communist left

본문

진보의 남용

-오세철

모든 일이 한꺼번에 벌어져 난마처럼 얽혀 있다. 한편에서 통합진보당 당원명부 압수수색이 방송 매체의 화면을 뒤덮는 동안, 다른 한편에선 ‘노동해방실천연대’ 사회주의자들의 국가보안법 위반 혐의 긴급체포가 언론의 주목을 받지 못하고 이루어졌다. 그런가 하면 22명의 쌍용차 노동자의 죽음을 추모하는 국민대회를 연 대책위를 사법처리하겠다는 검경의 엄포가 쌍용차 노동자들을 두 번 죽이고 있다.

이것이 자유민주주의 국가를 소리 높여 외쳐대는 이른바 선진자본주의 국가 대한민국의 벌거벗은 모습이다. 그 틈을 비집고 이명박 정권 말기의 공안정국을 향한 발톱이 다시 흉측하게 드러나고 있으며, 보수·진보 언론을 막론하고 시대착오적인 진보재구성 논쟁이 사람들의 눈과 귀를 막고 있다.

이 모든 사태의 본질은 무엇인가? 그것은 역사적이고 상대적 의미를 갖는 ‘진보’ 개념을 상투적으로 남용하는 문제이고, 형식으로서의 절차적 민주주의와 내용으로서의 실질적 민주주의를 분리하는 비변증법적 관념론의 문제이다. 마르크스가 160여년 전 <공산주의선언>을 썼을 때, 그는 자본주의를 진보적이라고 보았다. 그러면서도 자유로운 개인이 연합하는 새로운 생산양식의 건설을 인류의 물질적 필연성으로 보았다. 1차 세계대전을 정점으로 쇠퇴하는 자본주의를 넘어서는 길목에서 혁명가와 노동계급은 “사회주의냐, 전쟁이냐”를 외쳤다. 그리고 100년이 지난 지금 세계자본주의는 그 모순이 극에 달해 ‘야만인가’ ‘사회주의인가’를 선택해야 하는 운명에 놓여 있다. 자본주의 쇠퇴라는 객관적 사실과 노동계급의 억압을 뚫고 솟구치는 투쟁을 목도하면서 한가롭게 진보를 외치거나 새로운 진보를 내세우는 것은 손바닥으로 하늘을 가리는 일이다.

민족주의는 사회주의와 대립한다. 1차 세계대전 당시 독일 사회주의세력이 조국의 깃발을 들고 전쟁터에 수많은 노동자들을 몰아넣어 살해했을 때, 그 후 나치즘과 스탈린주의가 ‘사회주의’ 탈을 쓰고 노동계급을 억압·착취했을 때, 민족주의는 노동계급의 국제주의를 가로막는 반혁명적 이데올로기가 됐다. 통합진보당은 강령에서 사회주의를 삭제함으로써 스스로 ‘진보’의 깃발을 내렸기 때문에 우리는 그들을 진보라 부르지 않는다. 비당권파가 사회민주주의적 색깔을 일부 지녔다고 해도 그들 역시 진보로 부르기 어렵다. 민족주의와 사회민주주의는 동전의 양면이기 때문이다.

일부 진보논객이 ‘민족해방’과 ‘노동해방’을 말하는 세력을 민주주의를 외면하는 추상적 혁명주의로 매도하는 논거와 태도는 두 가지 점에서 해괴한 논리다. 첫째, 민족주의는 21세기 자본주의 체제 내에서 더 이상 혁명주의가 아니다. 민족주의는 오히려 자본주의를 공고히 해 왔고, 파시즘의 위험을 내재하고 있기 때문이다. 둘째, 부르주아 민주주의와 노동자 민주주의는 전혀 다른 개념이고 대립한다는 사실이다. 혁명주의는 형식적 민주절차만 강조하는 부르주아 독재에 반대하고 형식과 내용이 통일되는 노동자 민주주의를 옹호한다. 이번 통진당 사태는 노동자 민주주의를 저버렸다는 점에서 비판받아 마땅하고 혁명주의와는 아무런 관련도 없음을 밝혀야 한다.

