Do things need to get worse before they get better?

[Dr Mindbender]

As the world deteriorates, and things get worse for ordinary people, part of me thinks we should be welcoming this in a perverse sort of way. If you look at previous experiences of communist revolution, the people were living in diabolical conditions, much much worse than anyone here has ever experienced. So the more privileged the country the farther it is away from a 'critical mass'of class conciousness.

So how much worse do things need to be? Will we have to be queing for a quarter of a loaf of bread and have soldiers shooting us in our protests like in tsarist petrograd before the working class finally wakes up?

And to that end should we actually be welcoming beourgiose attacks against our standards of living?

[trivas7]

So how much worse do things need to be? Will we have to be queing for a quarter of a loaf of bread and have soldiers shooting us in our protests like in tsarist petrograd before the working class finally wakes up?

Frankly, no one knows the answer to your question. It depends on many factors, not least of which is proletarian class consciousness.
The bourgeois media in the USA paints a picture as if the entire world is rapidly becoming middle class. I know this is a lie. Does anyone have any statistics re this?

[mikelepore]

Things were worse in Germany in 1933, and that didn't get people moving in the right direction; it got people moving in the wrong direction. It's not anger that people need, but understanding. The lesson has to be: Class divided society generally, and capitalism in particular, is the systematic cause of society's problems. It is a misconception to think that our problems can be solved under capitalism, and it is another misconception to think that our problems cannot be solved even if we remove capitalism. The point that has to be communicated is conceptual and sometimes subtle. Anger due to intolerable conditions interferes with the more subtle parts of the necessary understanding, such as the need to avoid installing leaders.

[trivas7]

The lesson has to be: Class divided society generally, and capitalism in particular, is the systematic cause of society's problems.
This alone is a tall order. People don't believe in class analysis, and they generally distrust government to improve their lives.

[Holden Caulfield]

tbh i dont think it needs to,

but i think it does at the same time, rather it is likely that things getting worse will push people to the left and therefore making things better, for example the Tories beating labour next election will push the Labour party left which is a good thing, and the Tories doing what they do best will push voters to the left as well,

this is a bad thing making good happen, and the Tories will need to beat labour to make it happen but it isnt the only thing that could force change, but perhaps the most likely

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ No, what needs to happen is the replacement of the Labour party as the "center-left" party by the LibDems.

[Holden Caulfield]

^which will happen when the Tories win, and the middle classes flee en masse from the New Labour Party,

how else do you see that occuring JR???

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ I don't think New Labour's prospects of going into third place (BEHIND the LibDems) are that prominent yet, though correct me if I'm mistaken. :)

[PRC-UTE]

What matters is whether working class people are getting organised in their community and workplace. How the class responds when things get worse depends on so many subjective factors, that there's no guarantee how they'll respond as capitalism continues to spiral down. There've been a few left wing journals writing about this topic, how contrary to what one would expect, the left is disintegrating and the far right appears to be benefitting far more than the left from recent economic downturns and social ills.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ The only reason, comrade, why it is "disintegrating" is because of continued sectarian BS as well as the lack of a prominent "utopian" presentation of post-bourgeois and ESPECIALLY of post-capital society!

For example, it's downright idiotic to read Louis Proyect call Cockshott and Cottrell's Towards A New Socialism "utopian," when clearly the information-technology means to LABOUR-CREDIT-PLAN the economy already exist!

[Not to mention that the information content of the "average Joe" has gone up, such that we know more in general than our 19th-century counterparts.]

But then again, guys like Proyect truly are lefts-of-capital (even if not lefts-of-bourgeois-capital) for a reason. :rolleyes:

[PRC-UTE]

^^^ The only reason, comrade, why it is "disintegrating" is because of continued sectarian BS as well as the lack of a prominent "utopian" presentation of post-bourgeois and ESPECIALLY of post-capital society!

For example, it's downright idiotic to read Louis Proyect call Cockshott and Cottrell's Towards A New Socialism "utopian," when clearly the information-technology means to LABOUR-CREDIT-PLAN the economy already exist!

