I want to begin with the concessions first since both are true. Marv’s point that insurgents replicate the motivations of their predecessors is correct. I’d make that stronger; it is typically how insurgencies occur. Anyone who has seen a winning caucus develop a new respect for staff discretion after gaining control will understand what I’m saying. Mark is correct; there isn’t anything formal that prohibits these discussions.
However, no one has ever been gavelled down for expressing a view. The issue wasn't that the discussion itself is taboo; the issue was that if you don't have an organizational mechanism to transform discussion into action (i.e., instruction), then your organization is going to continue talking but ultimately accomplish very little. That's exactly what we're doing now. Therefore, Mark's solution won't solve the problem. Having conversations outside of meetings, creating an environment that promotes open communication, and asking people to share their views. Good practices. None of those practices are accountable, because the hallway is the only space in which you can utilize recall, mandate, and reporting back to someone. When you leave the hallway, there is no position to be recalled from and there is no community to report to. In 1970, Jo Freeman resolved this matter. Informal networks are not checks on unaccountable leadership. Instead, informal networks are simply a vehicle for unaccountable leadership to reproduce themselves. The more friendly the environment, the better unaccountable leadership operates. Conversely, Marv shifts the same concern to a future circumstance. Maybe in socialism, when the pursuit of wealth, status, and power ceases to exist. This turns the historical relationship around. Recall and the workers’ wage were not merely ornamental features of societies that had eliminated careerism. Rather, they were tools that a working class in control developed specifically because careerism existed in full force and encouragement hadn’t worked. These tools assume the scramble exists; they do not wait for the scramble to end. Additionally, Marv’s reliance upon the Michels argument runs counter to the conclusion he draws from it. If oligarchy were a product of bad behavior, education should suffice, and mechanisms would become superfluous. If oligarchy is structural, then education becomes redundant. Marv acknowledges the structural nature of oligarchy and then prescribes the moralistic treatment. As his last statement clearly illustrates, agreement doesn’t always equate to commitment. Just like that. That’s the case for mechanisms that establish accountability regardless of whether agreement occurs, not the case against such mechanisms. There are two smaller issues I’d like to address. Accountability is not a function of democratic centralism. Recall, instructed delegates, and worker wages are all either Communard or earlier republican devices. Versions of each still exist in some form in trade unions’ constitutions and state-level recall measures. To dismiss the request based on this technicality treats the request as an import of Bolsheviks. Further, most of the failures experienced by democratic centralist organizations occurred due to the absence or suspension of mechanisms binding members rather than their existence. Permanently established tendencies were prohibited, leading to committees exempt from recall and full-time employees compensated at levels equivalent to professionals. Ultimately, my inquiry for any caucus—including mine—is not if it supports internal democracy. All caucuses do. My inquiry is whether it would implement recall and worker wages within its cadre once they gain office. I've yet to hear anyone say "yes" and follow through. -- Tony -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#43134): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/43134 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/120853362/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. #4 Do not exceed five posts a day. -=-=- Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/13617172/21656/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
