>From: Perry Vodchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

>Mailing-List: list [EMAIL PROTECTED]; contact
>Is there a Pre-Revolutionary
>Situation in Russia?
>
>In reviewing the comments which have appeared
>on the ISKRA and proletarism lists on the
>contradiction between the Samara Stachkom, the
>Party of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat and
>'Zashchita,' ISWoR, it seems apparent that many
>comrades in the 'West,' including Ben Seattle,
>Dave Bedggood, Peter LaVenia and others, have
>the greatest difficulty putting themselves into the
>shoes of the Russian proletariat.
>
>One crucial element of the PDP's analysis of the
>contemporary world situation is that Russia, right
>now, today, is in a pre-revolutionary situation; that
>at any moment historic class battles can erupt
>there. Although many of the comrades know the
>facts which prove that Russia is in the grip of a
>profound, all-sided crisis, their analysis of these
>facts proceeds from the perspective of those who
>have lived their lives as revolutionaries in
>non-revolutionary times and places, in times and
>places when both the bourgeoisie and significant
>fraction of the working class are able to easily
>persuade themselves that things can and must go
>on in the old way. This is entirely understandable,
>but, nonetheless, leads to a tragically flawed
>approach to the crucial questions.
>
>So many of the doubts and criticisms of these
>comrades would be correct if only their
>fundamental assessment of the present stage of
>historical development in Russia were not wrong.
>
>In revolutionary and pre-revolutionary situations,
>to work for reformist, parliamentary goals is, quite
>simply, counter-revolutionary. At such times,
>revolutionaries must set themselves different
>tasks. This is not because they have lost sight of
>the beneficial effects on working class
>consciousness of the struggle for limited
>objectives, nor because they have turned their
>backs on the struggle of the class to improve its
>economic situation; but because they realize that,
>once a given social-economic order has
>exhausted all its possibilities for development,
>when the terminal, all-sided crisis is at hand, then
>all these benefits, and more, can only be obtained
>in revolutionary struggle against the oppressor,
>and, moreover, the pursuit of limited aims, without
>constantly linking them to larger political demands,
>interferes with such revolutionary development by
>retarding the development of proletarian,
>revolutionary consciousness.
>
>Let's take as an example one fragment from
>comrade Ben's recent posting "Information war
>breaks out ..."
>
>"And there is an important tactical
>issue related to the labor code: If a
>mass struggle is developing against
>an employer it often makes a
>considerable difference, tactically,
>as to which side is violating the
>law--if only because this will effect
>the ability to rally mass support for a
>popular struggle--because it will
>impact the thinking of
>less-advanced sections of the
>working class."
>
>Such an assessment makes perfect sense in
>most developed capitalist countries, where the rule
>of bourgeois law prevails and when the situation is
>not revolutionary. It makes little or no sense when
>applied to Russia today! The law, in Russia today,
>is a complete fiction. Arbitrariness and
>lawlessness are the norm. Just consider some of
>the actual circumstances;
>
>Banking is a dangerous profession; a well
>dressed banker wears Kevlar.
>
>Squabbles between rival business groups
>are often settled by conflict between hired
>thugs; as for example in the recent case of
>the Krystal Vodka Factory.
>
>The tax police wear ski masks and carry
>automatic weapons when they go tax
>collecting.
>
>A state of open contradiction exists
>between the regional governors and the
>central government. Many decrees and
>laws of the central government are, illegally,
>ignored in the regions.
>
>Billions of dollars are, illegally, leeching out
>of Russia daily to reach safe haven in the
>Western metropolises.
>
>Organized crime (mafia style) is at
>epidemic levels.
>
>Organized crime (bourgeois style) is at
>epidemic levels.
>
>Organized crime (feudal and
>petty-bourgeois styles) is at epidemic
>levels.
>
>Agricultural and industrial production have
>all but collapsed. Seventy percent of the
>Russian working class are unemployed or
>underemployed.
>
>Workers are frequently, but illegally, not
>even paid their pittances for months and
>sometimes years at a time
>
>Soldiers in Chechnia go on strike because
>they have not received their combat
>allowances.
>
>The infrastructure, after decades of
>negative accumulation, is in a state of
>catastrophic decay. The fire at Ostankino
>and the Kursk are only the early harbingers
>of greater disasters to come.
>
>The largest 'trade union,' the FNPR,
>organizes no strikes. Its role is to fight
>rear-guard actions, on behalf of the ruling
>class, to defuse the actual wild-cat strike
>actions of the workers; yet such actions are
>going on all the time, in spite of the fact
>that they are all illegal.
>
>Occasional court decisions which do favour
>the working class are not upheld in life.
>
