please cde would you kindly send me political lesson on the late cde smiso nkwanyana..........
On 8/11/09, morgan phaahla <[email protected]> wrote: > Comrade VC, > > May you kindly send me the whole document - POLITICAL NOTES PRESENTED BY CDE > MASONDO > > Kindest regards > Morgan Phaahla > > "Sometimes, if you wear suits for too long, it changes your ideology." - Joe > Slovo > > --- On Tue, 8/11/09, Dominic Tweedie <[email protected]> wrote: > > > From: Dominic Tweedie <[email protected]> > Subject: [YCLSA Discussion] POLITICAL NOTES PRESENTED BY CDE MASONDO > To: [email protected] > Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009, 3:48 AM > > > Dear Comrades, > > In my opinion the principal difference between a communist party and a > bourgeois party, except for the fact that they represent different classes, > is that a bourgeois party seeks power for itself and a communist party does > not. > > A bourgeois party seeks power in competition with other bourgeois parties, > in terms of the bourgeois democracy, which is only one organ of the > executive committee of the bourgeois ruling class, wherein the other organs > include the Constitutional Court, the executive, and the military. > > A communist party has no business seeking power in a bourgeois executive > committee. The basis for communist participation in government is not that. > We do not do power politics as an organisation, but only as a class. > > The basis for communist participation in all mass organisations and > structures is to be the peoples' tribune there, on the basis of "nothing > about us without us". It is not a substitute for organs of peoples' power > and for subsequent Dual Power as the tactical means of transition in > revolution. Nor is it co-option into the bourgeois state. > > The communists do not contest for bourgeois state power. What Cde Masondo > calls "organisational state power" is power of the bourgeois state. When did > such a thing become the aim of the communists? > > Cde Masondo has not taken care to reconcile his arguments with the communist > understanding of the State. This is a constant strand from the Communist > Manifesto, through Marx's books on France, to Engels' "Origin of the Family, > Private Property and The State", to Lenin's works and in particular "The > State and Revolution", and on up to today. > > The communist conception of The State is integral to our understanding of > class and of class struggle (e.g. "The 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte"). > > Without the communist understanding of The State, the entire communist > theory of class struggle, transitional socialism, and final classless, > stateless communism, collapses. > > There are not two communist understandings of The State. There is a > different, indistinct, lazy and vulgarised bourgeois usage of the term, and > then there is a provisional, intermediate, hybrid term called "developmental > state" that is used as between people who do not yet agree as to the nature > of the state. This spectrum of different meanings creates a temptation to > use the term "State" in the same text, now with one meaning, now with > another. I am afraid that this is what Cde Masondo has done. He has not > committed to one or other meaning of the word, because he wants to have his > State cake, and eat it, too. > > Cde Masondo's repetitive new phrase, "mode of entry into the state", is > pregnant with mistakes. The communists are not entryists! Nowhere are we > entryists. Not in the ANC, not in COSATU, and not in the bourgeois > democracy. As communists, we deal by open advocacy. > > We do not take on the clothes of a bourgeois party, even when we contest > elections. If we stand for election as Communists in a bourgeois democracy > we do so with an intention of challenging it, root and branch, and we must > be open about that with the electorate. > > If we do not stand as Communists, then we stand in relation to the bourgeois > assembly as we stand in relation to any mass organisations where we give > leadership as common members, such as the ANC and COSATU and any other mass > organisations, and this is well covered by Rule 6.4 of our SACP > Constitution. > > The communists cannot have a double agenda. The communists "disdain to > conceal their aims". > > VC > > > > > > > State power and SACP’s independence in the state > > 17. Smiso also understood that it is one thing to have an interest in > something. But it is another thing to have power to achieve what you > want. It is for this reason, that he spent a lot of his time > organizing student power through building and leading SASCO to fight > for the immediate interests of students in institutions of higher > learning. He also built the working class’ organisational power > through building the SACP. > 18. He was clear in his mind that for the working class to exercise > its organisational power, the Party must be independent. It should be > able, amongst other things, to decide on what it wants to do, > including democratic control of its cadres in the state. > 19. The key question we should answer in memory of Smiso is: whether > our SACP will be in a position to exercise its organisational power in > the post-2009 state within the current institutional make up of the > Alliance. > 20. My answer to this question is : our SACP will face two constrains > within and outside the state, namely (a) institutional constrains > arising out the current configuration of the Alliance and (b) class > power of business on the state. > 21. And to overcome these constrains, > > a. There must be institutional change in the SACP’s the mode of entry > into the state as well as accountability mechanisms; and (b) there > must be popular working class campaigns will be necessary to shift the > balance of class power against business > > 22. What is not my argument? > > a. This is not an argument for breaking of the Alliance. Instead it is > an argument for its real reconfiguration. It is an argument for a > democratic marriage between the SACP and ANC. (b) This is not an > argument for abandonment of the Communist contest for the ANC. And (c) > this is not an argument against SACP’s participation in the state. > > > Cautionary notes > 22. In discussing this issue we should not (a) exaggerate the > presence of the SACP in the state (b) Or under-estimate our presence > in the state (like the ultra-left do) and (c) we should not discuss > this question from what the ANC wants and thinks. That is