Log in

View Full Version : L'Anniversaire de la Commune de Paris



Orcris
27th May 2013, 02:27
Monday will be the 142nd anniversary of the Paris Commune.

The Commune was the first Dictatorship of the Proletariat. Although it wasn't socialist, since the bourgeois still owned the means of production, but the government was controlled by the workers, and worked for them.


Marx on the Commune:

Paris, the central seat of the old governmental power, and, at the same time, the social stronghold of the French working class, had risen in arms against the attempt of Thiers and the Rurals to restore and perpetuate that old governmental power bequeathed to them by the empire. Paris could resist only because, in consequence of the siege, it had got rid of the army, and replaced it by a National Guard, the bulk of which consisted of working men. This fact was now to be transformed into an institution. The first decree of the Commune, therefore, was the suppression of the standing army, and the substitution for it of the armed people.

The Commune was formed of the municipal councillors, chosen by universal suffrage in the various wards of the town, responsible and revocable at short terms. The majority of its members were naturally working men, or acknowledged representatives of the working class. The Commune was to be a working, not a parliamentary body, executive and legislative at the same time.

Instead of continuing to be the agent of the Central Government, the police was at once stripped of its political attributes, and turned into the responsible, and at all times revocable, agent of the Commune. So were the officials of all other branches of the administration. From the members of the Commune downwards, the public service had to be done at workman’s wage. The vested interests and the representation allowances of the high dignitaries of state disappeared along with the high dignitaries themselves. Public functions ceased to be the private property of the tools of the Central Government. Not only municipal administration, but the whole initiative hitherto exercised by the state was laid into the hands of the Commune.

Having once got rid of the standing army and the police – the physical force elements of the old government – the Commune was anxious to break the spiritual force of repression, the “parson-power", by the disestablishment and disendowment of all churches as proprietary bodies. The priests were sent back to the recesses of private life, there to feed upon the alms of the faithful in imitation of their predecessors, the apostles.

The whole of the educational institutions were opened to the people gratuitously, and at the same time cleared of all interference of church and state. Thus, not only was education made accessible to all, but science itself freed from the fetters which class prejudice and governmental force had imposed upon it.

The judicial functionaries were to be divested of that sham independence which had but served to mask their abject subserviency to all succeeding governments to which, in turn, they had taken, and broken, the oaths of allegiance. Like the rest of public servants, magistrates and judges were to be elective, responsible, and revocable.

The Paris Commune was, of course, to serve as a model to all the great industrial centres of France. The communal regime once established in Paris and the secondary centres, the old centralized government would in the provinces, too, have to give way to the self-government of the producers.

tuwix
27th May 2013, 06:31
It was first try of socialism in civilised society. And in capitalist.feudalist sorrounding it had to fail.

Brandon's Impotent Rage
27th May 2013, 07:24
It was, in those two months, that the workers of the world realized that a better world was possible...and that all they need do was to cast off their chains. They may have failed, but the example they set would be the first shot in the revolution of the working class.

Let us, as socialists, make sure that their sacrifice was not in vain. Their ghosts haunt the dreams of the tyrants, for they know that they live on borrowed time. Their spirits cry out for justice, and we will be the ones to put their souls at rest.


VIVE LE COMMUNE!

WORKERS OF ALL NATIONS UNITE!

Eniac
27th May 2013, 08:24
I often claim that the only and the first truly communistic state is the paris commune, even though means of production were in the hands of the bourgeoisie it was only two months, and you cannot go from capitalism to communism in two months, but they had the initiative and the potential, and socialism was implemented fantastically, after May Day, May the 5th, and May the 25th (youth day in ex Yugoslavia) this is another Communist holiday, with a weird regularity of them all being in may.

Vive la commune, vive le communism
working men of all countries, unite!

B5C
27th May 2013, 10:09
Sorry, but didn't the Commune started in March 18th? May 28th is the day when the government collapsed.

Vive le commune!

urPXy2zagos

Djoko
27th May 2013, 10:43
I just started this morning to read "Lisagare - History of Paris commune" without knowing that today is anneversary.

Baracko Marx
14th July 2014, 19:46
What would any of you recommend reading, watching or listening, so I can learn more about the history of the Paris Commune?

Zoroaster
14th July 2014, 20:36
What would any of you recommend reading, watching or listening, so I can learn more about the history of the Paris Commune?"

"The Civil War in France", by Karl Marx is a good read.

bricolage
14th July 2014, 20:43
"

"The Civil War in France", by Karl Marx is a good read.
It's a good read to understand Marx's political theory and his changing ideas of the state but as a historical text it's a bit lacking. He wrote most of it from newspaper reports and a few smuggled papers but he didn't have access to all the information.

Lissagary's primary account (which was ironically edited by Marx a lot) is still the bible on the commune, and the Rebel Lives book on Louise Michel is good if you want something short and exciting.