[Not to mention that the information content of the "average Joe" has gone up, such that we know more in general than our 19th-century counterparts.]

But then again, guys like Proyect truly are lefts-of-capital (even if not lefts-of-bourgeois-capital) for a reason. :rolleyes:

I'm not sure I follow. You mean they haven't put forth an alternative to the status quo? I could see that: many Left sects are basically defined by what they're against, which isn't too inspiring.

I think it has more to do with the manner that eurocommunists and social democrats hitched their wagons to the state, and so could not continue to present themselves as any real alternative to the establishment. People around the world are wanting change, demanding it, but the reformist Left must play realpolitik, which undermines their credibility. The neo-fascists continue to pretend to be an alternative, as they always do. The false rebel act.

As for the revolutionary Left, we were either isoalted by improvements in living standards in the first world, drowned in blood during counter-revolution, or surrounded by imperialists and blockaded like Cuba. Feck, with my party, the IRSP, most our leadership were assasinated.

[mikelepore]

This alone is a tall order. People don't believe in class analysis, and they generally distrust government to improve their lives.

Today most people already realize it in the form of a large set of separate anecdotes that capitalism is the cause of their problems. Ask them whether the Hudson River became polluted with PCB due to the greed of General Electric, and they say yes. Ask them whether mining disasters could be prevented if not for private profit considerations, and they say yes. Ask them whether the law-makers are servants of the wealthy because of large campaign contribution and bribes, and they say yes. Ask them whether wars get fought over such economic factors as markets and raw materials and trade routes , with ideological slogans added to make those wars seem palatable, and they say yes. Socialist literature and oratory has to be a lesson about: "You know, folks, we don't merely have here a collection of tens of thousands of anecdotes that are unconnected with each other. We have a systematic pattern. We don't live under the best of all possible economic systems. It's rather easy to outline what a better system might consist of." Unfortunately, much socialist communication fails to deliver this lesson, and actually uses the disconnected anecdote style. The common leftist strategy of publishing a "list of demands" is one such disconnected format that lacks educational content.

[Hit The North]

Things will certainly have to get worse for the bourgeoisie and what we do in the here and now is also important.

Mikelepore's point about the crisis in 1930s Germany leading to the Nazis and deathcamps rather than socialist revolution is an important one because it highlights a number of things:

1. That the breakdown of Capitalist society will always throw up powerful movements of reaction just at the moment when large sections of the working class are becoming revolutionary. Germany, Italy, Spain and Greece are European examples which prove this. The history of other continents will have their examples.

2. How necessary it is for us, who already carry revolutionary consciousness, to be arguing, convincing and building support for our ideas in our workplaces and communities. Agitate! Educate! Organise!

3. How important anti-fascist activity is as part of our work in the here and now. Obviously, though, the extent of this is dictated by local conditions and priorities.

4. When the system is in crisis and workers are looking for answers, we need to be well organised and strong, otherwise we will fail. We have to be the rudder of the class, steering it in the right direction.

[PRC-UTE]

Today most people already realize it in the form of a large set of separate anecdotes that capitalism is the cause of their problems. Ask them whether the Hudson River became polluted with PCB due to the greed of General Electric, and they say yes. Ask them whether mining disasters could be prevented if not for private profit considerations, and they say yes. Ask them whether the law-makers are servants of the wealthy because of large campaign contribution and bribes, and they say yes. Ask them whether wars get fought over such economic factors as markets and raw materials and trade routes , with ideological slogans added to make those wars seem palatable, and they say yes. Socialist literature and oratory has to be a lesson about: "You know, folks, we don't merely have here a collection of tens of thousands of anecdotes that are unconnected with each other. We have a systematic pattern. We don't live under the best of all possible economic systems. It's rather easy to outline what a better system might consist of." Unfortunately, much socialist communication fails to deliver this lesson, and actually uses the disconnected anecdote style. The common leftist strategy of publishing a "list of demands" is one such disconnected format that lacks educational content.

Great post! :thumbup1:

[Die Neue Zeit]

I'm not sure I follow. You mean they haven't put forth an alternative to the status quo? I could see that: many Left sects are basically defined by what they're against, which isn't too inspiring.