to say, we > should start by asking if the ANC will agree or not – important as > this is. Instead we should start by stating what we want. > 23. Constrain Number 1 : The state’s inherent dependence on business > > a. The state, like workers, depends on business to reproduce itself. > To illustrate, to deliver social services the state needs to create > the necessary conditions for capitalists to invest. Productive > investment means higher growth, which in turn means potentially more > wages for workers and profits for capitalists. Thus enabling the state > to grow its tax revenue base. Because states do not control > significant investments, they tend to depend on business to invest > their resources, which enables the state to generate its own income by > taxing wages, salaries and profits. > > b. All successive post-1994 state leaderships have sought to lure > business to invest in South Africa. The pre-2009 state leadership’s > strategy had been to make the costs of doing business cheaper through > neo-liberal economic policies and at the expense of the poor. > > c. Business, through various means, including stating its economic > policy preference, has been exerting pressure on the post-2009 state. > All politicians are subjected to the power of business. However, > specific policy and programmatic outcomes are not inscribed in the > structure of capitalism itself. There are other alternatives even > within the limits of capitalism. > > 24. Conditions under business can be forced to make progressive compromises > > a. It is not out of the passivity of the working class that business > makes concessions to the poor. Instead, they are forced to do so by > organised and mobilized working class power. In the absence of mass > struggles, there will be no reason for business to make any > concessions. > b. In the last 15 years, the SACP could not effectively challenge the > ANC’s neo-liberalism because Communists in government were materially > dependent on the ANC, but ideologically committed to the Party. And > this generated political conflicts which eventually led to the > out-voting of many of the cabinet ministers out of the SACP > leadership. We argue that this will only happen if the working class > shifts the balance of power through mass struggles, as well as making > certain institutional changes in the SACP’s modes entry and exit in > and from the state. > > 25. Constrain number 2 : Unreconfigured alliance as an > institutional constrain > > a. Unquestionably, there have been significant consultations in the > development of the 2009 ANC elections manifesto and selection of > public representatives, particularly for the national and provincial > cabinet committees. But the post-Polokwane and 2009 elections have not > resolved a number of fundamental questions with regard to the > independence of the SACP within the state. However, SACP cadres are in > the legislatures as ANC members and under the whip of the ANC, and the > modes of accountability as well as the tasks of communists in the > legislatures in relation to the independent role of the Party in the > legislatures are not very clear. > b. Assigning a significant amount of power to the ANC to elect and > select SACP cadres within the state generates conditions for the > subordination of the SACP to the ANC leadership. ANC Premier can > unfairly SACP MECs. > > 26. Quota for the SACP to overcome institutional constrain > > a. The mode of entry, exit, and accountability should change. Mode of > entry of the SACP into the should include quotas. These SACP members > should be deployed by and accountable to the Party. This does not mean > that communists should not be elected into the ANC lists in their own > right, and should abandon their communist conduct and values once they > are elected to the ANC list. > b. To realise the quota at the municipal level, the Alliance must > agree in principle that certain wards should be contested under the > banner of the SACP. In the same way as the SACP has been doing in the > last elections, the ANC shall also mobilise its members to vote for an > SACP candidate in these wards. > > Mass work to overcome business power > > a. Doubtless, quotas for the SACP in the legislatures and executives, > will not resolve all the problems associated with being in a > capitalist state, but it will provide the necessary conditions for the > SACP to maintain its independence and control over its deployed > cadres. Parliamentary work is not a substitute for mass work including > by SACP parliamentarians. In fact, the 90% the marginalization of the > Party in some provinces can be explained by its (i.e. SACP) weaknesses > on the ground. > b. Building and reconfiguring the Alliance should be accompanied by > strengthening the Party structures capable of leading popular > campaigns on the ground. Otherwise, the Party will be reduced to a > political party begging for positions from the ANC leadership. > c. Communist parliamentarians and ministers in their capacities as > SACP activists and leaders must not hesitate to join mass actions even > if they are against parliament or the state. > d. The pre-condition for the strength of the Party within the state > and the reconfigured Alliance, lies in our ideological and > organizational strength in broader society and within the ANC. > > Ideological tasks of the Party in relation to the ANC > > 27. Who says the ANC cannot be socialist? The ANC does not have to be > a communist party to fight for socialism. Therefore, there is nothing > that prohibits the ANC from adopting socialism as its ultimate > emancipatory vision. The ANC is a human made organization, and we > should not naturalise its ideological orientation. In fact the > ideological orientation of the post-Morogoro ANC had been explicit on > the class question – it envisioned a socialist society. There is a lot > of textual evidence to validate this claim. > > Issued by YCLSA Head Office > > For interviews contact: > > David Masondo > YCLSA National Chairperson – 072 889 9052 > > > > > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You are subscribed. This footer can help you. Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this message. You can visit the group WEB SITE at http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, pages, files and membership. To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this address (repeat): [email protected] . -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
