Class consciousness post 2011 - split from Bob Avakian Meeting thread

[Sentinel]

With respect to the American Left my view is that things have dissipated to the point that an resurgence of our fortunes is probably dependent upon extrinsic events. I had hope that Occupy might spark something but it seems to have fizzled.

Comrade, I generally do agree with you here - but I guess I feel more optimistic. Perhaps it's simply because I (born 1980) wasn't around during the 70's period of upsurge, the like of which is yet unseen; but until 2010 and above all 2011 I, and the majority of this site's members, had pretty much only witnessed a downward slope for the left.

It is obviously a catastrophe, and potentially very dangerous, that this crisis of capitalism would coincide with a historic lowpoint for the workers movement. But I also think that last year marked a turning point in workers' consciousness, and that it'll keep rising now.



One thing that i learned from Occupy is that in the event of a resurgence of activism I am quite certain there will be a protracted period of ideological instability.


True. There is a lot of work ahead, and it's not certain we will be up to the task in time, the pace things are going. But it's certainly possible, which I would not have believed before.

The general consciousness has shifted sharply to the left, and I think it's safe to say that it will be the democratic wing of the revolutionary left that will benefit the most. My organisation, for example, has grown quite a bit globally during the last two or so years, in the US for example by almost doubling the membership figures.

For another example from the US, as you probably know, we did run - in the state of Washington - a candidate for the house of reps who got 27% of the vote on an openly socialist platform. Etc, etc. So all this is very encouraging and vindicating, but yeah I do of course agree that there is a hard road ahead.

But I do also believe, that we can again be a force to reckon with, in a not too distant future. :)

[GoddessCleoLover]

I believe that the political situation in Sweden, or anywhere in Europe for that matter, is well advanced compared to the Benighted States of America. Exhibit One in my presentation of evidence is the fact that attending an RCPUSA event is seen as "something to do". Back in the 70 s on any given evening there was almost always something better to do than go to an event sponsored by the RU/RCPUSA. I hope we get back to that point some of these days.

[Sentinel]

Unfortunately, Sweden and Finland (the countries I'm active in) are actually both still far behind when it comes to this new class consciousness sparked by the crisis. When all the events of 2011 were unfolding in other countries, including the US with stuff like the Battle of Wisconsin and the blocking of the port of Oakland etc, nothing on the same scale happened here.

There is discontent with cuts etc, but unfortunately up to now the far right has managed to benefit from it much more than the left. I am convinced this will change as the situation polarises further and the crisis deepens, however - as long as we socialists work hard enough, that is, as it obviously won't happen by itself.

We really must constantly look in the mirror now, and consider how to get the socialist message through much better than so far considering the circumstances. For otherwise who knows what the hell happens when neoliberalism digs it's own grave even further..

[GoddessCleoLover]

Unfortunately, both the Oakland port actions and the Wisconsin struggle against Walker seem to have run their course. Perhaps they have left behind some legacy of activism, I certainly hope so. Here in Baltimore, the Occupy movement still has remnants, but it seems mostly to be an internet presence, not much more.

[Sentinel]

There might not be much going on atm, but wouldn't you say that the general atmosphere has shifted to the left (not necessarily far left but left) at least somewhat, as a result of those events? That new opportunities have opened up for further progress?

I've heard that for example a large percentage of young people in the US now see 'socialism' (in quotes as they don't necessarily understand the word exactly in the marxist sense) as something positive, compared to before.

I think it's a generation thing too, with the people born in the late 80s and the 90s lacking memories of the failure of the USSR and the triumphant neoliberalism, 'end of history', all that crap.

[GoddessCleoLover]

I agree that there has been a shift to the left in the American, reformist sense of that term. The Occupy movement may have in fact motivated enough young people to vote against the Romney/Tea party attempt to push America back to the right. The downside of occupy was that after several months of daily General Assemblies these well-meaning advocates of direct democracy caused massive burnout. As a result, at least in Baltimore, they were unable to sustain regular GAs and once the meetings became irregular they ceased to be of any utility.

[Raúl Duke]

If I ever met Bob Avakian I would tell him that his autobiography fucking sucks. Most of the Stalinoids around here could probably tell a more interesting story about how they fell in love with Stalin than he did. Literally about a third of his book is dedicated to pointless childhood shit that no one gives a fuck about.

I have no idea how someone so fucking boring and decidedly mediocre could become the centre of a party like that.

Now I kinda feel like I got a shot at starting my own party-cult. Mine will be more fun, I'll guarantee it. :P


With respect to the American Left my view is that things have dissipated to the point that an resurgence of our fortunes is probably dependent upon extrinsic events. I had hope that Occupy might spark something but it seems to have fizzled. One thing that i learned from Occupy is that in the event of a resurgence of activism I am quite certain there will be a protracted period of ideological instability.

