On the significance of Militant Materialism

[LoneRed]

I stumbled upon this little blurb, in The Lenin Anthology
selected,edited and introduced by Robert C. Tucker,

and recomend it, although there are a lot of debatable parts in it, i found this one most interesting

Bold is mine

"One of the biggest and most dangerous mistakes made by communist(as generally by revolutionaries who have successfully accomplished the beginning of a great revolution) is the idea that a revolution can be made by revolutionaries alone. On the contrary, to be successful, all serious revolutionary work requires that the idea that revolutionaries are capable of playing the part only of the vanguard of the truly virile and advanced class be understood and translated into action. A vanguard performs its task as a vanguard only when it is able to avoid being isolated from the mass of the people it leads and is able really to lead the whole mass forward.


All serious posts welcome, if you anarchists cant post without saying moot points id ask to refrain you from posting, we dont want anymore droll lenin bashing here. If you maturely engage the quote and the discussion welcome indeed.

[KC]

Vanguard is teh sux. Leninism is ev1l!!!



I got it out for all the anarchists; we can move on to serious discussion now.

[LoneRed]

thanks for that....

[LSD]

One of the biggest and most dangerous mistakes made by communist(as generally by revolutionaries who have successfully accomplished the beginning of a great revolution) is the idea that a revolution can be made by revolutionaries alone.

I don't know to what Lenin is refering specifically, but I would say that from Marx and Enbges onwards the general communist line was one of mass proletarian insurrection.

Indeed, if anyone can be credited with raising the signifcance of the revolutionary "party" above the general working class, it would be Lenin!

Marx spoke a good deal about the idea of a "revolutionary vanguard", but it was always in a rather fuzzy sense. It wasn't until after the success of the Bolsheviks, that communists began to equate revolutionary vanguard with the "communist party".


A vanguard performs its task as a vanguard only when it is able to avoid being isolated from the mass of the people it leads

Although I reject the entire notion of a "vanguard" organization, I would agree with the general message of this statement.

It is not enough to "be revolutionary", one's message must resonate with the general working class and appeal to their class interests.

The question, however, is should one attempt to "cater" one's message to meet the "opions" of the "average" worker, or should one attempt to change those opinions.

It would seem to me that LoneRed is asserting the former. Especially with his choice of thread title, he seems to be implying that "militant materialism" is detrimental to revolutioanry politics as it might "alienate" many workers.

The problem with that conclusion, however, is that while "militant materialist" communism may have failed to galvanize the modern proletariat, his alternative has failed even worse.

As communists, we are not materialist out of some slavish devotion to Marx or because it "seems like a good idea". Materialism is at the heart of the communist worldview. And to tell the workers anything else is not only dishonest, but ultimately counterproductive as a "communist" revolution is worthless if the proletariat doesn't actually know what they're fighting for.

A revolution lead by ignorant workers will not lead to proletarian self-governance, it will just lead to corrupt "revolutionary" leadership and another "red" state-capitalist autocracy ...or worse! :o

Do I really need to remind people about the South African communist party's attempt at "avoiding being isolated": "white workers of the world unite!"?

Now, there can be no doubt that racism was highly prevalent among the South African working class of the period and it's probably true that adopting a strident anti-racism attitude would have alienated many white workers.

That doesn't mean it shouldn't have been done.

Unless you're proposing that serious communists today embrace homophobia in the name of "fitting in"? :o

[LoneRed]

I really you dont hope that Just because i posted it means i agree with it. The name of the thread is the title of the work which that quote was taken, it wasnt a personal affirmation of belief. I personally dont believe in lenins view of the vanguard, yet i thought those parts were quite important, and interesting. I never posted that i believed all that.

[Ol' Dirty]

I think that a partially revoluytionary proletariat run by a Lenist form of vanguard is obsolete and, really, not enough! We need (LSD practically put the words in my mouth, once more) a mass proletarian insurection, a completely millitant proletariat ruled by the people, not only by the pety-bourgoise oligarchy... pardon me, the "Vanguard Party".