Against Organizations

[Brotto Rühle]

Yeah, the title might cause you to think "what's this ultra left scum bag saying now!", but it's not what you think. I'm not opposed to the organization of the working class when it's done from a spontaneous point, whether that means they organize a new party or into an existing one, or if that means they organize into councils or a new type of organization. My argument is that the current organizations are useless circle jerks that produce nothing. I want to know why anyone supports a certain group, and why you believe this party or international is "the one".

Why do you think the working class will all rush to your arms, and view you as their glorious leaders?

[helot]

Yeah, the title might cause you to think "what's this ultra left scum bag saying now!", but it's not what you think. I'm not opposed to the organization of the working class when it's done from a spontaneous point, whether that means they organize a new party or into an existing one, or if that means they organize into councils or a new type of organization. My argument is that the current organizations are useless circle jerks that produce nothing. I want to know why anyone supports a certain group, and why you believe this party or international is "the one".

Why do you think the working class will all rush to your arms, and view you as their glorious leaders?


Funny 'cause i am in an organisation and we're not looking for people to support us or anything. We are looking to help develop the strength and self-activity of the local working class. A useless circle jerk isn't the words i'd use.

Btw, how come you make a distinction between the working class forming their own organisations and the rest of us? My organisation is composed of the working class. We don't even admit management ffs.

[Brotto Rühle]

Funny 'cause i am in an organisation and we're not looking for people to support us or anything. We are looking to help develop the strength and self-activity of the local working class. A useless circle jerk isn't the words i'd use.

Btw, how come you make a distinction between the working class forming their own organisations and the rest of us? My organisation is composed of the working class. We don't even admit management ffs.

Because the organization that will make a difference will be one that is made by the working class themselves, whether they make something of nothing, or something of an already existing organization. I think it's impossible to predict.

However, what you are doing now, is essentially nothing.

[Luís Henrique]

Yeah, the title might cause you to think "what's this ultra left scum bag saying now!",

What is this ultra left scum bag saying now!? ;)1


but it's not what you think. I'm not opposed to the organization of the working class when it's done from a spontaneous point,

But what is "spontaneous"? Nothing humans do is "spontaneous", all our actions are thought beforehand, discussed with others, etc.


whether that means they organize a new party or into an existing one, or if that means they organize into councils or a new type of organization. My argument is that the current organizations are useless circle jerks that produce nothing.

Well, maybe. Which organisations do you have in mind? Are all of them really completely unproductive? Don't they ever do anything useful, be it calling a strike, organising a demonstration, writing analysis of the situations, explaining people the problems with capitalism?


I want to know why anyone supports a certain group, and why you believe this party or international is "the one".

Well, I want to know how a new group would have to be to earn your support, and why would then believe it to be the one.

For my part, I don't think any group is "the one", I don't believe any group can be "the one", and I think that any group that believes to be "the one" has already got something very wrong. This doesn't mean that I don't participate in one existing group, nor that I deny the validity of what each and every group does (even those who get it wrong by believing they are "the one").

Luís Henrique

[helot]

Because the organization that will make a difference will be one that is made by the working class themselves, whether they make something of nothing, or something of an already existing organization. I think it's impossible to predict.

My organisation is made by members of the working class. Of course it's not the working class as a whole organised which is of vital necessity but i've got no pretense that it'll be the organisation of which i'm apart of hell i'd be worried if it was.




However, what you are doing now, is essentially nothing.

Cool so i'm doing nothing even though you don't know me nor what i do on a day to day basis? What must i do to be doing something that isn't essentially nothing? I beseech you, oh great sage, to grant me your wisdom...

[Geiseric]

The thing communists should be doing is entering already existing non political bodies such as student fightback coalitions at schools threatened with cuts. Or join a union and try to be the best at what you do. Eventually a socialist party has to be organized nationally, which pulls togather everybody nationwide whom agrees with a programme built with mobilization, not any abstract "leftist" jargon, in mind.

Edit: Almost said national socialist party by accident.

[Jimmie Higgins]

However, what you are doing now, is essentially nothing.

If attempting to promote class independence and organization as much as we subjectively can is doing nothing, what is your alternative strategy? If class self organization just comes out of thin air and we just have to wait for it... Aren't you just arguing for doing nothing? If so, then what do you care if people are wasting their time if it doesn't matter anyway?

I think spontaneity and organization are simply different aspects of the same process. Take a small example: occupy. The initial sit in was organized, but the resonance and the way it spread were spontaneous which fed back into new and different organizing.