I was hinting, comrade, at what makes social proletocracy "social": the "pre-communist" abolition of both wage slavery and capital through the full credit of labour (net of "common fund" deductions).

Some people are getting the picture that Lenin's infamous Social-Democratic conception of "socialism" is downright wrong!

[Devrim]

Feck, with my party, the IRSP, most our leadership were assasinated.

In some cases by different republican factions (e.g. Costello), or even by different INLA factions (e.g. Gallagher).

Devrim

[Joe Hill's Ghost]

I don't think so. Revolutions come about when the working class is well organized, and that organization comes sometimes from system wide pressures, though it also comes from years of education, agitation and organization. If our ideas and our methods don't diffuse through the class then when there are wars, recessions, layoffs etc. then the workers may not turn left, but far right.

[Dr Mindbender]

despite what all of you said, i cant help feeling that the russian revolution couldnt have happened without the shitty treatment and neglegence of the tsar.

I think we will need some sort of catastrophe in order for people to get off their ass, all or most previous revolutions happened in times of crisis.

[Joe Hill's Ghost]

despite what all of you said, i cant help feeling that the russian revolution couldnt have happened without the shitty treatment and neglegence of the tsar.

I think we will need some sort of catastrophe in order for people to get off their ass, all or most previous revolutions happened in times of crisis.

Well its a function of capitalism that bad things will happen. The owners will always try to get more for less, and power will always abuse those underneath it. That's why we organize.

[Dr Mindbender]

Well its a function of capitalism that bad things will happen. The owners will always try to get more for less, and power will always abuse those underneath it. That's why we organize.
my point is i believe revolution can only happen when those owners go too far in implementing those bad things. As did Nicholas II.

I dont think agitation alone is sufficient.

[Wake Up]

In the UK there is truth in what you say US.

Because, in the Uk at least, most people are doing alright financially they don't feel the need to try and change things and it often takes a few shocks to shake people from their stupor.
In the Uk the system is seen to be working by the majority of citizens. They may not like the government and they may have certain issues but they believe that the system works and therefore see no need (or don't understand a need) for change. Most people here don't actually understand what capitalism really is or why it is an exploitive form of society, I bet if they did the political climate here would be vastly different. As I always say it is as much about education as it is situation.

Crisis will change all that as "extreme" (to centrists) viewpoints become more identifiable to a larger proportion of the population.

You are right to say that crises will give us more popular support, but its not the only hope.

[Dr Mindbender]

yes sadly that is the case.

It pains me to admit it but i think the UK is closer to fascism than it is to socialism.

[Wake Up]

Indeed, I would say that our governmental system is even easier to abuse than that of Wiemar Germany.

[Dr Mindbender]

Indeed, I would say that our governmental system is even easier to abuse than that of Wiemar Germany.
thank hell i'm getting out of this country. I pity anyone here still in 20 years, the BNP will probably be in contention of election by then.

[PRC-UTE]

In some cases by different republican factions (e.g. Costello), or even by different INLA factions (e.g. Gallagher).

Devrim

There was a faction opposed to Gino, but Gallagher was killed by a drug dealer, who was later taken out.

And to name another example, the IPLO are widely believed to have been backed and equipped by the PIRA when they were attacking the IRSP leadership and INLA (the Provos called on the INLA to disband while they were being shot at and later absorbed the IPLO).

But none of this would change what I said anyway- many in republican groups who carried out "fueds" were directed by British intelligence, as were many Loyalists. That's been proven, and it's not surprising since it's standard counter-insurgency strategy.

[Devrim]

There was a faction opposed to Gino, but Gallagher was killed by a drug dealer, who was later taken out.

Yes, he was shot by Kevin McAlorum whose nine year-old sister incidentally was murdered almost certainly by the INLA Gallagher faction shortly after the attack. Also, unsurprisingly, this drug dealer was also actually an INLA member, and the attack was organised by the Torney faction (INLA-GHQ).

In the aftermath of this it didn't stop at the murder of nine year old girls. Torney and John Fennell, an IRSP founding member, were killed as were several others by members of Gallagher's faction.

