...The class struggle --- "The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles," declared Marx. Before him, the class struggle had been recognized by revolutionaries like Proudhon and Babeuf, but also by bourgeois economists like Guizot. Marx's originality lies in his assertion that classes are linked to specific phases in the development of the productive forces; and that the class struggle, in industrialized societies, would automatically lead to a transitional phase (the dictatorship of the proletariat) toward a classless society. While we agree with the first point, we do not share
the linear view of history contained in the second. For us, communism is not inevitable, and the development of capitalism, the formation of nation-states, and parliamentary democracies are not necessary steps toward a classless society. This "progressive" view of history has often led revolutionaries to participate in accelerating capitalist development rather than destroying it: against their will, they completed the bourgeois revolution, that is, they eliminated pre-capitalism more than capitalism itself. It is within this framework that we must also understand the history and role of trade unionism-both as representative of the exploited people's emancipatory will, as an element of integration, and as an intermediary between capital and labor. Trade unionism is therefore, in our view, only one means among others, contributing at specific times to the class struggle, chosen by workers according to the moment and the circumstances.It is never a question for us of unconditionally supporting any particular union, but simply of being present where workers are fighting, when we believe there are opportunities for rupture and openness. Nor is it our intention to fight within bureaucratic structures or to occupy leadership or full-time union positions. However radical the struggle waged through union means may be at any given moment, we never lose sight of the fact that it cannot be an end in itself.
... Citizenship
Citizenism is a political and ideological position that incorporates the idea that all people are equal before the rules of the state. We do not believe in such "equality," because we believe that what defines an individual in this society is their social class, corresponding to economic interests and standardized cultural reproduction. Citizenism tries to make people believe that the state is managed "democratically" by all citizens, when in reality it is in the hands of the most powerful, the wealthiest-in short, a social class called the bourgeoisie.
To suggest that the bourgeoisie, the "middle classes," and the proletariat have the same interests is simply fallacious.
If citizenism (particularly republican citizenship) has been spreading more and more in recent years, it is because the dominant order needs it to deny class struggle and ensure social cohesion that serves its interests. The usual civic rhetoric rings out when rebels attack the police during counter-
summits, or when cars are burned in working-class neighborhoods, for example, but never when bosses lay off workers or ministers award themselves exorbitant salaries. Only the poor are asked to be citizens.
...Ecology
Almost all ecological disasters, present or future, are direct consequences of the mode of production that dominates the planet: it can only exist through endless development, the absolute necessity of destroying in order to rebuild profitably, and it inherently carries within it a logic of death. The success of an ecological struggle cannot therefore come from the sum of individual behavioral changes. Nor can it be embodied in structures that accommodate themselves, however imperfectly, to the capitalist mode of production and the political structures that support it. To separate ecological struggles from an anti-capitalist fight is to demonstrate both culpable unrealistic thinking and boundless demagoguery. The economic principles that govern us imply a destruction of the planet that no reform can slow or mitigate. It is the will for an egalitarian future that must guide environmental struggles, and not the reference to a supposedly natural and mythical past or to any mystical symbiosis with "Mother Nature".
...The patriarchy
We fight against patriarchy, a system of oppression that imposes inequality between the sexes, because we do not recognize anyone's right to dictate our identity and our lives, nor to control our bodies. The perpetuation of this inequality grants men the rights of the public sphere (strength, power, violence, decision-making, representation, etc.) and women the duties of the private sphere (fertility, raising children, housework, sexual and social submission, conformity to beauty standards, etc.). Man and Woman, like the "real man" and the "good woman," are merely images, representations, and constructs that the patriarchal system organizes and perpetuates according to separate, hierarchical, and unequal principles to maintain male domination over society.
We are part of the history of the women's movement and believe that the anti-patriarchal struggle must be neither isolated nor secondary, but waged alongside other social struggles: no victory on the grounds of anti-capitalism or anti-colonialism, for example, guarantees the end of patriarchal oppression.