I agree. In my experience there was a bit of this (ideological instability) as it seemed to at times degenerate to groups trying to recruit others into their ideology.

What was interesting though was I could get my friends and acquaintances who are/were mostly apolitical I guess (although kinda punk, however I'm not punk really) to kinda agree with what I was saying (which I mostly focused on just plain-spoken criticisms of capitalism, didn't put much anything new forward; people get kinda bored if you talk run-of-the-mill activism and get turned-off if you start talking about revolution and what not and especially so if you start talking about "Lenin," "Stalin," "Join my Party/Org," "Join the Vanguard.") more than the liberal activists, libertarians, conspiracy theorists types could influence anyone.

In fact they ended up being a factor that turned everyone off and than all the "regular people" (more or less) left and Occupy shrank. However, I feel the left has a bit of this "presentation" problem and also a problem with how they feel it means to be effective (which revolves around actively ideological recruiting, similar to the other asshats in Occupy in my area that basically scared away or disinterested the "regular people).

I can't say I know exactly what "needs to be done" (at the moment) but I kinda feel the focus should be criticizing capitalism from a radical perspective (the kind of criticism that implies implicitly, yet let the listener make his own interpretation or reach that conclusion, that radical action or revolution may in fact be necessary) and to foment agitation/militancy among people particularly in the realm of labor (i.e. more strikes, walk-outs, whatever; wild-cat actions or not, although these days I feel wild-cat actions are what is needed).


I believe that the political situation in Sweden, or anywhere in Europe for that matter, is well advanced compared to the Benighted States of America.


Unfortunately, Sweden and Finland (the countries I'm active in) are actually both still far behind when it comes to this new class consciousness sparked by the crisis. When all the events of 2011 were unfolding in other countries, including the US with stuff like the Battle of Wisconsin and the blocking of the port of Oakland etc, nothing on the same scale happened here.

I've notice that the Americans usually tend to think things are better in Europe while some Europeans (although fewer) think things are better in the US.

Well, in reality, we can't view the US as homogenous. In Florida, things are shit. But yes, there are quite some labor actions and such in the West Coast, parts of the Great Lake states, and some cities/locations in the North-East.

Likewise, Europe isn't homogenous. Even I found it strange that Gramsci Guy mentioned Sweden...I heard they got, presently (probably won't last long due to the wave of austerity),a nice "social democratic welfare state" but in terms of radical actions I haven't heard much from Sweden...must of the action seems to be in Greece, France, Spain, and Italy...

Some of these European nations may have commendable, better organized, and more members in their pro-rev/radical organizations (the UK always gave me the impression it has a good Anarchist "scene" and organization) it doesn't really say much about the public really.

[GoddessCleoLover]

I singled out Sweden solely because Sentinel is from Sweden.:D

[Sentinel]

Likewise, Europe isn't homogenous. Even I found it strange that Gramsci Guy mentioned Sweden...I heard they got, presently (probably won't last long due to the wave of austerity),a nice "social democratic welfare state" but in terms of radical actions I haven't heard much from Sweden...must of the action seems to be in Greece, France, Spain, and Italy...

You are correct that there is an enormous difference between Southern Europe and Scandinavia when it comes to left wing militancy, and that it in a way has to do with our social democratic past. But as I said, there is a lot of discontent here too, it just isn't directed where it should (against the capitalists) as there are no large, established parties/organisations with anything even resembling a coherent socialist program.

Instead, right wing populists parties - with fascist elements - have so far managed to channel the anger, in Sweden they got into the parliament for the first time in the last elections. In neighbouring Finland things are even worse, a right wing populist party - with leading members who pretty much openly state their belief in race biology - got as much as 19% of the vote!

That Sweden would still today have a 'nice social democratic welfare state', however, is these days simply a myth that refuses to die. Sure, some remnants - or perhaps 'effects' would be a better word - of the welfare state remain. Sweden is still one of the most secular, gender equal, unionised etc countries in the world.

But the dismantling of the welfare state was begun already 20 years ago by the social democrats themselves, and now we've had over 6 years of privatisation-fundamentalist bourgeois coalition rule. Probably no country has privatised it's welfare as fast and as extremely than Sweden since the 90s.

Almost everything is owned by risk capitalists now - industries, services, medical & elderly care, infrastructure, transport, you name it. And it's run in a take out maximum profit and then crash the shit way.

A while ago, people were chocked when it became known that in the privatised elderly care, diapers were weighed on scales to see if there was enough piss in them for them to be changed. This caused a huge scandal, and we instantly started a campaign against private profits in the welfare sector.

