'Anarchist DoP'? -- Split from Chit Chat

[Sentinel]

I am influenced by the ideologies of anarcho-syndicalism and technocracy. I believe in an 'anarchist DoP', I want the working class through a federation of unions/guids/workers councils to rule a stateless society.

I want to create a society without a state or a price system, which is run on the principles of federalism and direct democracy, and has it's production and distribution managed by energy accounting. I am black, red and grey.

[Black Dagger]

I believe in an 'anarchist DoP', I want the working class through a federation of unions/guids/workers councils to rule a stateless society.

Are you insinuating that the latter is the former? Because there's no such thing as an 'anarchist DoP' within the anarchist tradition.

[Sentinel]

Are you insinuating that the latter is the former?Yes. A true dictatorship of the proletariat, as opposed to that of a 'vanguard party' or any organisation claiming to 'represent' the working class. Direct democracy rather than representation, etc. That's DoP for me.

And btw, I put 'anarchist DoP' in quotes for the precise reason, that such a term does not exist in 'anarchist tradition'. ;)

[Devrim]

Are you insinuating that the latter is the former? Because there's no such thing as an 'anarchist DoP' within the anarchist tradition.

I think that there is:


We are introducing a slight variation in anarchism into our programme. The establishment of a revolutionary Junta. As we see it, the revolution needs organisms to oversee it, and repress, in an organised sense, hostile sectors. As current events have shown such sectors do not accept oblivion unless they are crushed.
There may be anarchist comrades who feel certain ideological misgivings, but the lesson of experience is enough to induce us to stop pussy-footing.
Unless we want a repetition of what is happening with the present revolution, we must proceed with the utmost energy against those who are not identified with the working class.



Devrim

[Black Dagger]

I don't see how that constitutes a new concept within the anarchist tradition. If the FODG are advocating something tantamount to a state, with its own armed police force and army this would be a departure from anarchist thought - indeed, contradictory to it.

But the idea of organised, violent suppression of the bourgeoisie and its allies engaged in counter-revolution is not a new concept to the anarchist tradition (this is one of the primary concerns of the organised class in any transitional situation)- obviously i would have to read the rest of that document to understand what the FODG is proposing specifically - but i doubt it would be the same as a 'DoP' in the parlance of most marxists (and they certainly haven't called it such in that snippet).

[Devrim]

What they argue for there is exactly what the dictatorship of the proletariat is. I don't think that it matters that they didn't use the term. In fact it is quite understandable why they didn't. If you read the text though, they clearly call for class dictatorship.

Devrim

[Colonello Buendia]

I'm against any class ruling, I think that through federated groups/union/guilds and other groups we should overthrow the capitalist system and their bourgeois defenders to then create a collectivised communal leaderless society, not a class dictatorship.

[KC]

I'm against any class ruling, I think that...we should overthrow the...bourgeois defenders

That's about as contradictory as you can get.

[Marsella]

If someone is against the concept of the dictatorship of the proletariat, i.e. rule by the working class, then I wonder if this is the right forum for them.

[Colonello Buendia]

wrong phraseology:blushing:, I meant, though the workers should overthrow the oppressive Bourgeois, there shouldn't be a "dotp" in the marxist sense, there should be a stateless leaderless society in which the mass the proletarians have their say with use of direct democracy. the by this point ex bourgeois people will also get their say as to how every commune and collective work. if that makes any sense, I'm incredibly tired and probably talking out my arse. I pretty much agree with Black Dagger

[KC]

wrong phraseology:blushing:, I meant, though the workers should overthrow the oppressive Bourgeois, there shouldn't be a "dotp" in the marxist sense, there should be a stateless leaderless society in which the mass the proletarians have their say with use of direct democracy.1. There will need to be a means of suppressing counterrevolution. This is the dictatorship of the proletariat.
2. Generally the dictatorship of the proletariat is organized through the most democratic form possible - the soviets.
3. In every political movement leaders will inevitably rise, whether by formal/legal power or through simple social recognition.


the by this point ex bourgeois people will also get their say as to how every commune and collective work.

Why the hell would you give counterrevolutionaries support in their attacks on proletarian power?


if that makes any sense, I'm incredibly tired and probably talking out my arse.

I sure as hell hope so.

