Question

[Red Flag Waver]

Does most of the population have to be sympathetic towards communism for a successful revolution to take place?

[Blake's Baby]

Very interesting question. I've busy on another thread arguing this point - I think it's to do with how one sees the relationship between consciousness and action.

My short version is no, people can embark on the processes that lead them to revolution and the creation of a socialist society without having any idea or knowledge beforehand where those processes are going to lead.

[Luisrah]

Very interesting question. I've busy on another thread arguing this point - I think it's to do with how one sees the relationship between consciousness and action.

My short version is no, people can embark on the processes that lead them to revolution and the creation of a socialist society without having any idea or knowledge beforehand where those processes are going to lead.

But they do have to be conscious that their [class] interests are opposite from their bosses'.
How can the new society be created if ithe agents of it's creation don't know how to do it?

[Blake's Baby]

1 - knowing that you need to fight back against the attacks of the capitalists doesn't mean that you have to realise there and then that the workers' councils are the way for the proletariat to exercise its power and destroy capitalism or have a worked-out theory of class society, or revolution, or even consciousness. One doesn't have to have read a word of Marx (or even heard of him) to come to an understanding that 'they' have the power and what 'we' can do about it is resist.

2 - it's perfectly possible to do something without knowing beforehand you're going to do it. Falling off a cliff, for example. You don't need to have planned it, or any understanding of a theory of gravity, to fall off a cliff. You can even 'not want to hit the ground', but still you'll fall if you go off the edge. Likewise one can catch a ball without understanding calculus, catch a cold without understanding microbiology, etc.

[Zukunftsmusik]

"The people aren't free when they are educated, but educated when they are free," as Marx said. [EDIT: It's come to my attention that this is not a quote form Marx, but from the anarchist Carlo Pisacane. Thanks to GDU] Or at least something along those lines.

If we take the German revolution as an example, a great majority of the workers voted for the counter-revolutionary SPD. Does this mean they weren't class conscious? The same workers fought "on the ground" against the counter-revolutionary forces, striked etc. It may seem contradictory, but it is how the revolution works. Class consciousness was definitely "in the making" in Germany at this time, but the ballot box is not where it's measured.

So that's a no to the OP's question.

[argeiphontes]

Does most of the population have to be sympathetic towards communism for a successful revolution to take place?

It might depend on how you think about the revolution. If the revolution is supposed to be one conflagration where workers rise up and overthrow their oppressors, then you'd probably need most people to be either pro or neutral towards communism.

On the other hand, if revolution is a process, and people are radicalized by exposure to the process, then it could occur in a certain area and then spread through society.

I'm no revolutionary theorist, but it doesn't make sense to me to say that a minority vanguard or whatever is going to change an entire society. If that were the case, we'd be closer to communism than we are now. Also, I'm not in the business of leading people over cliffs. The goal of the destination, the rational and perhaps irrational reasons for getting there, must be part of the collective consciousness for the goal to be reachable at all.

It's like a road trip. I don't just put my friends in a car and then blindly take them to Toledo, and expect them to realize that Toledo is a great place to go on a road trip after we get there. I would try to get them to understand why we should go to Toledo before the trip began. If they didn't know where they were going, they could take a wrong turn somewhere. If they didn't know all the wonders of Toledo, they could choose a pretty but vacuous hole in the ground like the Grand Canyon instead. When they finally saw a sign reading "Toledo, 20 miles" they could decide to turn the car around rather than face the (real or imagined) horrors of being in Toledo.

Of course, how I would convince them would require an analysis of the current state of the road-tripping classes. ;)

[Brotto Rühle]

The act of revolution itself, the seizure of political power, and the maintaining of political power will be what creates the "mass consciousness". Not a vanguard party, not selling newspapers, and not protesting the XL pipeline.

[Blake's Baby]

...

I'm no revolutionary theorist, but it doesn't make sense to me to say that a minority vanguard or whatever is going to change an entire society. If that were the case, we'd be closer to communism than we are now. Also, I'm not in the business of leading people over cliffs....

I hope you're not in the 'business' of 'leading' people anywhere. I'll be arguing against following you anywhere, 'to socialism' or anywhere else.


... The goal of the destination, the rational and perhaps irrational reasons for getting there, must be part of the collective consciousness for the goal to be reachable at all.