Baracko Marx
14th July 2014, 20:54
It's a good read to understand Marx's political theory and his changing ideas of the state but as a historical text it's a bit lacking. He wrote most of it from newspaper reports and a few smuggled papers but he didn't have access to all the information.

Lissagary's primary account (which was ironically edited by Marx a lot) is still the bible on the commune, and the Rebel Lives book on Louise Michel is good if you want something short and exciting.

From what little I know I am very interested in Louise Michel.

Brutus
14th July 2014, 21:13
If you want a criticism and appraisal, I recommend this: http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1921/02/commune.htm

bricolage
14th July 2014, 23:17
I haven't read Trotsky on the Commune for a while but I remember being unimpressed. At a quick glance;
"It had all the possibilities of taking the power on September 4"
September 4 was before the siege, the Commune was a product of the siege as much as it was anything else. Sure it *could* have happened then in the way that revolution could objectively *could* happen at any time, but to act like Paris was the same in September 1870 and March 1871 is nonsense.
And so;
"Six months elapsed before the proletariat had reestablished in its memory the lessons of past revolutions, of battles of yore, of the reiterated betrayals of democracy – and it seized power."
Six months elapsed before the material conditions of Paris changed massively. It wasn't just that people suddenly got better historical memory.

The enemy had fled to Versailles. Wasn’t that a victory? At that moment the governmental band could have been crushed almost without the spilling of blood. In Paris, all the ministers, with Thiers at their head, could have been taken prisoner. Nobody would have raised a hand to defend them.
The Third Republic was weak but so was Paris. It would only have won such a battle had additional mutinies taken place across the country. It's actually quite likely that this might have happened but it's not guaranteed. This idea that Paris could have just marched on Versailles and everyone would have surrendered doesn't really seem accurate.

I don't have much faith for the rest. The whole thing is more an attempt by him to shoehorn the Commune into a defence of THEPARTY than an actual historical study.

TheWannabeAnarchist
25th July 2014, 03:30
It's so easy to completely forget about the Paris Commune. 142 years is a long time. For some people, it might seem to be irrelevant today. But we have to remember that every socialist revolution that followed it was influenced by them.

The Red Star Rising
25th July 2014, 18:17
I'm a bit ashamed to admit it but I first learned of the Paris Commune purely because it's the name France gets if it has a communist government in the Rhyse and Fall of Civilization mod for Beyond the Sword. Up until that point I had never known there ever was a communist government of any sort in France. It would have been interesting to see how it would have gone had the Prussian Army not intervened given it's desire to humiliate France no matter who was at it's head.

bricolage
28th July 2014, 22:51
I'm a bit ashamed to admit it but I first learned of the Paris Commune purely because it's the name France gets if it has a communist government in the Rhyse and Fall of Civilization mod for Beyond the Sword. Up until that point I had never known there ever was a communist government of any sort in France. It would have been interesting to see how it would have gone had the Prussian Army not intervened given it's desire to humiliate France no matter who was at it's head.
The interesting thing is that destruction of the Commune doesn't really humiliate France (if you take France to be the French nation state). For sure it had been humiliated in the Franco-Prussian War and its this humiliation that leads some to join the Commune (i.e. Rossel who served as Minister of War was a Communard because he thought it was the patriotic option as opposed to the rest of the country which had surrendered), but without Bloody Week the Third Republic would probably never have survived. At the time monarchists were actually a majority in the Versailles assembly and they only didn't succeed because they couldn't agree who would be King or what flag they would fly, but by destroying the Commune Thiers had shown that the Republic could defeat internal threats and could 'unite' the country. Lissagary says that the Third Republic was built on a 'scaffold of 30,000 corpses' and he's right; it never would have survived without it.

I've never been too into 'what ifs' but you're right it is interesting to think about how it would have evolved had it not been defeated so quickly. It's definitely always seemed like things were radicalising as it went on and it's not complete speculation to say it would have taken more revolutionary moves than it had done so far. That being said, it had failed to spread to other French cities and I don't think there's any way it could have survived (Versailles or not Verailles) without that happening.

bricolage
28th July 2014, 22:55
From what little I know I am very interested in Louise Michel.
Hero worship is not normally very useful but it's hard not to fall into it when you talk about Louise Michel.

She was a teacher who organised through the Commune and fought on the barricades, challenged the judges at her trial to kill her but instead they exiled her to New Caledonia where, unlike the other exiles, she worked with indigenous Kanaks to fight the French colonists. Then she came to France and carried on joining riots and demonstrations, went on speaking tours around Europe and set up a school in London. All the while she was completely devoted to her mother and wrote poems about cats and flowers.

Like I said hero worship is useless and romanticising people of the past is usually just a way to shift attention way from the present, but seriously she was amazing.