[Os Cangaceiros]

1. There will need to be a means of suppressing counterrevolution.

So much for the Paris Commune being an example of the DoP, then.

When most people hear the word "dictatorship", they get a pretty negative picture in their head. They probably visualize any number of historical scumbags. But it's my understanding that the word "dictatorship" had different connotations in Marx's time than it does in our time.

[Kropotesta]

Why the hell would you give counterrevolutionaries support in their attacks on proletarian power?
Sorry Che, we should exterminate all counterrevoluntaries.....:rolleyes:
If you read Blackflags comment, you'd see he put ex-Bourgeois, not active counterrevolutionaries. I'd doubt any vehment counterrevs would beable to operate from the inside, as it were.

[KC]

So much for the Paris Commune being an example of the DoP, then.The Paris Commune had a means of suppressing counterrevolution. The dictatorship of the proletariat can only be maintained through such suppression (i.e. arming of the proletariat, censorship of bourgeois propaganda, trial of counterrevolutionary elements, etc...). Therefore the dictatorship of the proletariat is maintained through a proletarian state apparatus by its very definition.


I'd doubt any vehment counterrevs would beable to operate from the inside, as it were.

A cursory knowledge of past revolutions shows the complete opposite. This is a ridiculous and baseless claim.

[Os Cangaceiros]

censorship of bourgeois propaganda

Define "bourgeois propaganda".

[KC]

On the Press

In the serious decisive hour of the Revolution and the days immediately following it, the Provisional Revolutionary Committee is compelled to adopt a series of measures against the counter-revolutionary press of all shades.


Immediately on all sides there are cries that the new Socialist authority is in this violating the essential principles of its own programme by an attempt against the freedom of the press.


The Workers’ and Peasants’ Government calls the attention of the population to the fact that in our country, behind this liberal shield, is hidden the opportunity for the wealthier classes to seize the lion’s share of the whole press, and by this means to poison the popular mind and bring confusion into the consciousness of the masses.


Every one knows that the bourgeois press is one of the most powerful weapons of the bourgeoisie. Especially in this critical moment, when the new authority of the workers and peasants is in process of consolidation, it is impossible to leave it in the hands of the enemy, at a time when it is not less dangerous than bombs and machine-guns. This is why temporary and extraordinary measures have been adopted for the purpose of stopping the flow of filth and calumny in which the yellow and green press would be glad to drown the young victory of the people.


As soon as the new order is consolidated, all administrative measures against the press will be suspended; full liberty will be given it within the limits of responsibility before the law, in accordance with the broadest and most progressive regulations….


Bearing in mind, however, the fact that any restrictions of the freedom of the press, even in critical moments, are admissible only within the bounds of necessity, the Council of People’s Commissars decrees as follows:


1. The following classes of newspapers shall be subject to closure: (a) Those inciting to open resistance or disobedience to the Workers’ and Peasants’ Government; (b) Those creating confusion by obviously and deliberately perverting the news; (c) Those inciting to acts of a criminal character punishable by the laws.


2. The temporary or permanent closing of any organ of the press shall be carried out only by virtue of a resolution of the Council of People’s Commissars.


3. The present decree is of a temporary nature, and will be revoked by a special ukaz when normal conditions of public life are re-established.


President of the Council of People’s Commissars,

Vladimir Ulianov (Lenin).

[Colonello Buendia]

DOTP by your definition is basically the government with a bit more representation, a Bakunin quote ran along the lines of the people won't much enjoy being beaten with the stick even if it's called the peoples stick. yes every commune and collective will have means to defend itself against counter revolutionaries but there sure as hell won't be leaders.

[BobKKKindle$]

I meant, though the workers should overthrow the oppressive Bourgeois, there shouldn't be a "dotp" in the marxist sense, there should be a stateless leaderless society in which the mass the proletarians have their say with use of direct democrac

Even after a revolution has occurred, there will still be groups which are hostile to the workers and will aim to return to capitalism, by using force to take control of production and restore private ownership.

A state is an instrument of class oppression - such that, when faced with the threat of counter-revolution, the proletariat will also require their own state apparatus. This state will, however, be different from that of capitalist society, it will not be based on armed bodies of men which are separate from the rest of society, but through workers militias located in every workplace and controlled by means of councils.


