Our immediate task: in the defensive?

  1. Tower of Bebel
    Tower of Bebel
    I found this article very interesting:
    But we do still need to imagine the goal of a workers’ Europe on the road to the global overthrow of capitalism. If it is nearer to us than an ‘independent socialist Scotland’ or a ‘socialist Britain’ (or the Eurosceptic economist-Trotskyists’ ‘British workers’ state’), it is still some way away. The workers’ movement, from the trade union and Labourite tops to the economistic far left, remains dominated by national horizons.

    We have to overcome this domination. But in the meantime the present crisis is unlikely to be the occasion of the workers taking power in Europe or elsewhere. The crisis will therefore play out in ways dominated by the choices made by the capitalists and their governments. The immediate tasks of the workers’ movement are therefore to organise itself for defensive struggles against attempts by the capitalists and their governments to make the global working class pay for the losses of the crisis.

    This is not a task separate from the goal. By organising itself for defensive struggles, the working class can strengthen its collective power within capitalist society. It can build up an organised movement sufficiently that when - at some point in the future - not merely the capitalist financial system, but also the capitalist state order, falls into crisis, the workers’ movement will be in a position to challenge for power.
    The working class needs to rebuild its movement - most fundamentally, at the base, in the localities. This is true whether the coming recession is externalised onto other countries or becomes severe in the UK. A severe recession does not alter the basic tasks, but alters their urgency and relative priorities.

    Paradoxical as it may seem, in order to do this, the working class needs not merely to build trade unions, cooperatives and so on, but also to build a political party which aims for working class power, grasps the international unity of the working class and the class struggle and fights for proletarian internationalism, and fights for radical democracy both in the workers’ movement (against the labour bureaucracy and bureaucratic centralism) and in the society (against the capitalists’ bureaucratic-hierarchical state).

    The reason is two-sided. First, the trade unions and other forms of workers’ organisation are, precisely, sectional. In order to knit these sectional forms of organisation together so that they can effectively resist capitalist attacks, we need to organise from the starting point of the interests of the working class as a whole. We need to be working with the masses door to door and on the streets, not just in the workplaces, to organise class solidarity. The alternative is that social solidarity will be organised not on a class basis, but on the basis of religion and nationalism, and expressed in the growth of far-right politics.

    Secondly and on the other side. The working class has a mass workers’ party. It is called the Labour Party. But this party is, in reality, a party of the labour bureaucracy and the relationship of this bureaucracy to the capitalist state - through the unions’ ties to the state, through Labour MPs and councillors, and so on. This character of the Labour Party is politically expressed in its constitutionalism and nationalism: its subordination of working class solidarity to the interests of the British state.
    I think the article concludes that revolution would be very premature. What do you think?
  2. Die Neue Zeit
    Die Neue Zeit
    ^^^ Indeed (I see you've been reading the Weekly Worker and especially the stuff of CPGB comrade Mike Macnair much more often than I thought, and perhaps even my published e-mails to them ).

    While revolution is premature, I think that Comrade Macnair has exhibited reductionist binary thinking in this regard. Not every offensive struggle is one that poses the question of workers taking power. The immediate demands that I have outlined are intended to be quite offensive in nature. I've sent a letter to the CPGB comrades, which I hope will be published in next week's edition.
  3. LUXEMBURGUISTA
    LUXEMBURGUISTA
    Who knows what will be a offensive struggle or a deffensive struggle? The things can change very much in a process. And all is vinculated, or it can be.
    SALUD
  4. Die Neue Zeit
    Die Neue Zeit
    My letter has been published:

    http://www.cpgb.org.uk/worker/742/letters.html
  5. Tower of Bebel
    Tower of Bebel
    While revolution is premature, I think that Comrade Macnair has exhibited reductionist binary thinking in this regard. Not every offensive struggle is one that poses the question of workers taking power.
    Maybe not. The most important task for revolutionaries is to build a revolutionary-left opposition on the political scene. Since the party should be the backbone of the workers movement, the movement in general should adopt defensive measures until a real offensive organ has been built. Yet this doesn't mean that no offensive tactics can be used. The strongest defense is "the offensive": not the revolution, but offensive tactics.
  6. Die Neue Zeit
    Die Neue Zeit
    From your post I take it you're referring to non-programmatic issues ("measures" and "tactics").

    You may be interested in this article, which pertains directly to my programmatic section on minimum wage indexing, living wages, and SSOW ("cost of living adjustments"):

    http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2008/1...age-gains.html

    This would be a very crucial time to make people aware of the need to universalize "cost of living adjustments."
  7. Die Neue Zeit
    Die Neue Zeit
    * bump*

    Crisis and defensive demands by Mike Macnair

    [Letters]