class is leading the peasantry through the revolution.

[Die Neue Zeit]

There was no bloc of four classes in Russia, and in every socialist revolution, we've seen time and time again that the working class is leading the peasantry through the revolution.

The peasantry was very active during the Russian Revolution, was active on both sides of the Russian Civil War, and was crucial to the rebuilding of the Bolshevik party itself (for good and for ill).

[Geiseric]

Well the peasantry if anything is what ruined the bolshevik party and took away its character of a vanguard of the proletariat. The right opposition was mostly peasantry, and its focuses were to benefit the peasantry's petit bourgeois economic goals instead of industrializing and starting the planned economy. Do you think it is a good idea to let Kulaks or petty Kulaks into the bolshevik party? The flood of peasantry into the bolshevik party if anything was the thing that allowed the famines of the 1920s.

[Grenzer]

The peasantry was very active during the Russian Revolution, was active on both sides of the Russian Civil War, and was crucial to the rebuilding of the Bolshevik party itself (for good and for ill).

Mostly for ill, I think we can agree.

On the one hand, there was a need for large numbers of recruits to serve in the government administrations; so with the set up they had, the only option was to bring in peasants. Of course, there were other options. A two party system with a peasant party and a workers' party could be a possibility, but I also get the feeling that the former could be too easily hijacked by petit-bourgeois or bourgeois forces.

That's not even getting into the issue of transforming the party from a political body into something that is little more than a recruiting apparatus for the state. The party really ceased being a strictly political entity, probably for the worst.

[Geiseric]

There would of been no reason for anything but an employed peasants party, but most of them supported the bolsheviks. The rich peasants deserved no representation, and their property should of been collectivised sooner. The only reason it wasn't is because the bolshevik party had a huge opposition made up of completely Kulak supporters. a

[Die Neue Zeit]

Well the peasantry if anything is what ruined the bolshevik party and took away its character of a vanguard of the proletariat. The right opposition was mostly peasantry, and its focuses were to benefit the peasantry's petit bourgeois economic goals instead of industrializing and starting the planned economy. Do you think it is a good idea to let Kulaks or petty Kulaks into the bolshevik party? The flood of peasantry into the bolshevik party if anything was the thing that allowed the famines of the 1920s.

I wasn't referring to the NEP era. I was referring to the growth of party membership and overall bureaucracy in the midst of industrialization, the definition of "cadre" offered by Stalin, and certain top-down methods.

To be frank, Russia needed a left "Caesarism" politically, to avoid what comrade Ghost Bebel mentioned above: http://www.revleft.com/vb/nep-did-russia-t146798/index.html

[Khalid]

New Democratic Revolution is for underdeveloped, semi-colonial and semi-feudal countries.

[ComradeOm]

Russia had a population that was about 15% working class, the rest was peasantry15% urban. There were a mere 2.5m workers in large scale industry in 1914, that's less than 2% of the Empire's population. Throw in miners, railworkers, artisans, construction labourers, etc and you probably have a maximum 7-8%

Just a nitpick