We are highly critical of pseudo-feminist advances such as the law on gender parity in politics, as well as of the superwoman models that combine paid work with tasks traditionally imposed on women (housework, childcare, etc.). And we fight against the return to moral order-in which religions and "secularism" participate at their own level-which is achieved through the shaping of sexual and social behaviors imposed by puritanical society on both women and men. An anti-patriarchal and sexual revolution remains to be waged.
Fascism
Fascism is a dictatorship based on a doctrine of class reconciliation, serving a nation-state that combines a corporatist and hierarchical organization of workers with an all-powerful, militarized state. It professes an anti-capitalism that is merely a facade, since in reality, it only comes to power with the support and approval of big capital and a segment of the bourgeoisie, and often quite legally, that is, through elections.
The historical causes of fascism in the 1920s and 30s were the crisis of capitalism (a new, uncontrolled industrial revolution) and the absence of revolutionary momentum (the defeat of the workers' movement in 1914, leading to the bloody suppression of all genuinely socialist attempts).
Parliamentary democracy is therefore by no means a bulwark against fascism, nor against any other form of totalitarianism that might emerge. History has taught us that when faced with a choice between social revolution and fascism, social democracy itself (and the Stalinists!) does not hesitate to fight revolution, at the proven risk of allowing fascism to triumph (the Sacred Union in 1914, Germany in 1920, Spain in 1937, the granting of full powers to Pétain in France, etc.).
Our antifascism, which is one element of our political commitment against current society, cannot accommodate any alliance, even temporary, with these forces, which are only antifascist when capitalism does not demand dictatorship; we are therefore opposed to front-line strategies (such as a common front against...). True antifascism can only be anticapitalist, and it is only on this basis that an effective struggle can be waged.
...National liberation struggles
As internationalists, we are by definition anti-colonialist and anti-imperialist. However, national liberation struggles have often been a revolt against the situation endured by exploited, dominated, and colonized populations. Like all other struggles, they are not without contradictions and are permeated by class struggle: they can participate in the fight for the reappropriation of collective power within a concrete and controlled space, but they can also cross a threshold beyond which the affirmation of belonging becomes a logic of exclusion; they can promote a social and egalitarian project, but they are also frequently the stepping stone for the rise to power of a local bourgeoisie previously deprived of its prerogatives by the colonizer.
This is why, when we support or participate in a national liberation struggle, we emphasize the concept of national and social liberation. This means:
to defend the idea that real liberation comes through a reorganization of production according to the needs expressed by the exploited classes, and not according to the "imperatives" of the market and profit;
combat integration tactics within institutions and promote grassroots and counter-power structures at the expense of party power;
to fight against demands that would tend to strengthen the power of a future bourgeoisie or local notables;
favouring in the bond of belonging what is acquired (language, struggle...) at the expense of what is given (blood ties, etc);
to refuse to allow armed struggle, when it exists, to have a leading role.
... A movement
A movement, as we understand it, is a group of people, activists or not, who attempt to react collectively to some form of oppression or exploitation. It is made up of who these people are, their social reality, the reasons and objectives for which they fight, as well as the contradictions that run through them.
We do not measure the value of a movement by its "revolutionary potential," but by the dynamic it is capable of creating. Thus, even a movement at a low level of protest can prove exciting because the openings it creates give people the opportunity to open up, discover themselves, and move at their own pace toward greater radicalism-that is, toward greater understanding and therefore a questioning of society. It is in this spirit that we intervene in movements (it being understood that OCL activists do not join a movement for tactical reasons, but because they share the social reality, the needs, and the objectives of the people who are fighting).
To act within a movement is to point out contradictions, introduce elements of reflection (for example by posing problems in anti-capitalist terms) and promote the self-organization of its actors; it is in fact to build an impulse of social liberation, by creating the conditions allowing the development of a spirit of distrust towards the State, a spirit of rebellion, disobedience and insubordination; it is to work towards everything that can promote popular autonomy and the break with this society at the expense of reformist and integrationist projects.
https://oclibertaire.lautre.net/spip.php?article4764
_________________________________________
Source: A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten