|
Fascicle 15 Today we present and diffuse the fascicle 15 that corresponds to the end of the part V, "Classes and the struggle for socialism" of the A.B.Razlatski's II Communist Manifesto. COMUNISTES de CATALUNYA February 8, 2000
(Diffuse this text among the proletarians, all the downtrodden and exploiteds and that sympathize with this cause, and translate it in other languages. Organize groups for study, discussion, support and diffusion of the II Communist Manifesto.)
THE SECOND COMMUNIST MANIFESTO A.B. RAZLATSKI (1935-1989)Part V (end)Classes and the Struggle for Socialism(...) The economic recognition of capitalism, the growing competition for the purchase of intellect and the revelation of its secrets, grew into social recognition, recognition through economic position. But this secondary status always tortures the intelligentsia, for they would prefer a society where intellect would be recognized for its own sake, where it would be considered as social property. But in so far as the majority of the intelligentsia is unable to accommodate to this separation of social from economic recognition, they are thrown into a wilderness of utopian fantasy, believing themselves to have mastery of both mind and matter. The fact that humanities best minds succeeded in breaking free of such eclecticism and directly comprehended the connection between this contradiction and the basic contradiction of capitalist society, finally recognizing both their place within society, and the fact that this situation must lead to the transformation of the class position of the proletariat, does not resolve the question for the whole intelligentsia. There is no solidarity of the intelligentsia in its pursuit of recognition. The struggle of the proletariat and its social activism always attracts a fraction of the intelligentsia to its side. Some immediately regard the power of the proletariat as a means for the achievement of their own ends. These are the liberals who flirt with the proletariat. Others arrive in the proletarian ranks as equals among equals. But later this becomes, 'We are the more educated among equals, to us falls the responsibility of defining the aims and choosing the paths.' From these arise endless opportunists who lead the proletariat for their own ends. Some choose to serve the proletariat unconditionally. To help the proletariat become conscious of its own aims, to light with the torch of theory the proletariat's path forward in order that it will not be mistaken in its choice of the proletarian path; these are the tasks they set themselves. With this last group the proletariat can march to victory. And afterwards? Having established its hegemony, the victorious proletariat requires the activity of the entire intelligentsia. But this will be impossible without casualties. The flames of revolution inflame hegemonist strivings in a part of the intelligentsia and incite them to corresponding activity. This fraction must become the object of proletarian terror. And clearly, the remaining fraction will have no intentions of working for the proletariat for free, just for the sake of it. The proletariat as a class, as the sole owner of the means of production, and this means as a capitalist in its relations with other strata, must also act as a capitalist. It must hire as many of the intelligentsia as are necessary, and under conditions, as far as is possible, no worse than those offered by the bourgeoisie. It can also hire some fraction of the bourgeoisie, maintaining an appearance of capitalist profit in determining their pay. The proletariat must rationally organize all the creative resources of society. As dictator, the proletariat must decisively refuse political recognition to all members of the intelligentsia hired under bourgeois conditions. Taking upon itself the defence of the right of individuals in their individual relations with non-proletarian strata, the proletariat must leave these strata, in their relations with the proletarian state, no more than the appearance of whatever their rights might have been. All of this flows naturally from the interests of the proletariat. All of it arises naturally from the indefinite, unstable situation of the intelligentsia. The more distinctly the hollow victories of the intelligentsia in the proletarian revolution are revealed, the more precisely and definitely they are pointed out, the more the groundlessness of utopian hopes will be clarified to the intelligentsia. That the contradictions in the minds of the intelligentsia are expressions of the contradictions of capitalism must be revealed under socialism with the utmost clarity, and must compel the intelligentsia to sharply rethink its place in society. These contradictions must push the intelligentsia into motion, must nudge it forward. But toward what? Creative labour is a need for all human beings. Each regularly turns to creative activity. And when the results of this creativity acquire a social significance, this need becomes still more imperative, for in uniting it is weighted with a heightening of personal social significance. Reproductive labour is essential. It realizes itself as a social necessity and it occurs only with the realization of each