Desperately
Seeking Revolutionary Intellectuals-Then, And Now
From The Pen Of Frank Jackman
Several years ago, I guess about
three years now, in the aftermath of the demise of the Occupy movement with the
shutting down of its campsites across the country (and the world) I wrote a short
piece centered on the need for revolutionary intellectuals to take their rightful
place on the left, on the people’s side, and to stop sitting on the academic
sidelines (or wherever they were hiding out). One of the reasons for that piece
was that in the aftermath of the demise of the Occupy movement a certain
stock-taking was in order. A stock-taking at first centered on those young radical
and revolutionaries that I ran into in the various campsites and on the flash
mob marches who were disoriented and discouraged when their utopian dreams went
up in smoke without a murmur of regret from the masses. Now a few years later
it is apparent that they have, mostly, moved back to the traditional political
ways of operating or have not quite finished licking their wounds.
Although I initially addressed my
remarks to the activists still busy I also had in mind those intellectuals who
had a radical streak but who then hovered on the sidelines and were not sure
what to make of the whole experiment although some things seemed very positive like
the initial camp comradery. In short, those who would come by on Sunday and
take a lot of photographs and write a couple of lines but held back. Now in 2014
it is clear as day that the old economic order (capitalism if you were not
quite sure what to name it) that we were fitfully protesting against (especially
the banks who led the way downhill) has survived another threat to its dominance.
The old political order, the way of doing political business now clearly being
defended by one Barack Obama with might and main is still intact. The needs of
working people although now widely discussed (the increasing gap between the rich,
really the very rich, and the poor, endlessly lamented and then forgotten, the student
debt death trap, and the lingering sense that most of us will never get very
far ahead in this wicked old world especially compared to previous generations)
have not been ameliorated. All of this calls for intellectuals with any activist
spark to come forth and help analyze and plan how the masses are to survive,
how a new social order can be brought forth. Nobody said, or says, that it will
be easy but this is the plea. I have reposted the original piece with some
editing to bring it up to date.
*******
No, this is not a Personals section
ad, although it qualifies as a Help Wanted ad in a sense. On a number of
occasions over past several years, in reviewing books especially those by James
P. Cannon, a founding member of the American Communist Party and the founder of
the Socialist Workers Party in America, I have mentioned that building off of
the work of the classical Marxists, including that of Marx and Engels
themselves, and later that of Lenin and Trotsky the critical problem before the
international working class in the early part of the 20th century was the
question of creating a revolutionary leadership to lead imminent uprisings.
Armed with Lenin’s work on the theory of the imperialist nature of the epoch
and the party question and Trotsky’s on the questions of permanent revolution
and revolutionary timing the tasks for revolutionaries were more than
adequately defined. A century later with some tweaking, unfortunately, those
same theories and the same need for organization are still on the agenda
although, as Trotsky once said, the conditions are overripe for the overthrow
of capitalism as it has long ago outlived its progressive character in leading
humankind forward.
The conclusion that I originally drew
from that observation was that the revolutionary socialist movement was not as
desperately in need of theoreticians and intellectuals as previously (although
having them, and plenty of them, especially those who can write, is always a
good thing). It needed leaders steeped in those theories and with a capacity to
lead revolutions. We needed a few good day-to-day practical leaders, guys like
Cannon, like Debs from the old Socialist Party, like Ruthenberg from the early
Communist Party, to lead the fight for state power.
In that regard I have always held
up, for the early part of the 20th century, the name Karl Liebknecht the
martyred German Communist co-leader (along with Rosa Luxemburg) of the aborted
Spartacist uprising of 1919 as such an example. He led the anti-war movement in
Germany by refusing to vote for the Kaiser’s war budgets, found himself in jail
as a result, but also had tremendous authority among the left-wing German
workers when that mattered. In contrast the subsequent leadership of the German
Communists in the 1920’s Paul Levi, Henrich Brandler and Ernest Thaelmann did
not meet those qualifications. For later periods I have, as mentioned previously,
held up the name James P. Cannon, founder of the American Socialist Workers
Party (to name only the organization that he was most closely associated with),
as a model. Not so Communist Party leaders like William Z. Foster and Earl
Browder (to speak nothing of Gus Hall from our generation) or Max Shachtman in his
later years after he broke with Cannon and the SWP. That basically carries us
to somewhere around the middle of the 20th century. Since I have spent a fair
amount of time lately going back to try to draw the lessons of our movement I
have also had occasion to think, or rather to rethink my original argument on
the need for revolutionary intellectuals. I find that position stands in need
of some amendment now.
