ICC position on Decadence and the Bourgeoisie in Developing Nations?

345 posts / 0 new
Last post
Jamal's picture
Jamal
Offline
Joined: 14-04-15
Jul 17 2015 23:30

We are in the period where communist revolution is possible. History does absolutely unfold, whatever you chose to refer to this process as is only a matter of words. We (as in my comrades) periodize history simply to understand it more easily.

Artesian, if anything you are the revolutionary inadequate to your time. Orthodox marxism just had it's natural progression so we shouldn't be surprised by the outcome. At least these inadequate leaders managed to rally millions and millions of workers.

Also, the ICC just baited you guys straight into this. And I have to say jura, Khawaga and Artesian are missing the mark here, and to the ICC's benefit. Boo

jojo
Offline
Joined: 30-06-12
Jul 18 2015 03:01
S.Artesian wrote:
If that was the beginning of the epoch of world communist revolution, they the founders of the CI were completely inadequate to their times.

It was definitely the opening of the epoch of world revolution as the revolutionary wave 1917-25 proves. This was the first time the working class had attempted internationally to challenge the rule of capital. It was the beginning of something new - a new epoch- and that the class failed at that time and that capital still stumbles on is hardly something to celebrate. And that the CI, rather than merely its founders, failed, as did the whole class, doesn't mean that it and the class should be dismissed as being "completely inadequate", but rather attempts should be made to understand what went wrong.

The working class revolution is doomed to fail until it succeeds. Partial gains are not available. Communism cannot be built gradually within the old society as was capitalism. But lessons can be learned.

The CI like the revolutionary wave itself, arose amidst the ruins of a war which left the European working class worn out. The spectre of Social Democracy, which had been the pride and joy of the 2nd. International but had now deteriorated into a bourgeois left-wing, haunted the first revolutionary wave and helped mislead and defeat it.

The setting up of the CI was already in 1918 too late to be a lot of use. The initial stage of the revolution was over in Russia and the Bolsheviks had put themselves in power. The failure of the revolution elsewhere meant this was to prove a deadly mistake. Proletarians like Luxembourg and Liebknecht were ill-prepared, and while critical of the events in Russia had no ready-made solution either regarding the question of how the working class seizes and exercises control. All these factors contributed to failure at that time. But we can learn from our mistakes, can we not?

This was the revolutionary "cycle" to use Khawaga's term, as it played out in those distant days.
Next time this cycle comes round it is to be hoped the class and it's avant-gardes will be better prepared, and won't be found inadequate again. Will anarchists be ready? Let's hope so.

The next cycle of struggle could be drawing near. Fish stocks, oil, coal and forests are dangerously depleted. The climate is abused and becomes a threatening chaos while pollution rules the world. The forests are sold for profit. The expense of cleaning up the pollution caused by burning coal in China could exceed the profit made in mining and selling it. The destitute classes either starve in the "undeveloped" world; work for a pittance under capitalist "growth" elsewhere in the mature capitalist hegemonies; or are condemned to the misery of unemployment. The bourgeoisie has sold our human inheritance for a pittance of profit and have nothing left to offer. Their concept of growth has become a death threat for the planet and the life it is ceasing to sustain.

A changed perspective is required as suggested above, and not just on this thread, but among all those who can see or otherwise sense that all is not right with the world and capitalist society. That we are living and dying in a decadent society is surely plain for all to see.

That all this capitalist mayhem and destruction was set in motion some 300 years ago doesn't mean that capitalism was in no way progressive at all in its beginnings and youthful joy (!) After all it did bring into being the very class capable of replacing it with something unimaginably better and has made technological advances which will be immensely useful for us released from their capitalist chains. So we can be grateful to it for that if little else.

S. Artesian
Offline
Joined: 5-02-09
Jul 18 2015 02:50
Jamal Rayyan wrote:
We are in the period where communist revolution is possible. History does absolutely unfold, whatever you chose to refer to this process as is only a matter of words. We (as in my comrades) periodize history simply to understand it more easily.

Artesian, if anything you are the revolutionary inadequate to your time. Orthodox marxism just had it's natural progression so we shouldn't be surprised by the outcome. At least these inadequate leaders managed to rally millions and millions of workers.

Also, the ICC just baited you guys straight into this. And I have to say jura, Khawaga and Artesian are missing the mark here, and to the ICC's benefit. Boo

A) I don't claim to be a revolutionary leader; taking the struggling masses forward. Nor do I want to be. Being a "revolutionary" is pretty much impossible in isolation from the working class' own movement.

B) I don't know what orthodox Marxism is, and I suspect neither do you. Tell us, what is the "outcome" of "orthodox Marxism"? I have no idea what that means, and I suspect neither do you. It's just a bunch of blather you find convenient to throw around.

C) No, the conflicts of capital propelled millions of workers, not the CI. In Germany, Italy, China, Vietnam, Britain, Spain, France, etc. the CI disorganized the prospects for revolutionary power.