It's like a road trip. I don't just put my friends in a car and then blindly take them to Toledo, and expect them to realize that Toledo is a great place to go on a road trip after we get there. I would try to get them to understand why we should go to Toledo before the trip began. If they didn't know where they were going, they could take a wrong turn somewhere. If they didn't know all the wonders of Toledo, they could choose a pretty but vacuous hole in the ground like the Grand Canyon instead. When they finally saw a sign reading "Toledo, 20 miles" they could decide to turn the car around rather than face the (real or imagined) horrors of being in Toledo...

I can walk 15 miles north of my house and arrive in the town of Loughborough. I know Loughborough is there. If someone didn't know Loughborough was there, and they walked 15 miles north of my house, where would they end up?

[Geiseric]

The act of revolution itself, the seizure of political power, and the maintaining of political power will be what creates the "mass consciousness". Not a vanguard party, not selling newspapers, and not protesting the XL pipeline.

But the peoples whose lives are ruined by the pipeline won't be able to struggle for anything except a days worth of food. You're effectively abandoning huge sections of the working class with that attitude who have day to day things to worry about.

[argeiphontes]

I hope you're not in the 'business' of 'leading' people anywhere. I'll be arguing against following you anywhere, 'to socialism' or anywhere else.

I was just using a rhetorical device. But in point of fact, I think that couldn't be more obvious ;)

[Ocean Seal]

The answer to this question is quite nuanced? Do I believe that the people will indoctrinate themselves with the works of Marx and pursue the most socialist approach when they take control of the capitalist state? No. Do I believe that a handful of professional revolutionaries will take control of an advanced capitalist nation? No.
Workers will break down the state of capitalism and will assemble naturally in a matter which controls the economy, and in turn the state which they create will simply facilitate relationships between the workers (which should be composed of communists) and control counter-revolutionary activity.

[Blake's Baby]

I was just using a rhetorical device. But in point of fact, I think that couldn't be more obvious ;)

So what was your point?

If you're not about 'leading' the proletariat (over a cliff or anywhere else) what is your take on the question at hand? Does the working class need to acquire 'socialist theory' before the revolution, or does it evolve its own methods in the struggle?

[argeiphontes]

^ My point was that I don't think it should be led. It should understand the goal and what it takes to get there.

[Blake's Baby]

That's not the only options.

1 - 'be led to socialism';
2 - 'learn how to get to socialism and then go';
3 - 'invent socialism as the working class goes along'.

I'm a supporter of option 3. You seem to support option 2, and reject option 1. However, to my mind option 2 is just the same as option 1. Just because the woring class acquires some socialist theory from somewhere (where?) it doesn't mean it isn't being led. It isn't creating its own theory from its own practice, it's relying on being told what socialism is.

[Geiseric]

Well if the majority of people don't think there's anything wrong with capitalism, than a minority will try to impress socialism which numerically won't work. The bolsheviks had the support of the majority of people in Russia which is why they won, opposed to the German revolutionaries who did not have the support of the majority of Germans for a variety of reasons, mostly disorganization, but it was in due in large part to oppression by the german state.

[Brotto Rühle]

But the peoples whose lives are ruined by the pipeline won't be able to struggle for anything except a days worth of food. You're effectively abandoning huge sections of the working class with that attitude who have day to day things to worry about.

You think protests will stop the pipeline?Like all those protests which stopped the Iraq war?

[The Idler]

Short answer to the OP is yes. If you're interested in tendencies, this is where libertarian communists such as the SPGB (who argue revolutionaries create the revolution) differ from some left communists such as the ICC (who argue the revolution creates the revolutionaries). I may be simplifying a bit here, but thought this would be useful as a summary.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

I'm going to go with no for a couple reasons. First, because as people have mentioned above, to some degree one can "do communism" without needing to be a communist - in some cases, the contradictions within capitalism point to communist possibilities when they sharpen as crisis. Secondly, because no social change has ever really involved a "majority" of people. Most people, in most times and most places, even in the midst of great upheavals continue to go about their routines, until conditions render those routines impossible (at which point they adjust).

That said, I do believe an active communist minority is a necessity - acting to bring together various struggles that point to communism, challenging reactionary ideology within struggles, etc. I don't think communism will simply emerge "organically" in the sense of without communist theory. That said, I think communist theory has an organic character, and to a large degree, simply means telling people what they already know in such a way as to make them act on it, but that's another thread entirely.