Thanks Andrew and Stephen, two young friends who have carried out two reviews of the day on 7 November, organized by our Collective, in memory of the October Revolution.
Di seguito pubblichiamo i loro interventi.
La Rivoluzione d’Ottobre vista da sinistra
di Andrea Virga Domenica 7 novembre, nell’anniversario dell’assalto al Palazzo d’Inverno e della nascita di Lev Trotzky, ho partecipato, su invito di un amico, alla conferenza di rievocazione della Rivoluzione d’Ottobre tenutasi presso il circolo ARCI di Bonelle (PT). L’organizzatore era il Collettivo anticapitalista Andreu Nin, composto da marxisti di varia provenienza (Sinistra Critica, Partito Comunista dei Lavoratori, apartitici) Eastern and Trotskyist. The host was instead the publisher, essayist and historian Roberto Massari, a member of the Left and Trotskyism Foundation President Ernesto Guevara. His speech was short, but rich in concepts.
First, emphasized the scope of the October Revolution as the most important events of the twentieth century, with its quality of revolution not only political, but above all social, that is aimed at a real transformation of production process. This was similar to the Paris Commune, but unlike it, suffocated with the violence outside, had a negative outcome to internal causes, serving at the consequences of the revolutionary rupture of the First International, which took place with the expulsion of Bakunin to Marx's work, which meant then splitting, respectively, between ethics and reason, within the labor movement.
Secondly, Massari has shown some Bolshevik forgery alleged by the official historiography, noting that the choice of giving all power to the Soviets, that the advice proletariat, the real protagonists of the Revolution, was not exclusive to the Bolsheviks (Part which in fact was contrary), but also the SRs left, part of the Mensheviks, anarchists and revolutionaries of the four movements (anarcocomunisti, anarcho-syndicalists, anarchists and anarchist terrorists Soviets). On the other hand, described the Bolshevik strategy of excluding from the organs of power (and then outlaw) the other parties, then to deprive the Soviets themselves, doing so undermines the social base of the Revolution.
Finally, he made a digression on the history of Russian Social Democratic Labour Party, highlighting the centrist position (in the wake of the Second International) and the centralized nature of Stalinism as unavoidable circumstances, involving Lenin and (to a lesser extent) in Trotsky his condemnation of the contradictions inherent in its structure and in the apparatus of the Party. Massari's conference was followed poi da un intervento di uno degli organizzatori riguardo al marxismo libertario, e da un breve dibattito. La discussione non è cessata ed anzi è proseguita durante il pranzo.
Personalmente, pur provenendo da tutt’altra area politica, e mantenendo posizioni non marxiste bensì riconducibili alla Rivoluzione conservatrice, ho trovato di notevole interesse l’evento, e apprezzato la figura dell’oratore per la sua onestà e coerenza intellettuale. Sicuramente ho anche approfondito con curiosità le posizioni vicine alla Quarta Internazionale – in passato da me trascurate a favore dello studio dei movimenti socialisti e comunisti nazionalisti, a me più affini –, ma soprattutto ho avuto modo to reflect on some points, which remains the crux of the relationship between elites and masses in relation to leadership and management of the revolutionary process.
I would finally a final note related to my personal commitment: a superficial level, the thesis Massari provide an excellent contribution to a Marxist-based critique of the radical left, all too often hypocritically cloaked in a militant anti-fascism fully functional to bourgeois politics and parliament, but in reality poorly adherent to their own ideals, at a deeper level, however, this historical revisionism is a great inspiration for me and indeed almost a similar exhortation to self-critique of fascism and history of the radical right, essential for a renewal.
--------------------------------- ---
Bolshevism left.From criticized by the Communist Left Communism Councils
Stefano Zecca
my want to consider the position of Massari about the Russian Revolution and then submit the reader with the main currents of the left common.
Roberto Massari is one of the most important exponents of Italian Trotskyism (and not only Italian), it certainly is a rich and original theorist of critical positions and challenging, the report could not open several issues on which it is good to reflect.
Marx reminded us that every revolution is critical, first of all to herself, since the historical process of becoming a determined by internal dialectical contradictions, and the celebration of past events and then it belongs on the field of anti-Marxism can be vulgar and it is right to leave Groups I call charlatans.
The Russian Revolution was certainly the greatest event in history, politics of the entire twentieth century, the exploited masses for the first time took power giving rise to extraordinary efforts to manage itself from below. Roberto Massari addresses the problem of the revolutionary process forward the thesis of the Bolshevik Party as a centrist party, and then as party positions ranging between revolutionary and reformist positions.
The Party of Lenin in fact has never been dropped altogether from the theoretical paradigms of the Second International Congress of Erfurt in which envisaged the division between the Minimum Programme (momentary demands) and the maximum program (social revolution).