A lot of others left of the centre joined it, and even the congress of trade unions (LO) voted against profits against the wishes of the bureaucratic leadership. The right wing media tried to smear the campaign by yelling that it had been started by 'communists', publishing 'name and shame' lists of those who had signed the petition first - mostly (but not only) our comrades and people from other revolutionary leftist orgs.

That of course didn't change the fact that 8 out of 10 - even those voting for the bourgeois coalition, in other words, oppose at least profits that aren't reinvested when it comes to the welfare sector. There is a general feeling that things have gone too far, but the social democratic leadership refuses to take up the fight, and as said so far it hasn't led to radicalisation on a deeper and wider level.

To conclude, of course Sweden is no third world country politically or economically, and in many aspects is still better than at least the US, when it comes to workers rights etc. But my point is that it's not really social democratic at all anymore; not in name and not in practice.

In todays Sweden you may still get by allright if you manage, physically and mentally, to work hard. But there is no security anymore, and those who can't work - the weak, the sick, the elderly poor, etc - get a cold shower of reality if they still thought we had a welfare state here. :(

[svenne]

As for the difference between Sweden, the US and other european countries, it seems that countries which made it through the last years of crisis somewhat okay (the Scandinavian countries, Germany etc) has seen a lot less of open class struggle than Greece, Spain etc., where the crisis struck harder.
There's also some big differences in the make up of the radical left; while we have a former eurocommunist party in the form of Vänsterpartiet (The Left Party), with a bit over 10 000 members and 5-6 % of the votes in the general elections, we also have a still living anarcho-syndicalist union, SAC, with some 5000 members. While it of course it's nothing against the social democratic trade union, it seems to have made the left in Sweden a bit less built around the "ordinary" trotskyite and marxist-leninist parties (i guess the party Sentinel is a member of, Rättvisepartiet Socialisterna is the biggest of them, with around 1000 members), and a bit more around anarcho-syndicalism, anarchism and autonomist marxism.

[BOZG]

You are correct that there is an enormous difference between Southern Europe and Scandinavia when it comes to left wing militancy, and that it in a way has to do with our social democratic past. But as I said, there is a lot of discontent here too, it just isn't directed where it should (against the capitalists) as there are no large, established parties/organisations with anything even resembling a coherent socialist program.

Instead, right wing populists parties - with fascist elements - have so far managed to channel the anger, in Sweden they got into the parliament for the first time in the last elections. In neighbouring Finland things are even worse, a right wing populist party - with leading members who pretty much openly state their belief in race biology - got as much as 19% of the vote!

That Sweden would still today have a 'nice social democratic welfare state', however, is these days simply a myth that refuses to die. Sure, some remnants - or perhaps 'effects' would be a better word - of the welfare state remain. Sweden is still one of the most secular, gender equal, unionised etc countries in the world.

But the dismantling of the welfare state was begun already 20 years ago by the social democrats themselves, and now we've had over 6 years of privatisation-fundamentalist bourgeois coalition rule. Probably no country has privatised it's welfare as fast and as extremely than Sweden since the 90s.

Almost everything is owned by risk capitalists now - industries, services, medical & elderly care, infrastructure, transport, you name it. And it's run in a take out maximum profit and then crash the shit way.

A while ago, people were chocked when it became known that in the privatised elderly care, diapers were weighed on scales to see if there was enough piss in them for them to be changed. This caused a huge scandal, and we instantly started a campaign against private profits in the welfare sector.

A lot of others left of the centre joined it, and even the congress of trade unions (LO) voted against profits against the wishes of the bureaucratic leadership. The right wing media tried to smear the campaign by yelling that it had been started by 'communists', publishing 'name and shame' lists of those who had signed the petition first - mostly (but not only) our comrades and people from other revolutionary leftist orgs.

That of course didn't change the fact that 8 out of 10 - even those voting for the bourgeois coalition, in other words, oppose at least profits that aren't reinvested when it comes to the welfare sector. There is a general feeling that things have gone too far, but the social democratic leadership refuses to take up the fight, and as said so far it hasn't led to radicalisation on a deeper and wider level.

To conclude, of course Sweden is no third world country politically or economically, and in many aspects is still better than at least the US, when it comes to workers rights etc. But my point is that it's not really social democratic at all anymore; not in name and not in practice.

In todays Sweden you may still get by allright if you manage, physically and mentally, to work hard. But there is no security anymore, and those who can't work - the weak, the sick, the elderly poor, etc - get a cold shower of reality if they still thought we had a welfare state here. :(

When it comes to the welfare state "myth", I think there are misconceptions from both Swedes and non-Swedes, but I actually think Swedes are more guilty. I sometimes feel that comrades are almost offended when someone praises the welfare state in Sweden and are quick to point out how bad things are. Which they are completely right to do but I don't think they get just how dismal and non-existent the welfare state is in other countries.

