Subject: LL9804212 Louis Paulsen: re LL9804174 Chris Faatz (what to do)
Date: Thursday, April 09, 1998 2:50 AM
Chris Faatz wrote:
> In short, Klo, what are the routes to be explored in building an
> authentic communist movement in this country that has mass appeal and
> influence, that's not subject to social democratic deviations, that's
> flexible enough to be able to respond quickly and adequately to major
> turns on the part of the class struggle, and to *actually* rather than
> *theoretically* struggle for power?
>
> I guess the same question would arise for Louis.
In essence, this question can be rephrased as "WHAT IS TO BE DONE"? :-)
I hope that I can give an answer that makes some sense and doesn't
sound like that old "Monty Python" comedy skit about "How to cure all the
diseases in the world!" ("First you become a great doctor, and study hard
and discover a great cure for a disease so they'll all take notice of
you...")
This is really a subject for a book, not a three-paragraph post, but I
will write down the first three paragraphs that come into my head.
(1) The way to develop a large authentic communist movement is to develop
a small authentic communist movement and then make it large. It is not
to water down or disguise the communism so as to appeal to people who
are not ready for socialism, make it large, and then try to make it
"authentically communist".
(2) If we knew a magic formula for transforming ourselves from a small
authentic communist movement to a large authentic movement quickly and
easily, we would do it. In the absence of such formulas, I can only say
what it is that we actually do. We look for struggles which are taking
place, or which should objectively take place but which no one has yet
taken up. In the first instance, we participate; in the second instance,
we organize it. In either case, we look for the people who are the best
fighters; who are the representatives of the most oppressed; who recognize
most quickly the links between the given struggle and others'. And we try
to win them over to socialism and to our party. Is this easy in the
heartland of imperialism? Not always.
(3) On the other hand, all this depends a lot on the period you are in.
You cannot just make revolution whenever you want, or expand rapidly in
size whenever you choose. My party grew very rapidly during the period
from our formation in 1960 until 1976 or so. It was a period of intense
revolutionary struggle around the world and here in the U.S. There were
victories over imperialism which stirred the imagination of young people.
In reality I suppose that period was the high-water mark of the wave of
revolutionary struggle which began in 1917.
Since that time there has been a world-wide period of reaction,
culminating in the defeats in Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Eastern Europe,
Central America, and the USSR.
Their effect has been terrible. They are the worst disaster in
the history of the working-class movement. All of the liberation
struggles, all of the remaining socialist countries, all of the
working-class parties, all of the workers and oppressed of the world have
been hurt. During this period we have lost people - not in splits,
mainly, but in demoralization and fatigue. Many other parties in the US
have disappeared entirely. Our influence in the U.S. movement has
increased dramatically in the 1990's despite our losses -
not only because our political line has been correct,
but also because most other organizations have become MUCH smaller, or
have become much less active, or much less radical, or have lost track of
the socialist line entirely.
And yet, history DOES continue. We are on the watch for signs that the
tide is about to turn. The collapse of the USSR brought about a period of
uncontrolled capitalist expansion and conquest worldwide. Yet in
countries like Mexico, Turkey, the Philippines, and Colombia, serious
struggles have been continuing. Now we have the "Asian economic crisis",
which we are watching VERY intently. The struggle in Indonesia now seems
VERY acute, with the PRD calling for the establishment of soviets,
actually. And is the "Asian crisis" going to stay limited to Asia?
The president of Sony says that the Japanese economy is about to collapse.
The prime minister says this is untrue. Who is right? What is going to
happen to the economies of the US and of Western Europe? As Marxists, we
KNOW that crises are inevitable. Is a global crisis at hand? We aren't
sure.
Such a crisis would change ALL the rules. What would happen in the USSR
and in Eastern Europe then? Wouldn't it make the class struggle there
even more acute (and it seems very acute in the former USSR right now)?
Wouldn't it strengthen the hand of the left wing in China? Wouldn't it
strengthen the hand of socialists in South Africa? Wouldn't it increase
imperialist rivalries, and bring on the danger of open inter-imperialist
war? Wouldn't it ruin the "middle classes" and the more privileged layers
of the working class in the US and in Western Europe? Wouldn't socialism
become suddenly much more attractive to people everywhere in the
world?
I said before that there was a wave of socialist revolution which began
in 1917 and whose peak was about 1975. (This is my personal analysis,
don't blame my party if you don't like it!) I HOPE that we are now in the
trough following that wave, and that the new wave is about to rise. And
it COULD rise at any time. Anything could touch it off. Something will.
The unbridled aggression of capitalism which brought the LAST socialist
movement into existence will inevitably renew it. Struggles will break
out. Struggles will intensify.
Then, somewhere in the world there will be a Victory. In Indonesia, in
Korea, in Mexico, in South Africa, in Ukraine or Russia. Or Brazil, or
Colombia, or Egypt. Or somewhere else. Something that will remind the
world that the clock of history is running again. Something that will
revive the workers and oppressed everywhere. Something that will make
socialism seem POSSIBLE again. Because that - at least in the US - is our
main obstacle in this period. Why, out of about 180 million adults and
youth in the US, do we have as few people in our party as we do? Why did
we get only 25 thousand votes or so in the last election? It's not
because 179,975,000 people LIKE this system. There are TENS OF MILLIONS
of workers and oppressed who hate this system. But they don't believe
it's POSSIBLE to change it.
The working class is very practical. They
don't want to waste their time. They have little enough time as it is.
They spend their time working two jobs, or studying to get a better job.
Or trying to find a job. So they don't want to spend their precious
hours beating their head against a wall, or trying to do the "impossible".
There have been so few victories in this period.
That's the significance of the UPS strike. It was the first big labor
victory in the US in a long time - which is why the U.S. government
immediately and dictatorially removed the head of that union. But there
will be other victories. And when they come, they will be contagious.
This has gone on WAY longer than I intended. My point is, however, is
that we can't make world-historical tides happen (unless we are in just
the right place at just the right time, the place and time when the ruling
class is the weakest and the anger of the workers and oppressed is the
greatest). But we can fight as hard as we can to survive and to keep our
place while the tide is running against us. Because the tide WILL turn.
And when it does, the task of making a small authentic communist movement
into a big one will seem a lot easier.
I hope this makes some sense. It's not a position paper by my party, but
it's how I view things personally.
In the struggle,
Louis Paulsen
member, Chicago branch, Workers World Party
http://www.workers.org
--