Lenin, SaR:


Furthermore, during the transition from capitalism to communism suppression is still necessary, but it is now the suppression of the exploiting minority by the exploited majority. A special apparatus, a special machine for suppression, the “state”, is still necessary, but this is now a transitional state. It is no longer a state in the proper sense of the word; for the suppression of the minority of exploiters by the majority of the wage slaves of yesterday is comparatively so easy, simple and natural a task that it will entail far less bloodshed than the suppression of the risings of slaves, serfs or wage-laborers, and it will cost mankind far less. And it is compatible with the extension of democracy to such an overwhelming majority of the population that the need for a special machine of suppression will begin to disappear. Naturally, the exploiters are unable to suppress the people without a highly complex machine for performing this task, but the people can suppress the exploiters even with a very simple “machine”, almost without a “machine”, without a special apparatus, by the simple organization of the armed people (such as the Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies, we would remark, running ahead).

[KC]

DOTP by your definition is basically the government with a bit more representation, a Bakunin quote ran along the lines of the people won't much enjoy being beaten with the stick even if it's called the peoples stick.

I have no idea what you're trying to say here.


yes every commune and collective will have means to defend itself against counter revolutionaries but there sure as hell won't be leaders.

I think the word you are looking for is rulers, not leaders. Learn that they do not necessarily mean the same thing.

[Os Cangaceiros]

You still didn't really define what is meant by "bourgeois propaganda". And it's extremely important that it gets defined, for reasons that should be more than obvious.

I'm not exactly sure that the Bolsheviks and the Russians revolution should be presented as shining examples of how "bourgeois propaganda" was censored successfully, either.

[KC]

You still didn't really define what is meant by "bourgeois propaganda".

What I posted earlier pretty much defines it. I don't see why you're having trouble understanding that.

[Devrim]

If the FODG are advocating something tantamount to a state, with its own armed police force and army this would be a departure from anarchist thought - indeed, contradictory to it.

What does 'state' mean? I think it is fair to say that any real anarchist advocates working class power*, and even though they don't always say it something akin to the 'dictatorship of the proletariat'. If they don't want to use those words to describe it, then that is their choice. You can call it what you want.

I think some of this is a purely semantic argument. What do you mean when you say:


a 'DoP' in the parlance of most marxists

Devrim

*I am not really interested in other types of people who call themselves anarchists

[Devrim]

DOTP by your definition is basically the government with a bit more representation, a Bakunin quote ran along the lines of the people won't much enjoy being beaten with the stick even if it's called the peoples stick. yes every commune and collective will have means to defend itself against counter revolutionaries but there sure as hell won't be leaders.

...And let's just look at Bakunin's ideas:


It is necessary that in the midst of popular anarchy, which will make up the very life and all the energy of the revolution, the unity of revolutionary thought and action should be embodied in a certain organ. That organ must be the secret and world-wide association of the international brothers
...the army must always be the people - but a revolutionary general staff composed of devoted, energetic and intelligent individuals who are above all sincere - not vain or ambitious - friends of the people, capable of serving as intermediaries between the revolutionary idea and the popular instincts. The number of these individuals should not, therefore, be too large. For the international organisation throughout Europe one hundred serious and firmly united revolutionaries would be sufficient ...


It looks like government with a bit less representation to me.

Devrim

[Devrim]

We have a very different conception of the idea of the state in the period of transition than the Trotskyists. First we agree with the anarchists when they say that the state is always a reactionary organisation, and also agree with them that the bourgeois state must be smashed in a revolution.

However, we recognise that a state will exist during the period of transition. However, it is not a working state, and we believe that the working class must exercise it's dictatorship separate from, and when/if necessary against the state.

Devrim

[Sentinel]

It looks like government with a bit less representation to me.And a vanguard! :ohmy:

I'm not sure I support that by Bakunin. Too centralised. Would depend on how and by whom they were elected and recallable by, and what they exactly were supposed to do, what they got to decide etc. etc, but I'm generally against such an idea.

It would also make a difference, whether or not they were a permanent commission or only during the revolutionary war, and only in charge of the war effort. Then I could maybe support it.

By the way, I agree with what you have said about 'anarchist DoP' -- it's a semantic issue, class war anarchists support an 'anarchist DoP' regardless what they choose to call it.