The distinction between the theory that was the basis of Social Democracy and that was the basis of the Fourth International Trotsky is not trivial, let us first outline the differences.
Trotsky explains very well how it is necessary that the minimum demands collide with the needs of capitalism, that is going to hit more and more its foundations, to build a bridge to the State Worker.
E 'should be noted that these theories by the future founder of QI date back to 1905 and his written statements and Prospects''and''Lenin will (as well Trotsky also said later), these positions only with the April Theses 1917.
The position of Lenin and Trotsky that when it comes The transition problem is in fact absolutely convergent:
''The peculiarity of the present situation in Russia is to move away from the first stage of the revolution, which, because of insufficient awareness and organization of the proletariat, he gave power to the bourgeoisie, the second stage, which must give power to the proletariat and the poorest peasants. On the one hand, this transition is characterized by the highest law of (among all the belligerent countries, Russia is today the most free country in the world) and, secondly, the absence of violence against the masses, and finally , unwittingly trusting attitude toward the government of the masses of the capitalists of the worst enemies of peace and socialism. This feature requires us to know how to adapt to the special conditions of Party work among the immense masses of proletarians just awakened to political life.''(Lenin) 1
''The historical task of the next phase - the pre-revolutionary agitation, Propaganda and organization - is to overcome the contradiction between the maturity of the objective conditions of revolution and the immaturity of the proletariat and its vanguard (loss and demoralization of the old generation, the inexperience of new). We must help the masses to find, in the process of their daily struggle, the bridge tra le rivendicazioni attuali e il programma della rivoluzione socialista. Questo ponte deve consistere in un sistema di rivendicazioni transitorie che partano dalle condizioni attuali e dal livello di coscienza attuale di larghi strati della classe operaia e portino invariabilmente a una sola conclusione: la conquista del potere da parte del proletariato’’. (Trotsky) 2
Le rivendicazioni fondamentali (es. le rivendicazioni salariali) sono la palestra che spinge le masse a prendere coscienza dell’insostenibilità del Modo di Produzione Capitalistico e quindi a superarlo;sono come un ponte che porta le masse ad auto-organizzarsi dal basso.
Tutto questo è proprio quello has happened in Russia from February to October of 1917, where they have self-organized, creating works councils, the situation changed radically after the seizure of power.
In December of that year a law was passed providing for the regulation of the Board of Works, from shortly after the Constituent Assembly was dissolved. On this
Rosa Luxemburg had no doubts:''
Well after all these statements the first move of Lenin after the October Revolution was the same ... the dispersion of the Constituent Assembly, to which that would have paved the way'' .3
According to Rose the masses should not be stopped behind the revolutionary process, as was done in Russia, but that's the Revolution to create the right climate to give effect to the representative bodies, that is where the Luxemburg part to advance his theory of the mass strike (from Not to be confused with the general strike).
the centralization of power will be the primary cause of the birth of the bureaucracy, and the degeneration of the workers' state, but we try to say something more on the bureaucracy.
2.L 'Trotsky's analysis in this regard is extraordinary and is enhanced by the fact that it had no precedent in the history of the movement. Some
similar analysis can be found in Robert Michels and in his Iron Law of Functioning oligarchic, but what about the degeneration of socialism was not written anything until now. The same
Rakovsky examines the end of the French Revolution, starting with the problem of isolation in which he found himself leading his boss: Robespierre (in case we should speak of the isolation of the USSR, Lenin and Trotsky first then? Is doubtful ).
We can make a very brief introduction to the speech, however, that deserves some special treatments, saying that when a group came to power becomes the agent of that power and, unfortunately, acts on behalf of someone, in our case of the proletariat.
admits a solution centralized (and elite) means a party to prove that no faith in the masses, and was the central point of the rich report Massari, and other risk falling into the''power''of occupational hazards. Roberto Massari
a deep knowledge of the political thought of Trotsky say
''This definition (the bureaucracy) represents a point of arrival for Trotsky fondamentale.Per us a point of posterity partenza.Una needed basis, therefore, without which you could hardly understand what really happened in the world in the last seventy years''.4
Nothing more especially true if we consider the projections of Stalinism in the world and I am referring primarily to the Togliatti in Italy, the Titoism in Yugoslavia and Maoism in China, but also the effects that the Stalinist bureaucracy had strangled in the processes of social change as that of Spain 1936.
The position that emerged from the report is a stern position, the end does not justify the means, any form of despotism Social has been accepted or justified.