Take Ireland as an example. The idea that the state would provide free lunches in schools (very few schools have any lunch facilities at all - you bring your own or buy in the shop), offer any form of state run childcare (it's all private), nevermind subsidised childcare (childcare in Ireland can be €800+ per month, per child) with free diapers and lunches / breakfast, have cheap healthcare costs including maximum cost ceilings on doctor visits and medication (between €40-€60 each time just to see your local doctor and be told that you have a cold) would be unbelievable in Ireland.

And this is what a drastically reduced Swedish welfare state. All these things are somewhat taken for granted in Sweden whereas they could only be dreamed about in Ireland. So when they look at Sweden today, they see an enormously progressive state and economy because comparitively it is enormously progressive. And that's ignoring what's left of state run industries (never really had any and what there was is being sold off) , local free swimming pools (you have to pay and they are few and far between), playground facilities (I can throw a stone from my apartment and hit more playgrounds then exist in a 5km radius of where I grew up), public transport etc.

I know there are attacks on all these things in Sweden. There isn't in other countries because they have never existed.

[Unapologetic]

More instability in the global economy will lessen further the credibility of governments and bankers.

Less credibility and more dissatisfaction will breed more protests.

[Sentinel]

When it comes to the welfare state "myth", I think there are misconceptions from both Swedes and non-Swedes, but I actually think Swedes are more guilty. I sometimes feel that comrades are almost offended when someone praises the welfare state in Sweden and are quick to point out how bad things are. Which they are completely right to do but I don't think they get just how dismal and non-existent the welfare state is in other countries.

Take Ireland as an example. The idea that the state would provide free lunches in schools (very few schools have any lunch facilities at all - you bring your own or buy in the shop), offer any form of state run childcare (it's all private), nevermind subsidised childcare (childcare in Ireland can be €800+ per month, per child) with free diapers and lunches / breakfast, have cheap healthcare costs including maximum cost ceilings on doctor visits and medication (between €40-€60 each time just to see your local doctor and be told that you have a cold) would be unbelievable in Ireland.

And this is what a drastically reduced Swedish welfare state. All these things are somewhat taken for granted in Sweden whereas they could only be dreamed about in Ireland. So when they look at Sweden today, they see an enormously progressive state and economy because comparitively it is enormously progressive. And that's ignoring what's left of state run industries (never really had any and what there was is being sold off) , local free swimming pools (you have to pay and they are few and far between), playground facilities (I can throw a stone from my apartment and hit more playgrounds then exist in a 5km radius of where I grew up), public transport etc.

I know there are attacks on all these things in Sweden. There isn't in other countries because they have never existed.

BOZG, I do absolutely understand where you are coming from. I'm not blind to the fact that we in Sweden still have many gains the workers have secured in the past, which the socdems and the bourgeois coalition (so far) haven't dared to or managed to remove, or are only in the process of attacking.

But I still also feel that a lot of people around the world have way too high expectations on the Swedish economy and Swedish mainstream politics today. I base this on both the sound of it on this website and my talks with people when visiting other countries.

I'm not saying that's what RD believes, but I do believe that there indeed is a myth of some kind of Swedish semi-socialist paradise, or that at least that many aren't familiar with the recent history of Sweden, with all the cuts in welfare and social security, the privatisations etc.

A lot of people seem to think Sweden is still 'orthodoxly' social democratic, like the rise of swedish third way social democracy and the current bourgeois government had been just a bad dream. Etc.

But to conclude my point, while many other countries indeed still have it much worse, the Swedish welfare state is a shadow of it's former self - and that this needs to be pointed out, it's reasons explained etc.


More instability in the global economy will lessen further the credibility of governments and bankers.

Less credibility and more dissatisfaction will breed more protests.

It's safe to say that we will continue seeing an increasing amount of protests in the world. We've only seen the beginning of the new global protest movement.

There may be some shorter periods of calm ahead too in certain parts of the world, but the wheels of history roll only in one direction and so does the crisis of capitalism which has set them in motion.

Capitalism is failing, but it's demise won't come automatically. If it isn't systematically challenged, it won't 'give up' but will try to adapt to new conditions - with austerity methods, which don't help but only further the crisis, and harder repression.

So the question is, how do we win over the protesters to socialist ideas - and how can we do that in time, be a step ahead of the forces of reaction etc.

[Lucretia]

I agree that there has been a shift to the left in the American, reformist sense of that term. The Occupy movement may have in fact motivated enough young people to vote against the Romney/Tea party attempt to push America back to the right.

Oh - so you mean the Democratic Party successfully co-opted the Occupy movement? I hardly see this is as something worth celebrating.