Die Neue Zeit
20th May 2014, 01:25
This weekend, SYRIZA beat expectations in the Athens municipality and the wider Attica region. For good and for ill, this reminds me of the former PCI's electoral successes at the municipal level.
A comrade told me that what's needed is alternative opposition, not alternative government. A while back I suggested this framework (http://www.revleft.com/vb/state-left-t187609/index.html?p=2736508) and this one, too (http://www.revleft.com/vb/ideal-electoral-oppositioni-t180560/index.html?p=2615139):
For me, the optimal (as opposed to "ideal") pre-revolutionary-period situation regarding parliamentary vs. extra-parliamentary action is roughly this:
1) Mass party-movement of the working class with alternative culture institutions, on the basis of voting membership being restricted to those with working-class occupations or backgrounds
2) Majority of working-class adults spoil their ballots, whether as members or not
3) Much class-based political action puts external pressure on public policymaking (like the US Civil Rights movement)
4) Mass party-movement gets less reliable but still indicative electoral support from sympathetic working-class adults and those of other non-bourgeois (and maybe even non-petit-bourgeois) classes, them being coordinators, employed lumpenproletariat, etc. on the basis of protest votes
5) Protest votes (from the other classes and the aforementioned working-class adults) sufficient to make the parliamentary wing, at all levels of government (local, regional, national), large enough to hold the so-called "balance of power" and large enough to force the two mainstream electoral machines into perpetual "grand coalitions"
Whereby the second framework elaborates on the last two points of the first one:
1) At the local/municipal level, there should be an electoral campaign to organize just enough candidates to hold the "balance of power" in the city council. This is definitely beyond token commitment, but this is also a stance against certain r-r-r-revolutionaries' support of "municipal socialism" by organizing enough candidates for a council majority. It doesn't help that the likes of Rosa Luxemburg herself supported local opportunism. (http://www.icl-fi.org/english/esp/61/electoral.html)
In this first point, the aim is to have class opposition in the city council that would be outnumbered only by the combined forces of the other councillors. However, there would be the temptation to enter a reform coalition or to form an outright minority government, so party-recallable discipline and other sticks need to be employed.
2) At all other levels below the federal, there should be an electoral campaign to organize just enough candidates to hold the "balance of power" in the respective legislatures. Again, there should be no organizing for a legislative majority. At these levels, constitutional overhaul needs to be a disciplinary issue for those who might entertain "provincial socialism" or "regional socialism" fantasies; there is the imperative to not assume provincial or regional governance when said overhaul isn't on the horizon.
Again, the aim is to have class opposition in the legislature that would be outnumbered only by the combined forces of the other benchwarmers. This makes it much easier to discredit the other side as tweedle-dum, tweedle-dee, like with the perpetual governmental dance in Austria between the Christian Democrats and the Social-Democrats. However, again there would be the temptation to enter a reform coalition or to form an outright minority government, so again party-recallable discipline and other sticks need to be employed.
3) At the federal level, there should be an electoral campaign to organize just enough candidates to hold the "balance of power" in the legislature. There should definitely be no organizing for a legislative majority. Constitutional overhaul is a very real issue when faced with the imperative to not assume federal governance when said overhaul isn't on the horizon.
Like with lower levels, the aim is to have class opposition in the legislature that would be outnumbered only the combined forces of the other legislators. SYRIZA president Alexis Tsipras talked about being the "third force" in the EU parliament, for example. (http://www.alexistsipras.eu/index.php/8-news/135-alexis-tsipras-from-galicia-the-only-answer-to-the-crisis-is-solidarity-growth-democracy)
This makes it much easier to discredit the other side as tweedle-dum, tweedle-dee, like with the Grand Coalition in Germany. However, there would be the greatest temptation to enter a reform coalition or to form an outright minority government, so again party-recallable discipline and other sticks need to be employed.