>Such is the situation that faces the Russian
>proletariat today. In these circumstances, can it
>really make a difference which side has the law
>behind it? In circumstances where the proletariat
>has lost all faith in the President and the Duma,
>can it really be a step toward revolution to call
>upon the workers to devote their energies to a
>parliamentary struggle?
>
>Now comrades LaVenia, Seattle and others have
>criticized the PDP for lacking an appropriate
>'reform' component, but can we properly even use
>the word 'reform' to describe the struggles which
>are on the agenda in Russia today? How can a
>state mechanism which is so broadly ineffectual
>be reformed? It is not senseless and harmful to
>waste the revolutionary energy of the working
>class chasing legal reform when the law is without
>effect? Do strategy and tactics appropriate to
>fighting for a reduction in the working day apply,
>without change, to a situation where the fight is to
>prevent the increase of the working day?
>
>This same perspective, distorts Western
>comrades perception of the political situation. For
>example, in reading comrade Ben's description of
>one of the "factual matters that are still very
>unclear," we find;
>
>"Oleg Shein says that his
>organization, Zaschita, has
>consistently exposed the
>treacherous nature of the CPRF and
>the FNPR while Grigorii Isaev
>indicates that these trends may have
>dominated many of the May 17
>actions and used these actions to
>dull the minds of workers with
>nonsense."
>
>Now this description may seem to make some
>sense to Western ears, but it would be more
>scientific to call Al Gore the leader of a
>treacherous trend in the U.S. workers' movement
>than to award this title to Zhyuganov, leader of the
>KPRF (CPRF). Comrades should bear in mind
>that, while most of the organizations and trends
>participating for example in ISWoR or the
>proletarism list would be delighted if they could
>boast a quarter of a thousand members,
>Zhyuganov's party, even after a decade of
>relentless decline, still boasts a quarter of a
>million! The KPRF is the party of the old
>quasi-feudal Soviet ruling class, and, as recently
>as a decade ago, its word was law! As a practical
>matter, everyone in positions of authority in Russia
>today, from Putin down, was, ten short years ago,
>a member of the KPRF's predecessor
>organization, the CPSU. This is not the late Gus
>Hall's CPUSA, but an organization which
>expresses the interests of an important segment
>of today's ruling class, namely the remnants of the
>quasi-feudal rulers who dominated the Soviet
>Union for half a century.
>
>The KPRF is not a treacherous trend of the
>workers' movement, but its sworn enemy. It is a
>sophisticated, powerful and relentless machine
>which has decades of experience in consciously
>disorganizing the workers struggle. Moreover,
>Isaev's contention is not that the KPRF dominated
>the actions of May 17th, but rather that, in Samara
>at least, they are the movement! The workers
>have no interest in this parliamentary struggle, and
>while comrade Shein may claim that he and
>'Zashchita' "consistently expose their treacherous
>nature," in fact it is precisely this force which they
>are relying on to build the movement?
>
>Similar problems of perception and orientation are
>evident in the comments of the CWGNZ on the
>debate over the new Labour Code. For example in
>their post of the 30th of October, 2000 to the
>ISKRA list, we read;
>
>"Bourgeois rights must be defended
>against the rise of fascism or else
>the physical existence of organized
>labor will be smashed, and with it the
>capacity to develop a mass
>revolutionary movement."
>
>There are several problems with this
>characterization. In the first place, bourgeois right,
>in a substantially developed form, does not yet
>exist in Russia to be defended. What actually
>exists could better be called the law of the jungle;
>the present period is one of ongoing struggle
>between the defeated quasi-feudal ruling class of
>the Soviet period and the radical bourgeoisie to
>divide the spoils. It is a period of primitive
>accumulation through simple theft. Neither
>bourgeois economic methods nor bourgeois right
>have yet achieved even preponderance, let alone
>dominance, in Russia today. Just consider, neither
>has rule of law in general been established, nor
>have a host of other cornerstones of elaborated
>bourgeois right, specifically, land ownership,
>settlement of debts and so forth, been laid there
>yet. Even the fundamental, bourgeois right of the
>worker, to be paid in accordance with labour, does
>not really exist consistently in Russia.
>
>In the second place, what is meant, in this
>context, by "organized labour?" The dominant
>'labour' organization in Russia is the FNPR
>(CFTUR), an organization which has, quite literally,
>no experience organizing even the economic
>struggles of the working class, and which was, and
>continues to be, the loyal servant of the ruling
>class. Oleg Shein has characterized this
>organization as "a joke." Is this an example of
>"consistently expos(ing) their treacherous nature?"
>Or is it a prettification of an organization which
>does the workers' struggle incalculable harm, but