individual participant of his inseparability from society. The intelligentsia must also realize this, but this can only come about through the feeling that the social position of the working class is higher than its own and that the difference cannot be compensated for by the receipt of material goods. It is impossible to accelerate this process through economic pressure, although the proletarian authorities always have this possibility available. The proletariat, under all conditions, remains an open class, and this, its merit, conceals definite dangers. Exerting pressure on the intelligentsia, the proletariat can compel them to join its own ranks; and thus be left without an intelligentsia, like a blind man without a guide. This is why it is necessary to speak to the intelligentsia in the language of bourgeois privilege. Yet the proletariat can not maintain such a situation for ever. What must it counterpose to it? The proletariat must promote its own intelligentsia. The point here is certainly not that this must be an intelligentsia of proletarian origin, but rather that this intelligentsia must provide society with its labour free of charge, without any economic stimulus; satisfying itself only with social recognition and such goods as it receives from its own reproductive labour. If this cannot be a lifelong commitment, then let it be for a definite period, after which this intelligentsia may, if it wishes, take up the position of the bourgeois intelligentsia, losing its social privileges and gaining economic ones. But let it carry with it a nostalgia for the respect of its class brothers. And then the rising effectiveness of production, leading to the lowering of norms for reproductive labour, together with the growth of the material well-being of the proletariat will complete these beginnings and the new intelligentsia will, in general, not wish to break its links with the proletariat, with reproductive labour. The intelligentsia will then cease to exist as a social group, intellect will fully become a property of the proletariat and creative labour will be done according to ability. It stands to reason that this can occur no sooner than the supply of such labour exceeds the demand of proletarian society for it. Now that the tendency in the development of relations between the proletariat and the intelligentsia has been depicted with sufficient clarity, it is easier to present the movement in relations with the peasantry. It is only from the outside that the work of the peasantry appears to have a reproductive content. Of course, ploughing, sowing, weeding, harvesting crops, bringing in fertilizer and watering; is labour of a purely reproductive character. But all this must be done at an appropriate time and to an appropriate extent. And the time and extent must be determined depending on fluctuations in the meteorological conditions, and this is a purely creative labour. Agriculture concerns itself with living nature, and must always, creatively, track its demands and comply with them. It is much harder to separate creative from reproductive labour in this case than it is for industrial production. Yet there is no other way. Here too, creative work must be separated from reproductive work, for only in separation can it acquire the social breadth which is essential to the new society. The development of agronomy and zootechnics, with the maximal industrialization of agriculture, leading to the most complete liberation from the necessity of individual creativity and the sharpest separation of the agricultural intelligentsia from the agricultural proletariat, this is the direction in which proletarian efforts must lead. And, although it is obvious that the separation of creative labour and its return to the proletariat will be most sharply expressed here, in comparison with industry, yet without this all management will be impossible. The clear-cut separation of the agricultural proletariat from the intelligentsia and its merging with the industrial proletariat may also suggest new forms of reproductive labour, taking into consideration the non-seasonal work of industry and the seasonal character of agriculture. But independent of this, the industrialization of agriculture remains one of the most important tasks of the industrial proletariat, of the dictatorship of the proletariat, because without this the economic limitations cannot be overcome, the general level of effectiveness of production which can completely resolve the economic problems of society will not be achieved. This is why the technical and economic tasks of the proletariat in relations with the countryside converge with its fundamental direction. Here it is particularly important that, though the technical course of industrialization, of course, has enormous importance, it must not push the political tasks into the background. Without serious attention to the political tasks, even in the search for technical solutions, the ancient traditions will not be overcome, and this means that the divisions between town and country can not be eliminated. The town must bring to agriculture, with all possible precision, its industrial thinking, only thus liberating the natural attraction of humanity