when did the working class turn right wing?

[Spion]

Cool. It would be interesting to hear your views.

I found it fundamentally unconvincing. That's probably being charitable.

The nub of the author's argument seems to be:

The model of the Bolshevik party, as it developed in the years following revolution represents an experimental socialism; an experiment conducted in the specific conditions of post-Tsarist Russia, not an iconic organisation to be replicated in contemporary political practice.

Well, no shit, Sherlock!

I can't imagine many except die-hard old school Stalinists think anything other than that.

What the article is really trying to say is that the Bolshevik model at no point in its existence should form a model today. But to convince with that argument it needs to examine the party through the course of its existence, not just in the set of very unfavourable circumstances towards its (in some very important senses) end. It doesn't, and to ignore 20-ish years of growth from virtually nothing to a membership of 1/8 of the w/c is plain daft, or cutting the cloth to suit a predetermined position.

I see no other alternative to the creation of an organisation that has two key roles - a) to develop an understanding of this society and the role of the working class in destroying it b) to build among the working class to fuse its political-historical understanding with political action in the here and now.

 

[mk12]

I think the article is correct to focus on the Bolsheviks in 1917 onwards. It doesn't matter what they did in the 15 years before this. A party should be judged on what it does in power. Isn't this was leninist parties aim for?

And is that really all you have to say on that article?

 

[Spion]

I think the article is correct to focus on the Bolsheviks in 1917 onwards. It doesn't matter what they did in the 15 years before this.

Are you serious?

The article seems to want to imply something about the building of parties from the experience of one in its very specific post-revolutionary surroundings, but it doesn't demonstrate those connections.

And is that really all you have to say on that article?

I could pick up some other details, but what I've highlighted seems to be its main point.

 

[mk12]

We face a situation that is closer to pre-1917 than post, so it seems to me that that's what we need to discuss.

No, it's not. The Bolsheviks instituted a one party dictatorship which did not allow freedom of assembly, of speech and banned independent workers' organisations. How you can ignore this and claim we should look to see what they did pre-1917 is ridiculous.

The point is, the way the Bolshevik Party was built between 1903-1917 ultimately led to one of the worst dictatorships in history. But you say we need to replicate this.

Talk about not learning from history!

 

[Spion]

No, it's not. The Bolsheviks instituted a one party dictatorship which did not allow freedom of assembly, of speech and banned independent workers' organisations. How you can ignore this and claim we should look to see what they did pre-1917 is ridiculous.

So, the Bolsheviks did pretty much everything right until 1920-21?

 

[Spion]

No, it's not. The Bolsheviks instituted a one party dictatorship which did not allow freedom of assembly, of speech and banned independent workers' organisations. How you can ignore this and claim we should look to see what they did pre-1917 is ridiculous.

The point is, the way the Bolshevik Party was built between 1903-1917 ultimately led to one of the worst dictatorships in history. But you say we need to replicate this.

Talk about not learning from history!

I say that we need to replicate the building of a party that has a membership of 1/8 (or preferably more) of the w/c and be at the forefront of overthrowing capitalism. I don't say we need a party that suppresses the w/c!

Someone who learns from history learns the right lessons not the wrong ones - and doesn't throw the baby out with the bathwater

 

[mk12]

So, the Bolsheviks did pretty much everything right until 1920-21?

If by abolishing all power the working class and soldiers had over the state and army is doing "pretty much everything right", then yeah.

You think the Bolshevik model is a good one for getting a mass membership. It seems this is your aim, and you're willing to ignore what that party actually did once in power.

If you want a good model for getting new members, look to the history of the Labour and Tory parties. They had much more success in recruitment than any Bolshevik Party.

 

[Spion]

You think the Bolshevik model is a good one for getting a mass membership. It seems this is your aim, and you're willing to ignore what that party actually did once in power.

I don't ignore it. But it was quite clearly a result of very specific material/cultural conditions. To imagine that the same thing would happen in other circumstances is ahistorical nonsense, tbh.

And just to be clear, it's not 'mass membership' I want to see, but mass influence for the idea of workers running society and an organisation to promote such things seems the best way to do it.

I expected more of this discussion, but it seems I've hit upon the limits of your canon of accepted beliefs. Very poor