sure thats one way of viewing it.
if push come to shove the working class always has the power to overthrow the vanguard. yet large populations are generally to stupid to do so due to all the propaganda and reeducation (see the USA currently). first one would need to remove capitalism from the equation, and create political education that is systemically impossible to manipulate or censor. after that the working class will gain consciousness over time.
That is true, but it’s a huge undertaking to do even once, let alone twice in ‘rapid’ (10-30 years) succession once it turns out the vanguards have become the oldguards.
Systemic change need to happen naturally from a grass-roots level if it is to truly last as an alternative to the status quo. It needs to be something that all people feel heard and supported in, and want to see succeed.
This is one of the beauties of anarchism in that it promotes local groups to flourish, and to make the changes they need to suitable for their needs and environs. You can start working on secondary support systems without needing to wait for the revolution.
The first is in separating the vanguard from the working classes. The vanguard is a subsection of the working classes chosen by the rest of the working classes. Vanguards derive their power from the bottom-up.
The second is in assuming the working classes are stupid and easily duped. People instead license themselves to believe what they think benefits them is good. Socialist systems have always focused on education and literacy programs because a society run by the working classes works better with more informed members, but even within capitalism workers still come to understand the necessary conditions for their own liberation simply by existing within the brutally oppressive systems.
Historically vanguards only ever derive any form of power or legitimacy through popular support from the broader working classes. Had vanguards not been popularly supported, they would have failed. You can see examples of supposed “vanguards” that do fail, such as the Gonzaloist CPP Shining Path, which slaughtered peasants and alienated themselves from the working classes.
Historically vanguards derive power thru the threat of violence. Sure, for a vanguard to initially gain power, some level of popular support is important. But often the opposition to the bourgeois is more important than actual embrace of the vanguard. And once the full might of the state is in their control, with it’s propaganda and threat of violence, a mandate from workers becomes unimportant.
This doesn’t track with the experience of socialist states, though. Popular polling in AES states shows remarkable support for the vanguard party because of the real material gains made by socialism. The mandate from the working class is essential precisely because of the nature of running an economy where public ownership is principle. State violence is used, of course, but against fascists, sabateurs, slavers, capitalists, landlords, etc. who resist collectivization and undermine the socialist system. It’s state violence wielded by the working class against enemies of the working class that protects the gains of socialism.
No, it has “I give enough of a shit to actually look into history and verify that what I am saying is correct” energy. I care far less about sloganeering and far more about genuinely learning about and from socialist movements, for the purpose of achieving socialism in real life.
i dont think it is that wrong to seperate those 2. one could argue that by having different power than the rest all (regardless of where its coming from), it again becomes its own class.
and yes people realise themselves that capitalism is a horrendous system, yet they dont realise it enough to unite. if it was that easy to realise, we wouldnt have racism and such anymore and would have already liberated the working class. yet the class as a whole remains ignorant even if individual groups see through it all. im not saying the working class as a whole is stupid because it cant get smarter, im saying it is intentionally kept stupid and divided, and to stop that we first need to rid ourselves of the system thats responsible for that.
If you separate class from its basis in relation to the mode of production, then you are pivoting from Marxism. Class is not about “power,” it’s about social relations to the mode of production and how we fit into that. Plumbers and factory workers are both proletarian despite having different jobs, the same applies to administrators and managers.
Secondly, history is not a series of snapshots but instead a dialectical process. We should help accelerate class consciousness, and tackle bourgeois cultural hegemony, but we are not outside the class struggle and instead are within it.
And ideally capitalism would wither away and die on its own accord. The vanguard is not credible enough to wield authority over the working class.
sure thats one way of viewing it. if push come to shove the working class always has the power to overthrow the vanguard. yet large populations are generally to stupid to do so due to all the propaganda and reeducation (see the USA currently). first one would need to remove capitalism from the equation, and create political education that is systemically impossible to manipulate or censor. after that the working class will gain consciousness over time.
I hope you have some ideas because I have serious doubts that’s possible in any political/economic system.
That is true, but it’s a huge undertaking to do even once, let alone twice in ‘rapid’ (10-30 years) succession once it turns out the vanguards have become the oldguards.
Systemic change need to happen naturally from a grass-roots level if it is to truly last as an alternative to the status quo. It needs to be something that all people feel heard and supported in, and want to see succeed.
This is one of the beauties of anarchism in that it promotes local groups to flourish, and to make the changes they need to suitable for their needs and environs. You can start working on secondary support systems without needing to wait for the revolution.
This is wrong on two levels.
The first is in separating the vanguard from the working classes. The vanguard is a subsection of the working classes chosen by the rest of the working classes. Vanguards derive their power from the bottom-up.
The second is in assuming the working classes are stupid and easily duped. People instead license themselves to believe what they think benefits them is good. Socialist systems have always focused on education and literacy programs because a society run by the working classes works better with more informed members, but even within capitalism workers still come to understand the necessary conditions for their own liberation simply by existing within the brutally oppressive systems.
The Vanguard chose themselves and if you don’t like it, straight to Lubyanka
Historically vanguards only ever derive any form of power or legitimacy through popular support from the broader working classes. Had vanguards not been popularly supported, they would have failed. You can see examples of supposed “vanguards” that do fail, such as the Gonzaloist CPP Shining Path, which slaughtered peasants and alienated themselves from the working classes.
Historically vanguards derive power thru the threat of violence. Sure, for a vanguard to initially gain power, some level of popular support is important. But often the opposition to the bourgeois is more important than actual embrace of the vanguard. And once the full might of the state is in their control, with it’s propaganda and threat of violence, a mandate from workers becomes unimportant.
This doesn’t track with the experience of socialist states, though. Popular polling in AES states shows remarkable support for the vanguard party because of the real material gains made by socialism. The mandate from the working class is essential precisely because of the nature of running an economy where public ownership is principle. State violence is used, of course, but against fascists, sabateurs, slavers, capitalists, landlords, etc. who resist collectivization and undermine the socialist system. It’s state violence wielded by the working class against enemies of the working class that protects the gains of socialism.
This has real “we investigated ourselves and found no wrong doing” energy.
No, it has “I give enough of a shit to actually look into history and verify that what I am saying is correct” energy. I care far less about sloganeering and far more about genuinely learning about and from socialist movements, for the purpose of achieving socialism in real life.
i dont think it is that wrong to seperate those 2. one could argue that by having different power than the rest all (regardless of where its coming from), it again becomes its own class.
and yes people realise themselves that capitalism is a horrendous system, yet they dont realise it enough to unite. if it was that easy to realise, we wouldnt have racism and such anymore and would have already liberated the working class. yet the class as a whole remains ignorant even if individual groups see through it all. im not saying the working class as a whole is stupid because it cant get smarter, im saying it is intentionally kept stupid and divided, and to stop that we first need to rid ourselves of the system thats responsible for that.
You heard CowBee, stop having independent thoughts.
it is important for people to voice their disagreement, regardless of wether or you, i, or anyone else likes it or not
Right, so we should avoid being purists telling off other for deviating from ‘the theory’.
you cant unite the working class, if only the people you agree with can voice their opinion
Yes, so let’s stop saying shit like “then you are pivoting from Marxism” and forcing ideological purity.
If you separate class from its basis in relation to the mode of production, then you are pivoting from Marxism. Class is not about “power,” it’s about social relations to the mode of production and how we fit into that. Plumbers and factory workers are both proletarian despite having different jobs, the same applies to administrators and managers.
Secondly, history is not a series of snapshots but instead a dialectical process. We should help accelerate class consciousness, and tackle bourgeois cultural hegemony, but we are not outside the class struggle and instead are within it.