Lenin in 1921 say,''
"I said our state really is not a workers' state is a state worker and peasant . Reading the minutes of the debate, now I realize have been wrong, I should have said: The workers' state is an abstraction. In fact we have a workers 'state with the following characteristics: (1) are the peasants and workers to predominate in the population and (2) is a workers' state with bureaucratic deformations.''
is clear that it merely confirms the criticisms of the Communist Left, who were the first to denounce the authoritarian turn of the USSR.
A valuable contribution to the setting Critical Theory of Lenin (which obviously is not foolproof) is to say something about Communism that is placed to the left of Bolshevism; proceed in estrema sintesi cercando di dare al lettore una conoscenza di base (sta a lui approfondire) delle posizioni appartenenti alle forse politiche che mantennero un approccio critico verso la Rivoluzione d’Ottobre.
3.Dirò subito che i Rivoluzionari critici verso Lenin,per quanto contestati dai Bolscevichi Ortodossi,erano pensatori di prima grandezza e di grande spessore morale.
Farò un cenno all’Italia partendo dalla Sinistra Comunista,vera artefice della fondazione del Partito Comunista d’Italia nel 1921,che ha trovato il più importante esponente in Amadeo Bordiga.
Bordiga è stato un Marxista davvero eminente,di cui possiamo ben ricordare written as a dialogue with the''Stalin''and''dialogue with the dead.''
The first clash between the founder of the ICP and the head of the Interior, there was the question about electioneering, which is considered the first disadvantageous to the workers' movement.
The position of the SC was rejected at the Second Congress of this defeat and began to push forward the Ordinovisti, then led by Antonio Gramsci.
To clarify the turn of the Lyons Congress of 1926, I have to say that the training Bordiga had on his left a group very close to the Dutch Communists (who in 1919 came from the Communist Party of Germany) led by Michelangelo Pappalardi.
Pappalardi early 1923 he moved to Berlin where he met and considered valid Karl Korsch's position on the Russian Revolution.
On November 10, 1923 he resigned from the party which did not approve Bordiga inviting him to ask, with a letter dated October 25, 1925, to be readmitted.
Meanwhile Gramsci in Italy Bolshevization process begins by importing the Stalinist party structure.
For the Lyons Congress of the Communist Left tried to come up with a committee of Agreement, but this was dissolved by the Secretariat, also Engineer Napoletano (Bordiga) will be removed from his post as Secretary of the Section of Naples.
We already see how Gramsci anticipates some points that will underpin the policies of Togliatti, the elimination of dissent, a political opportunist in unions and especially the policy of the Popular Front.
Even the famous letter of 1926 the Political Bureau of the CPSU, which then fell into a dead end because if Togliatti held it in his pocket, did not clash at all the policy of the International and Bukharin's Theory of Socialism in one country.
Pappalardi in 1927 founded the Vanguard Group of the Communist who in 1928 became the Communist Workers Group, it must be said that this political formation broke up in 1931 and became part of his militant anarchists and other Libertarian Communists.
current Bordigist in Italy gave birth to the group in 1942 and Prometheus Onorato Damen founded the Internationalist Communist Party, the International Communist Party since 1965.
fell into two currents, an anti-Bolshevik (the directors to which he belonged Pappalardi) and a pro-Bolshevik (Prometheus).
4.For begin to understand the differences (it was a matter of principle) between the Communist Left (Bordiga Damen and with some different positions Cervetto) and l’Ultra-Sinistra Comunista o Comunismo dei Consigli (Gorter,Korsch,Pannekoek,Mattick) è bene riprendere la Lettera che Bordiga inviò a Korsch il 28 Ottobre del 1926.
Dice Bordiga:
‘’ Per esempio il vostro "modo di esprimervi" sulla Russia mi pare che non vada bene. Non si può dire che "la rivoluzione russa è una rivoluzione borghese." La rivoluzione del '17 è stata una rivoluzione proletaria, benché sia un errore generalizzarne le lezioni "tattiche." Ora si pone il problema di che cosa avvenga della dittatura proletaria in un paese se non segue la rivoluzione negli altri paesi. Vi può essere una contro-rivoluzione, vi può be an intervention, there may be a degenerative course in question to discover and define the symptoms and the reflections in the Communist Party''.5
For Bordiga and the communist left the Russian Revolution was a socialist revolution while the Councillors (just read the writings of Mattick) a bourgeois revolution through a dictatorship of intellectuals has led to the emergence of state capitalism. This prompted the Engineer
Napoletano to break with the Ultra Left which will work for the construction of a current international set theory Theory of Three Variants (Stalinism, Fascism and Social Keynesianism).