4) It should be maintained that electoral support /= political support, and that popular support /= worker-class support. Majority political support from the non-management workforce in developed countries is outside the scenarios above, but is all that should be required.
A comrade told me that what's needed is alternative opposition, not alternative government. A while back I suggested this framework (http://www.revleft.com/vb/state-left-t187609/index.html?p=2736508) and this one, too (http://www.revleft.com/vb/ideal-electoral-oppositioni-t180560/index.html?p=2615139):
For me, the optimal (as opposed to "ideal") pre-revolutionary-period situation regarding parliamentary vs. extra-parliamentary action is roughly this:
1) Mass party-movement of the working class with alternative culture institutions, on the basis of voting membership being restricted to those with working-class occupations or backgrounds
2) Majority of working-class adults spoil their ballots, whether as members or not
3) Much class-based political action puts external pressure on public policymaking (like the US Civil Rights movement)
4) Mass party-movement gets less reliable but still indicative electoral support from sympathetic working-class adults and those of other non-bourgeois (and maybe even non-petit-bourgeois) classes, them being coordinators, employed lumpenproletariat, etc. on the basis of protest votes
5) Protest votes (from the other classes and the aforementioned working-class adults) sufficient to make the parliamentary wing, at all levels of government (local, regional, national), large enough to hold the so-called "balance of power" and large enough to force the two mainstream electoral machines into perpetual "grand coalitions"
Whereby the second framework elaborates on the last two points of the first one:
1) At the local/municipal level, there should be an electoral campaign to organize just enough candidates to hold the "balance of power" in the city council. This is definitely beyond token commitment, but this is also a stance against certain r-r-r-revolutionaries' support of "municipal socialism" by organizing enough candidates for a council majority. It doesn't help that the likes of Rosa Luxemburg herself supported local opportunism. (http://www.icl-fi.org/english/esp/61/electoral.html)
In this first point, the aim is to have class opposition in the city council that would be outnumbered only by the combined forces of the other councillors. However, there would be the temptation to enter a reform coalition or to form an outright minority government, so party-recallable discipline and other sticks need to be employed.
2) At all other levels below the federal, there should be an electoral campaign to organize just enough candidates to hold the "balance of power" in the respective legislatures. Again, there should be no organizing for a legislative majority. At these levels, constitutional overhaul needs to be a disciplinary issue for those who might entertain "provincial socialism" or "regional socialism" fantasies; there is the imperative to not assume provincial or regional governance when said overhaul isn't on the horizon.
Again, the aim is to have class opposition in the legislature that would be outnumbered only by the combined forces of the other benchwarmers. This makes it much easier to discredit the other side as tweedle-dum, tweedle-dee, like with the perpetual governmental dance in Austria between the Christian Democrats and the Social-Democrats. However, again there would be the temptation to enter a reform coalition or to form an outright minority government, so again party-recallable discipline and other sticks need to be employed.
3) At the federal level, there should be an electoral campaign to organize just enough candidates to hold the "balance of power" in the legislature. There should definitely be no organizing for a legislative majority. Constitutional overhaul is a very real issue when faced with the imperative to not assume federal governance when said overhaul isn't on the horizon.
Like with lower levels, the aim is to have class opposition in the legislature that would be outnumbered only the combined forces of the other legislators. SYRIZA president Alexis Tsipras talked about being the "third force" in the EU parliament, for example. (http://www.alexistsipras.eu/index.php/8-news/135-alexis-tsipras-from-galicia-the-only-answer-to-the-crisis-is-solidarity-growth-democracy)
This makes it much easier to discredit the other side as tweedle-dum, tweedle-dee, like with the Grand Coalition in Germany. However, there would be the greatest temptation to enter a reform coalition or to form an outright minority government, so again party-recallable discipline and other sticks need to be employed.
4) It should be maintained that electoral support /= political support, and that popular support /= worker-class support. Majority political support from the non-management workforce in developed countries is outside the scenarios above, but is all that should be required.