From
what is to begin?
In response to my article УCautious
emancipators of LaborФ, or, rather that place where I criticized the passion of
Revolutionary Front (leftist group in
Let us examine this question in detail.
I remind about what I wrote in that place
of the article УCautious emancipators of LaborФ. I quoted from opportunists
from the group УEmancipation of LaborФ (leftist group in
The question emerges: for who is your
newspaper, who is it intended for? Is it intended for broad masses? Then I
agree with УEmancipation of LaborФ in the respect that it is wrong to write
about conferences in it Ц however, it doesnТt means that it is necessary to
write about Уdaily wantsФ of workers, about economic struggle between employees
and employers. I donТt agree with these decayed conclusions of УEmancipation of
LaborФ.
Let us recollect LeninТs idea of the
formation of the party. The essence of this idea is the creation of the
restricted solid core of professional revolutionaries, theorists, which connected
through several intermediate levels with the broad masses of proletariat and
semi-proletarian strata which follow proletariat. I shall try to outline these
levels (such circles, concentric circles), which I see them theoretically,
ideally (i.e. not what we have currently, but what we have to aim at).
1) Above-mentioned restricted solid core
of theorists, УLeninsФ. Its occupation is the elaboration of the most general
foundations of ideology, strategy and tactics. There are people who understand
Leninism thoroughly. The number of this circle is several tens at the most.
2) Propagandists, УStalinsФ (in the sense
what Stalin was before 1922-30). There are people who understand
Marxism-Leninism satisfactorily. Their occupation is the application of the ideology
of the party to all current events, processes, occurrences; popularization of
partyТs ideas in plain living language, which is understandable for the broad
masses (even if such popularization threatens our ideas with simplification, it
doesnТt matter, it is Уteething troublesФ). The number of this circle is several
hundreds or even thousands.
3) Agitators. There are people, who understand
Marxism quite roughly, nevertheless are able to carry partyТs slogans to
millions of proletarians and the allies from middle class; who are able to convince
and to arouse (the latter, i.e. whipping up emotions, plays a large role at
this level, while in the Уfirst circleФ the cold rigorous scientific foresight
is necessary in the first place). The occupation of this level is distribution
of leaflets and oral propaganda mainly (plus partly writing articles to our
editions, I shall say below about that). The number of this level is probably several
tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands.
4) The broad proletarian masses and the
part of middle class, labor aristocracy, intelligentsia, which follow
proletariat; mainly youth, women, immigrants. The number of this level is
millions and tens of millions.
Who is the newspaper needed for?
Obviously, itТs needed for broad masses, i.e. for the 4th circle of
my scheme. Today, in the presence of Internet, the representatives of the 1st
and the 2nd circles can communicate with each other using Internet.
But among who is information about conferences needed for distribution? Obviously,
it is needed for distribution among first 2-3 circles. Is it means, that we
must lower the level of the newspaper to Уdaily problemsФ, as УEmancipation of
LaborФ offers? No. I repeat following Lenin, that we need the newspaper of
political exposures, which castigates police; which expose the connection between
police violation and the interests of bourgeoisie; which connects the struggle
for democracy with the interests of proletariat; which expose the connection
between police violation of ruling regime against us and police violation of
ruling regime against peoples, which oppressed by Russia; the newspaper, which
cultivate international solidarity with peoples of poor nations, with Islamic
revolution, as well as solidarity with the western proletariat; the newspaper,
which not restrict within limits of daily problems, but connects these problems
by thousands examples with the problems of poorest strata of other nations,
from USA to Afghanistan, with world policy.
The question emerges: is the newspaper
needed in this stage? I donТt want to stifle initiative of honest comrades. I
want only to remind LeninТs words, which he said at about 1920, that communists
are the very thin stratum of society, and it is wrong for them to try to solve
the problems instead of people, it would be more correctly to organize people
to solve these problems.
Furthermore, where should we go with the newspaper?
I both consider in my theoretical views and know by experience, that it is
wrong to go to entrances of factories (such actions are similar to actions of
activists of Hizb ut Tahrir in Bashkortostan, who distribute their leaflets
among parish in mosques). We should go to the poorest youth, and itТs no
matter, are they employed or unemployed; moreover, we should distribute our
leaflets and newspapers not among anybody, not indiscriminately, as left
activists did in 1990Тs, but only among prepared ones, who was given a circle
of oral talks.
Above I spoke only about information flow
from the 1st circle to the 4th one. It is clear, that the
feedback (i.e. information flow from the 4th circle to the 1st
one) is needed too. These are items to the newspaper, the information about the
facts of police abuses, misery etc. and the criticism of the УhighestФ party
circles. It is clear, that party leadership would lose contact with masses
without such feedback; theory, which the leadership embeds in masses, would
deviate from the correct course; leaders would degenerate into philosophers-celestials,
alienated from the real life, who philosophize for the sake of their own
pleasure.
Last, it is necessary to be ready from
the outset to the probability of the exposure of our activity by police and we
must try to reduce this probability to zero (it is clear, that the detention
under present-day УcivilizedФ order can occur not for УpoliticsФ at all, but
for ordinary Уcriminal offenceФ - Уgive us a man, we will find the article to
put him behind the barsФ). LeninТs scheme is good also in the regard that it
minimizes this probability: the extraction of a single УlinkФ from the УchainФ doesnТt
result in the break of the УchainФ, because in fact it is not a chain at all,
but concentric circles. Every single link can be replaced by new link without detriment
to the party: if one member of the 1st circle has Уfallen outФ, he
(she) can be replaced by the most able one from the 2nd circle etc.
(on the other hand, that member of the 1st circle, who has Уfallen
outФ, i.e. has gone to the jail, would act as a member of the 3rd
circle).
It is clear, that it will be more
difficult, more complicated in practice, than on paper. But, anyhow, this
LeninТs plan solely is correct, because hysterical impulses, when the honest,
but not very conscious revolutionary tries to go alone to the people, come to
nothing. We already have such experience; it was very painful, yet very helpful
experience: we have learned by our own mistakes. But now we must go forward,
not stumble at the same point for the second time.
October 26, 2009
A. G.
ааааа аааааааааааааааааааааааа
ааааа аааааааа
ааааа аааааааааааааааааа
ааа ааааааа
а