Bordiga it ends saying,''In conclusion
not believe the case to an international declaration as you propose practically feasible and do not even believe it. I believe equally useful in different countries to give demonstrations and declarations parallel ideologically and politically for the content on the problems of Russia and the Comintern, without providing details of the "plot" is split, and each drawing freely his thoughts and experiences .''
I personally think that the Bolsheviks carried out a social revolution (and non-bourgeois), and above all a revolution with veins and Libertarian Anarchist, because of the large mobilization from below, this course until the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly. He
Unlike platitudes about the great historical experience is extraordinary''see''how many politicians were in favor of the slogan''All Power to the Soviets,''what happened after (the massacre of the Ukrainian Anarchists NEP) becomes denial of sovietist. That said
remember two important personalities coming from different political and cultural paths have come to similar conclusions: Maximilien Rubel and Daniel Guerin.
Marxologo Maximilien Rubel was a French, a close friend of Paul Mattick, who will go to attribute to Marx the merit of have formulated a theory of anarchism.
Rubel says that the Communists and the anarchists have in common the creation of a stateless society based on self-managed community, of course, all this presupposes a critique of Leninism and a return to the original theory of Marx.
The philosophical critique of Hegel becomes radical and leads to the denial of the State, anarchism will never be pronounced but the meaning is critical.
Rubel insist so much on the words of Marx,''The existence of the state and the existence of slavery are indissocialibili
...''In France, another great is that of Daniel Guerin who, starting from Trotskyism (Trotsky know at the home of Pierre Naville) Anarchism approached by formulating a theory that he said Libertarian Marxist (not to antagonize both the Anarchists as the Marxists). According
Guerin (which continues the analysis of the last Victor Serge) must resume done by the Marxist criticism of capitalism (Marx, Lenin, Trotsky) Ethics of Anarchists, central to achieving the self-management.
Marxism discovered the anarchic roots can not get out of it purified and found that the third way that has been overshadowed by the horrors of Stalinism.
The anarchist thought it retains its relevance because it has caught and exposed the risks di una deviazione autoritaria del Marxismo e inoltre una prospettiva libertaria fa appello alla forza creatrice delle masse e non alla delega del potere verso una minoranza esigua che si chiama Partito.
Guerin sui contrasti fra Marxismo e Anarchismo dice:
‘’Ma il fossato tra anarchismo e marxismo è diventato un vero e proprio baratro solo all’inizio del nostro secolo (si parla del Novecento),vale a dire quando la Rivoluzione Russa,libertaria e soviettista nell’Ottobre 1917,ha dovuto cedere il posto a un formidabile apparato statale,dittatoriale e poliziesco.L’anarchismo,l’idea anarchica sono stati liquidati in Russia come lo sono stati Soviet stessi’’.6
Criticism is very strong despite Guerin has always admired Lenin, even considering the USSR from 1917 to 1922 a form of socialism from above.
Stalinism was the denial of internationalism expressed Bolshevism in-part of the anarchist movement continued to support the Bolsheviks even after the approval of the NEP, however, can not remain indifferent in front of the weakness of the Russian proletariat to power of Stalin, it was of a Class discouraged, demoralized, unable to react. The first
Trotsky, Lenin's at odds with the''What to do?''And the organization of the party claimed by the Bolshevik leader, say
‘’Non è un caso che Lenin abbia dato una simile definizione che non è altro che un attentato teorico contro i caratteri di classe del nostro partito,un attentato non meno pericoloso del riformismo’’.7
E ancora:
‘’L’organizzazione del partito prenderà il posto del partito stesso;il Comitato Centrale prenderà il posto dell’organizzazione;e infine,il dittatore prenderà il posto del Comitato Centrale.
Saranno questi i punti fermi di Rosa Luxemburg e che guideranno poi Daniel Guerin e Roberto Massari verso una Prospettiva di Comunismo Libertario avversa alle Burocrazie Staliniane.
La mia analisi è molto parziale e richiede di sicuro ulteriori contributi,ma comunque penso che sia chiaro quanto importante è lo studio del Comunismo di Sinistra e la critica del leninismo,per quanto Lenin sia stato importante per tutti noi:il dogmatismo non interessa ai Marxisti anzi gli è da sempre avverso.
Note:
1)Lenin ‘’Tesi di Aprile’’
2)Lev Trotsky ‘’Programma di Transizione’’
3)Rosa Luxemburg ‘’La Rivoluzione Russa’’
4)Roberto Massari ‘’Trotsky e la ragione rivoluzionaria’’
5)Amadeo Bordiga ‘’Lettera a Karl Korsch’’
6)Daniel Guerin''''To a Marxism Libertarian
7) Leon Trotsky''''Our political tasks
Stefano Zecca for the Anti-Capitalist Collective Andreu Nin
0 comments:
Post a Comment