My argument is that the current organizations are useless circle jerks that produce nothing. I want to know why anyone supports a certain group, and why you believe this party or international is "the one".if a group thinks it has all the answers and is the leading force of a currently non existent working class movement, the the problem isn't really organization... Self delusion or dogmatism might be more the issue.


Why do you think the working class will all rush to your arms, and view you as their glorious leaders?you mean spontaneously? Why do you think workers will all rush to your views? Workers are a large and diverse group, they don't just develop ideas as a reflex of class but in dialogue, so workers who want to organize around independent class interests and self emancipation should do what they subjectively can to argue for this and against liberal ideas and reactionary ones in my view. It doesn't mean it's easy or is guaranteed to go anywhere, but not trying to organize our own class thing and class ideas is probably more of a guarantee that nothing will happen.

[MarxSchmarx]

I changed the thread title a bit, the original was just too misleading.

[Brotto Rühle]

But what is "spontaneous"? Nothing humans do is "spontaneous", all our actions are thought beforehand, discussed with others, etc.
The Soviets of the 1905 Russian Revolution. Spontaneous to me isn't a magic spell, a revolution from the sky, but organic and from the working class organization which occurs in a revolutionary moment.




Well, maybe. Which organisations do you have in mind? Are all of them really completely unproductive? Don't they ever do anything useful, be it calling a strike, organising a demonstration, writing analysis of the situations, explaining people the problems with capitalism?Workers call strikes, unions do as well...however, true revolutionary and spontaneous action are wild cat strikes, which always have more on an impact. Strikes can't just be called for by a central committee, and expect them to be fruitful.

These other things, are nice, but are on such a minor scale, that they affect little to nothing.



Well, I want to know how a new group would have to be to earn your support, and why would then believe it to be the one.It would have to be a genuinely working class, I don't think I can describe what the organization would look like.


For my part, I don't think any group is "the one", I don't believe any group can be "the one", and I think that any group that believes to be "the one" has already got something very wrong. This doesn't mean that I don't participate in one existing group, nor that I deny the validity of what each and every group does (even those who get it wrong by believing they are "the one").

Luís HenriqueWhat are some concrete things that these organizations have done to further workers class consciousness, etc. Where are the membership booms? Where are workers dropping unions for radical unions or strike committees because of the SWP or SPGB or CPB?

[G4b3n]

I Would say the majority of revleft are proletarians so it makes little since to distinguish between "us" and "the working class".

[Luís Henrique]

The Soviets of the 1905 Russian Revolution. Spontaneous to me isn't a magic spell, a revolution from the sky, but organic and from the working class organization which occurs in a revolutionary moment.

Sure, but then even things like the RCP are "spontaneous"; they arise from the working class, in relation to its level of consciousness, or lack thereof.

And, of course, "revolutionary moments" will see more radical forms of organisation. We just happen to not be on a revolutionary moment.


Workers call strikes, unions do as well...however, true revolutionary and spontaneous action are wild cat strikes, which always have more on an impact. Strikes can't just be called for by a central committee, and expect them to be fruitful.

Well, it depends on whether such central committee is responsive to the rank and file. But wild cat strikes are very rare; they are by no means the rule. The impact of a strike depends on its strength (and on the strength of the other side), not on how it was called.


These other things, are nice, but are on such a minor scale, that they affect little to nothing.

Nope, they aren't. They are the kind of thing that makes "spontaneous" movements possible.


It would have to be a genuinely working class, I don't think I can describe what the organization would look like.

Sounds like a religious thing. A fetish, a myth, a mystification.


What are some concrete things that these organizations have done to further workers class consciousness, etc. Where are the membership booms? Where are workers dropping unions for radical unions or strike committees because of the SWP or SPGB or CPB?

Well, I can't speak for "organisations" in general. You would have to look at them by yourself, and decide what they have been doing, or not doing.

I certainly do not propose, or support those who propose, workers dropping unions, be it for "radical unions" or "strike committees"; I think such positions are divisive and foolish. And it seems to me that you are obsessed with membership "booms". In non-revolutionary situations, there will be no membership booms, at least not for revolutionary organisations, or on revolutionary grounds. If an organisation is seeking a membership boom, they are mistaken; if they obtain a membership boom, they are probably even more mistaken.

I think you are seeking theoretical justification for inaction ("nothing is revolutionary, so let's do nothing"). If so, you are being contradictory, performing something like "anti-activism activism". If it is really indifferent, then why should you care about what other people do or do not?

Luís Henrique