>which comrade Shein wants to use as the basis
>for building his campaign in support of
>parliamentary demands? No, Mikhail Shmakov is
>no joke, but a very smooth operator.
>
>It is precisely the lack of working class
>organization in Russia which is the root of the
>proletariat's present difficulties in exploiting the
>revolutionary potential which exists everywhere.
>And where independent, militant workers
>organizations such as the Stachkoms and
>independent trades unions have arisen, the correct
>course for them can only be to develop their
>fighting readiness and organization in action and
>through raising, ever more sharply, the political
>demands and slogans which can explosively
>develop the classes readiness for revolutionary
>action; and not through miring them in the
>bureaucratic, legalistic, parliamentary marsh,
>which is, especially in the present
>pre-revolutionary period of predatory capitalism,
>roundly ignored by the ruling class since it poses
>no threat to them.
>
>And this brings us to the fundamental divide
>between the activities of 'Zashchita' and Peoples
>Deputy Shein, and those of the PDP. The PDP is
>preparing for proletarian revolution in Russia,
>'Zashchita' is not. And this is why, if readers take
>a calm look at the weapons of the two sides in this
>debate, they will see clearly that 'Zashchita' has
>avoided principled arguments almost entirely,
>relying instead on smear, slander, libel, innuendo
>and character assassination.
>
>The questions of Isaev remain! They are;
>
>1.What level of consciousness has the
>Russian working class achieved up till now,
>and thus, what are the appropriate slogans
>around which it can organize and advance
>to reestablishing its dictatorship?
>
>2.Why has the working class not taken up the
>struggle against the new Labour Code as its
>own?
>
>3.Who has the leadership of the campaign
>against the new Labour Code?
>
>4.What is the role of KPRF in the workers'
>struggle in Russia today?
>
>5.What is the role of CFTUR (FNPR) in the
>workers' struggle in Russia today?
>
>The practical proposals of the PDP exist! They
>are;
>
>1.the founding of a revolutionary, proletarian
>party,
>
>2.the gathering and uniting of those energetic
>workers collectives and organizations which
>already exist into one strike force (under the
>leadership, for example, of the All-Russia
>Stachkom),
>
>3.arranging for the publication of a militant,
>workers' newspaper, the base of which
>could certainly be the paper of the Workers'
>Council Stachkom) of the City of Samara,
>"Strike." [Zabastovka]
>
>As I have said before, the cards are on the table.
>Dodge and weave as they may, comrades Myers
>and Shein cannot evade them! Nor, if they are the
>revolutionaries that they pretend to be, should they
>want to. These are the cardinal questions and key
>tasks which the true friends of the working class
>must address. And the answers of the PDP are
>correct, subject only to one condition, namely that
>a pre-revolutionary situation exists in Russia
>today!
>
>And so that is the underlying question that we
>must all answer.
>
>Is there a pre-revolutionary situation in Russia
>today?
>
>And if your answer to this question is no, then my
>question to you is "When?" When incipient
>malnutrition gives way to starvation? When
>unemployment reaches 90%? When the disarray
>of the ruling class gives way to fascism?
>
>Comrades! The Time is Now!
>
>Perry Vodchik
>
>
>______________________________________________
>FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
>Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
>
>-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
>eLerts
>It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
>http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/3/_/687500/_/973654949/
>---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
>
>Glory to October of 1917! Long Live the New October!
>E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://proletarism.org/  http://stachkom.org/  http://www.samara.ru/~stachkom/
>   ICQ# 42743890
>Phone Stachkom Samara: (846-2) 352691, 353262.
>Community email addresses:
>  Post message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  List owner:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>Shortcut URL to this page:
>  http://www.onelist.com/community/proletarism
>----------------------------------------------
>[stachkomru] -The language of this list is Russian.
>Community email addresses:
>Post message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>List owner: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>Shortcut URL to this page:
>http://www.onelist.com/community/stachkomru
>
>


_______________________________________________________

KOMINFORM
P.O. Box 66
00841 Helsinki - Finland
+358-40-7177941, fax +358-9-7591081
e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.kominf.pp.fi

_______________________________________________________

Kominform  list for general information.
Subscribe/unsubscribe  messages to

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Anti-Imperialism list for anti-imperialist news.

Subscribe/unsubscribe messages:

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________________


Reply via email to