D)Missing the mark? I don't think Alf baited anyone. I think duplicity or feints are pretty much not in the ICC repertoire. He said-- let's change the angle of viewing the question; don't we agree that we are in the epoch of world-wide revolution? Again that's a meta-category; a conversion of history into ideology, just like the other angles of decadence theory.

But hey Jamal, keep on keepin' on; sooner or later your bound to say something relevant. Even a blind pig finds the occasional acorn.

S. Artesian
Offline
Joined: 5-02-09
Jul 18 2015 02:58

"oil and coal...are dangerously depleted." That's absolute nonsense. Once again, you impose your ideological thinking upon the actual issue. Coal reserves in the US are hardly depleted. Oil reserves are at all time highs, and production in 2014 was the highest its been in years. Where are coal reserves depleted?

The thread indeed has run its course as rather than answer the concrete questions raised about the theory, we get ideological chanting, and bad, bad science.

The possibility of proletarian revolution has not been discounted; the ideology of an epoch of communist revolution, based on the notion of capitalist decadence, has been.

Changing perspectives are necessary? Sure thing, the first thing to change is this magical thinking-- "I believe it's so, so it must be so."

Jamal's picture
Jamal
Offline
Joined: 14-04-15
Jul 18 2015 08:58
S. Artesian wrote:
But hey Jamal, keep on keepin' on; sooner or later your bound to say something relevant. Even a blind pig finds the occasional acorn.

Is spitefulness the only human emotion you're capable of feeling or is that just your internet persona?

And don't you worry, we intend to write lots and lots on the subject of orthodox marxism, how and why Stalinism is a natural progression of it and why us communists no longer refer to ourselves as marxist.

But we'll write it when we're ready, and not rush it for some random interest discussion forum user like yourself and others, because we're not blind pigs looking for acorns. Were principled communists trying to widen the debate and build instead of only cutting down.

jura's picture
jura
Offline
Joined: 25-07-08
Jul 18 2015 09:13

Jamal, you're starting to sound like someone from the RCP.

Jamal's picture
Jamal
Offline
Joined: 14-04-15
Jul 18 2015 09:15

How so? Fuck the RCP

S. Artesian
Offline
Joined: 5-02-09
Jul 18 2015 10:25
Quote:
But we'll write it when we're ready, and not rush it for some random interest discussion forum user like yourself and others, because we're not blind pigs looking for acorns. Were principled communists trying to widen the debate and build instead of only cutting down.

Let me know when, oh master builder.

Jamal's picture
Jamal
Offline
Joined: 14-04-15
Jul 18 2015 10:47

C'mon dude, don't be like this...you know what I'm saying. Your attitude and approach to people is the most decadent thing in this thread. Sorry for pointing out Lenin was more important to the workers movement than you are. Didn't expect a tirade

Also you called me a pig. That's just plain mean, especially to pigs. Very positivist

Jamal's picture
Jamal
Offline
Joined: 14-04-15
Jul 18 2015 10:49

And for the record I/we had even planned on discussing economics with you before writing because you seem to have a good grip on it

Jamal's picture
Jamal
Offline
Joined: 14-04-15
Jul 18 2015 10:52

You're like trying to be the biggest guy in the gym just for the sake of showing off your theoretical musculature which would speak more truth to a lot more people if you weren't constantly flexing

S. Artesian
Offline
Joined: 5-02-09
Jul 18 2015 13:15

No, I don't know what you mean. I know one of the "decadentists" resorted to distorting what the "antis" wrote, and claiming the we were TINA types; I know one of the "decadentists" accused the antis of "praising" capitalism, or "worshiping" capitalism. And I know the antis, including myself, have posed, repeatedly, specific questions about the so-called theory of decadence without receiving any concrete answers.

I don't care who is or is not more important to the workers movement than I am. BFD. Really. For one, have you looked at the condition of the workers movement lately; for two, you have to be part of an organization that is important to the workers movement-- that lets me out from the getgo, and I'd say just about everybody else who's concerned with his or her self-importance to the workers movement.

No, I did not call you a pig. I drew an analogy to your continuing attempts and failures to say something relevant and the blind pig searching for an acorn.

As for "showing off" theoretical musculature-- what horseshit. I'm not engaging in theoretical displays. ICC is.

Alf's picture
Alf
Offline
Joined: 6-07-05
Jul 19 2015 16:08

I don't think Alf baited anyone. I think duplicity or feints are pretty much not in the ICC repertoire. He said-- let's change the angle of viewing the question; don't we agree that we are in the epoch of world-wide revolution?

Thanks for this, Artesian.

Again that's a meta-category; a conversion of history into ideology, just like the other angles of decadence theory.

As I said, I think it would be better to take up this question of the "epoch of proletarian revolution" in another thread. Maybe I'll get round to it myself, but, again, not for the moment.

S. Artesian
Offline
Joined: 5-02-09
Jul 19 2015 17:40

Okay by me. Don't know if want to go another round on this, but my inherent contrariness will probably compel me to engage despite my reluctance.