to the land from feudal and bourgeois stratifications. Are the tasks of the proletariat, in relation to the peasantry and the intelligentsia, continuations of the class struggle carried over from capitalist society? Yes, but it is not here that we ought to search for the focal point. The proletariat carries the quintessence of its struggle with the bourgeoisie through the boundary of the socialist revolution. This basic contradiction ought to be seen from the following perspective; on the one hand, the collective, collectivist strivings of the proletariat, and on the other, the extreme individualism embodied by the bourgeoisie in the economic privileges of private property and the establishment of a direct dependency of social position on economic position. Yet capitalist society produces individualistic strivings for social privilege not only in the bourgeoisie, but in all strata and classes of society. And the proletariat, having liquidated the bourgeoisie as a class, and private property as the foundation of economic privilege, which serves as the basis for the acquisition of many social privileges, cannot completely eliminate all striving for individual privileges; for all society, even without the bourgeoisie, including the proletarian masses themselves is permeated through and through with such strivings. The fundamental contradiction of socialism becomes the contradiction between the individual and society. The essence of the contradiction is that the individual, in opposition to the interests of society, strives for the conquest of some individual privilege, strives to receive from society more than he himself has given. But then the backward, moribund side of the contradiction arises from the individual, from each member of society, whereas the advanced side comes from society and is bound up with the collective, proletarian class interests. Yet neither side can be annihilated in the struggle, for this would mean social suicide. Moreover, society, the proletariat, cannot solve its economic problems without stimulating the activity of members through the provision of definite privileges. This supports the individual struggle for privileges and does not allow them to die away. Society must provide the greatest privileges where the most important problems of the concrete historical stage are to be decided. Supplying privileges permits the effective solution of problems, but, simultaneously, society seeks other collective solutions to such problems and finds them. Thus the foundation is laid for the negation of previous privileges. In the course of social development, the dictates of this development produce a concentration of privileges in definite strata. And when society discovers alternative solutions to these problems, it inevitably comes out in favour of the liquidation of previous privileges. This is when new flash-points for social struggle flare up, where the side defending its privileges is in fact defending nothing other than its bourgeois right to these privileges, i.e. comes forward as the successor in the bourgeois cause in this continuation of the class battle. The rise of such aggravations of the class struggle is inevitable on all paths from capitalism to communism, and, in overcoming the resistance of the privileged strata, there must be an uninterrupted revolution which alone can lead to the development of communist consciousness. Naturally, it is only the dictatorship of the proletariat, the dictatorship of an open class, which provides privileges equally to all (or, which comes to the same thing, the absence of all privilege) which can guarantee that it will consistently reveal all obstacles along the path of social development, uncompromisingly struggle against them in all areas and so bring about victory in the struggle. _______________________ History taught us to struggle for the dictatorship of the proletariat and to achieve it. History also teaches us to extract lessons from defeat. Where the capitalists can not cope with the armed power of the proletariat, they conceal themselves, and trying to sprout again, cling to the smallest privileges. They deceive and make fools of the workers, trying to regain everything they have lost. The proletariat must not hope that such people and forces can save them from the rebirth of capitalism. Only its own vigilance can serve as a guarantee. The proletariat must not put its faith in its own best representatives, for, divided from the class, they begin to act in accordance with their own individual powers. The proletariat must not trust even the party it gave birth to when it holds power; power is such a privilege that only the proletariat itself will not be corrupted and bourgeoisified by it. Only the continuous readiness of the whole class, acting in defence of its rights and privileges, if necessary with arms in hand, only continuous class control over all social processes, only eternal enthusiasm and initiative of the proletarian organizations can provide hegemony for the proletariat. This is why, while not withdrawing the appeal for the unity of the proletarians of all countries, we proclaim that the key slogan of our time is: "HAIL THE DICTATORSHIP OF THE PROLETARIAT!" April, 1979 |