This is the way they ran political disagreements in the IRSP/INLA.


But none of this would change what I said anyway- many in republican groups who carried out "fueds" were directed by British intelligence,

This is undeniably true. It doesn't mean that groups of this type don't lend themselves to this sort of infiltration though.

Devrim

[RevolutionaryKluffinator]

Frankly, no one knows the answer to your question. It depends on many factors, not least of which is proletarian class consciousness.
The bourgeois media in the USA paints a picture as if the entire world is rapidly becoming middle class. I know this is a lie. Does anyone have any statistics re this?

Actually, you can use the bourgeois to disprove itself. Just look up the statistics on world poverty. Even the United Nations(Notice: I recognize some of you do not believe this to be an accurate source considering which countries it is comprised of and where the funds are coming from) says that 3 billion people (roughly half the world population) live on under $2 a day. Additionally, 27,000 children die every day due to poverty related causes. Even they admit the complete disproportion of the wealth. According to them, the top 1% of the global population owns 41% of the wealth while the bottom 90% owns only 15% of the wealth.

The use of resources is completely disproportionate as well. 20% of the population of the already developed nations consume 86% of earth's resources. That leaves 14% left for the renamining 4 or 5 billion people.

So, no, the entire world is definitely not all going middle class.

[Mersault]

What constitutes worse? I suspect if people weren't able to choose from 102 different brans of cereal, they might have something to say about it.

[PRC-UTE]

This is the way they ran political disagreements in the IRSP/INLA.


:thumbup1:

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ Why the thumbs up to this (thuggery in the INLA and Devrim's accusation of thuggery on the part of the IRSP)? :confused:

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

thank hell i'm getting out of this country. I pity anyone here still in 20 years, the BNP will probably be in contention of election by then.


naaa i suspect they will crash and burn when the conservtives start to fuck things up.

[freakazoid]

I had originally planned to post my response here but it just kept on getting bigger and bigger so I created its own thread here, http://www.revleft.com/vb/some-my-ideas-t83188/index.html?p=1186077#post1186077 But for the short answer, yes, I believe it will have to get worse before it gets better.

[PRC-UTE]

^^^ Why the thumbs up to this (thuggery in the INLA and Devrim's accusation of thuggery on the part of the IRSP)? :confused:

It was a poor attempt at sarcasm after many drinks...

I responded that way because as usual Dev was generalising to the point of absurdity. There were many disputes settled without it coming to violence, and often when there was violence it was basically one-sided. Such as when Ta Power and John O Reilly were massacred at a meeting setup under the banner of peace and to avoid a split.

The problem is it takes just a very few scummers to cause chaos and set off fueding. Watched an interesting documentary about this last night, actually.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Comrade, thanks for clarifying. :)

[Devrim]

I responded that way because as usual Dev was generalising to the point of absurdity.

Notice that none of the facts were disputed.

Devrim

[Axel1917]

Things getting worse? I would not say that is the sole factor of a revolutionary situation. In fact, a lot depends on the subjective factor, i.e. the presence of a Bolshevik party capable of winning the workers and natural allies (peasantry, urban poor, etc.) to their side and leading the revolution to victory.

Just take France in 1968 for example. A first world country. There was most definitely a revolution, and it only was stopped due to lack of leadership (the Stalinist leadership helped derail it.). Hell, the bourgeois state could have probably been toppled without a shot being fired - the army said it would not fire on French workers, peasants were supportive of the working class, distributing free food to strikers, the intelligence service was refusing to pass on information, the police were refusing to go out and attack strikers (with the exception of a well known reactionary section...forgot the name...but they were demanding "risk pay"), etc.

Parts of the "First World" are also more advanced than some parts of the "Third World" in terms of class consciousness, in spite of things obviously being worse in the so-called Third World. Some "First World" nations have stronger leftist organizations, have strike movements, etc. while some "Third World" places clearly do not have such attributes at this point in time.

[Hit The North]

peasants were supportive of the working class
Small point, but it irritates me: Why do some people insist on talking about a peasantry in 20th Century France as if one could exist in a mature capitalist mode of production?