Let’s be clear here about our needs.
The traditional Marxist idea that in order to break the logjam impeding
humankind’s development the international working class must rule is still on
the historic agenda. The Leninist notions that, since the early part of the
20th century, we have been in the imperialist era and that a ‘hard’ cadre
revolutionary party is necessary to lead the struggle to take state power are
also in play. Moreover, the Trotskyist understanding that in countries of
belated development the working class is the only agency objectively capable of
leading those societies to the tasks traditionally associated with the
bourgeois revolution continues to hold true. That said, rather than some tweaking,
we are seriously in need of revolutionary intellectuals who can bring these
understandings into the 21st century.
It is almost a political truism that
each generation will find its own ways to cope with the political tasks that
confront it. The international working class movement is no exception in that
regard. Moreover, although the general outlines of Marxist theory mentioned
above hold true such tasks as the updating of the theory of imperialism to take
into account the qualitative leap in its globalization is necessary (as is, as
an adjunct to that, the significance of the gigantic increases in the size of
the ‘third world’ proletariat). Also in need of freshening up is work on the
contours of revolutionary political organization in the age of high speed
communications, the increased weight that non-working class specific questions
play in world politics (the national question which if anything has had a dramatic
uptick since the demise of the Soviet Union), religion (the almost universal trend
for the extremes of religious expression to rear their ugly heads which needs
to be combated), special racial and gender oppressions, and various other tasks
that earlier generations had taken for granted or had not needed to consider.
All this moreover has to be done in a political environment that sees Marxism,
communism, even garden variety reform socialism as failed experiments. To
address all the foregoing issues is where my call for a new crop of
revolutionary intellectuals comes from.
Since the mid- 20th century we have
had no lack of practical revolutionary leaders of one sort or another - one
thinks of Fidel Castro, Che Guevara and even Mao in his less rabid moments. We
have witnessed any number of national liberation struggles, a few attempts at
political revolution against Stalinism, a few military victories against
imperialism, notably the Vietnamese struggle. But mainly this has been an epoch
of defeats for the international working class. Moreover, we have not even come
close to developing theoretical leaders of the statue of Lenin or Trotsky.
As a case in point, recently I made
some commentary about the theory of student power in the 1960’s and its
eventual refutation by the May 1968 General Strike lead by the working class in
France. One of the leading lights for the idea that students were the “new”
working class or a “new” vanguard was one Ernest Mandel. Mandel held himself
out to be an orthodox Marxist (and Trotskyist, to boot) but that did not stop
him from, periodically, perhaps daily, changing the focus of his work away from
the idea of the centrality of the working class in social struggle an idea that
goes back to the days of Marx himself.
And Mandel, a brilliant well-spoken
erudite scholar probably was not the worst of the lot. The problem is that he
was the problem with his impressionistic theories based on, frankly,
opportunistic impulses. Another example, from that same period, was the idea of
Professor Regis Debray (in the service of Fidel at the time ) that guerrilla
foci out in the hills were the way forward ( a codification of the experience
of the Cuban Revolution for which many subjective revolutionary paid dearly
with their lives). Or the anti-Marxist Maoist notion that the countryside would
defeat the cities that flamed the imagination of many Western radicals in the
late 1960s. I could go on with more examples but they only lead to one
conclusion- we are, among other things, in a theoretical trough. The late Mandel’s
students from the 1960s have long gone on to academia and the professions (and
not an inconsiderable few in governmental harness-how the righteous have fallen).
Debray’s guerilla foci have long ago buried their dead and gone back to the cities.
The “cities” of the world now including to a great extent China had broken the
third world countryside. This, my friends, is why today I have my Help Wanted
sign out. Any takers?
No comments:
Post a Comment