letters journal

anti-political communist journal from the us. here.

from total destruction #4, via letters journal blog:

Notes On Attacking the Cult of Personal Agency

• Regardless of my political positions or activity, I cannot transform material conditions. Involvement in a political group or “movement” does not change this. I can, at best, make it onto the evening news.
• The cult of personal agency pushes forward the ideology that individual choices and ideas can change the world. This cult pushes people in circles of useless political activity – in addition to the usual working, shopping, and so on – and leaves many burned out when all of their actions amount to nothing more than a strange social life.
• The expectation of doing the right thing, dressing correctly for political activity, and articulating acceptable positions on everything makes for awful personal and romantic relationships within the pro-revolutionary milieu. Specifics differ depending on ideology and subculture, of course, but the dedication to evangelism and party building (spreading consciousness) is constant.
• Sectarianism and ‘infighting’ emerge when one believes that political militants change the world, but the world doesn’t change. The lack of change is attributed to bad organizing, lack of creativity, or faulty leadership. As with advertising firms, the wording and layout of leaflets, websites, and posters takes on monumental importance.
• Political militants hold each other to a completely different set of standards than they do their coworkers and neighbors, who are not considered worthy of leadership or agency.
• Pro-revolutionaries, in their self-importance, make decisions not based on self-interest but on political strategy and tactics. In this way, the cult of personal agency is a cult of sacrifice.
• Do you think the possibility of revolution is related to what you happen to be doing?
• “tis true that slacking is likely the closest we’ll ever get to heaven…”

Not to revive a VERY old discussion here but don't you agree the core of this argument is rooted in a highly deterministic view of materialism as the motor behind revolution. As in: Material conditions motivate the working class to action and ONLY when those conditions are 'right', akin to the stars being 'right', then will there be revolution, this completely being out of control of the pro-revolutionary milieu. This completely dismissing class conciousness of course.

I disagree with such a notion on the basis that revolutionary activity rooted in perserving or improving the material conditions of the working class in the here and now, in a fashion that is both aimed at defending working class conditions and is an assault on Capital, heightens class conciousness and pushes towards revolution. What are your thoughts on this?

well, i have to confess i have not read letters journal as much as i would like (and when i get the chance i will perhaps revisit this) but from what i have seen, i agree there is a certain amount of determinism behind this and the "nihilist communist" argument generally but i think the call to "do nothing" and break down the pro-revolutionary milieu is fundamentally about divorcing ourselves from the historical structures, ideas, deficiencies, etc that have plagued it for so many decades and in doing so attempt to discover new ways to relate to each other and those around us and use this as a starting ground for our "attack" (if you can call it that) on capital. i think the duponts make this pretty clear in some of their texts and a lot of letters journal seems to be about personal relations.

while there may be some value from a purely self-interested perspective in attempting to improve or preserve the material conditions of our class, i do not think this actually builds a revolutionary consciousness or moves us towards revolution in any way, even if it attempts to be an "assault." the pro-revolutionary milieu is often completely outside this process on the ground, of course, and where it is present it tends to still exist as a separate entity, usually manipulating the "regular" workers involved in some fashion or another. i think this is why the nihilist communist attack on these practices is so important. the pro-revolutionary movement as a whole has basically marched its way into a giant rut while the forces it claims to oppose have moved on quite considerably. i mean, honestly, i think it is practically insane to believe that using almost the same methods as pro-revolutionaries a century ago we are going to build a movement that was stronger than their movement at its strongest and can defeat an infinitely more fearsome ruling class in some sort of apocalyptic clash with capital. what the duponts and letters journal are, i think at least partially, about is pulling ourselves out of the rut, surveying the landscape and beginning to chart a path from which to proceed.

I was curious, what's the nihilist communist opposition to the concept of class consciousness? Surely if we accept that as a natural circumstance, capital faced with a constant falling rate of profit will have to take measures to counter that, in doing so they will further agitate our class till the point when the class will naturally seek its emancipation through taking control of their own workplaces and communities, is this not coming to a realisation of class and which one they are in (even if most people will not have an in depth analysis of what it is)?

they're critical of the idea that class conciousness as transmitted by the "missionary work" of the revolutionary milieu will lead to revolution.