물론 우리는 사상의 자유, 표현의 자유를 억압하는 희대의 악법인 국가보안법의 폐지를 주장한다. 모든 공안 탄압을 반대하고 맞서 싸워야 한다. 그렇다고 선거를 통해 의회에 진출하려는 정치세력의 선거부정을 묵과해서는 안된다. 오히려 우리는 밑으로부터의 직접민주주의를 실현하며 막바지에 다다른 자본주의를 근본적으로 넘어서는 새로운 사회의 건설로 나아가야 한다. 이른바 ‘진보의 재구성’이란 이름으로 개량주의와 혁명주의를 구분하고 자본주의의 틀 안에 노동계급을 가두는 개량주의를 넘어서는 혁명적 실천을 모색할 때다.

<경향신문 오피니언 기고>

본문

The Eurozone Crisis:There is an Alternative but it is not on Any Electoral List

The British Labour Prime Minister, Harold Wilson once famously remarked that a week is a long time in politics. And indeed it is amazing how quickly the capitalist class can forget. Take how the current phase of the crisis really started. If you read the financial commentators or listen to politicians in any country today, whether in the UK, US or Europe itself you would think the world crisis of capitalism was due to workers living it up in luxurious welfare states that now can’t be paid for!

Political and Economic Paralysis in Europe Continues

From Greece to Portugal via Italy and Spain the Southern European debt crisis is put down to lazy workers and tax-dodging petty bourgeois. To hammer this home numerous journals have printed quotations from “a (usually anonymous) worker” agreeing that “we all lived beyond our means”. They seem to have forgotten that it was the bursting (initially in the US) of a financial bubble created by bonus-bagging bankers and financiers that started it all. The banks and big financial institutions had to be bailed out by the state because they were “too big to fail”. It was this bailout which saddled the governments of Europe (and not just Europe) with their current “unsustainable” borrowing costs.

But even this does not get to the root cause of the crisis. States everywhere bailed out the financial system in order to save the entire capitalist order. The last twenty years of financial speculation came about because the whole system was already in deep crisis. This was a crisis of accumulation of capital which began in the 1970s. When other “solutions” like nationalisation and deficit financing failed to re-start accumulation to the post-war boom levels the capitalist crisis could only take one course. It evolved in traditional fashion towards speculation which Marx frequently equated with “swindling” in Capital Volume III.[1]

But speculating on the basis of arbitrary values attached to “assets” which were only assets on paper could only be sustained by the pretence that this fictitious capital was actually based on real production values. In fact it was based on a mountain of debt which extended down to the least capable of paying it in society.

This, paradoxically, was a useful alibi when the crash came. It made it so much easier to play on the “we are all in this together” lie. And haven’t our masters done well? After four years of increasing austerity to “bring down the debt” global banking debt has not substantially shrunk. According to the Bank of International Settlements, it remains at $22,347,200,000,000 [see bis.org] nor has the speculative trade in so-called derivatives. Indeed the latter (which are a form of hedging against future losses) continues to grow. In June 2009 total contracts were valued at $594.5 trillion but for the latest quarter for which data are available this is now $707,569, 000,000,000. [See bis.org]. It is not just bankers’ bonuses which have been safeguarded by state intervention but the whole game of financial speculation itself. The derivative debts are not only not unwinding but have expanded by $100 trillions in the last six months alone. This is more extreme in some states than in others.

As always the Anglo-Saxons continue to play hardest in the financial game with the UK being the only large state in the EU to increase banking debts in the last year. As Robert Peston affirmed at the end of last year

One other slightly surprising and - perhaps - disturbing trend is that the debt of financial institutions has risen, from 205% of GDP to 210% of GDP.[2]

And UK capitalism can do little else. Having drastically reduced the manufacturing sector to a point where it counts for only an eighth of GDP it is desperately reliant on the financial sector if it is to get any GDP growth. And this is why the eurozone crisis hits home here too. If the Eurozone economy stagnates how can the British banking sector find new financial and speculative games to play (or “provide banking services” as the British ruling class like to call it)? [3]

Add to that the debt question. Amongst the so-called PIIGS the UK has not much exposure to Greek or Spanish debt but is very exposed to Portuguese and Irish debt. If they default (and both survive on IMF and Eurozone handouts) then the British banking sector will also arrive at an absolutely unsustainable point. And rising debt in relation to GDP is unstoppable as far as the richer economies of the world are concerned. According to a recent report on ‘deleveraging’ (i.e. reducing debt):

Total debt has actually grown across the world’s ten largest mature economies since the 2008–09 financial crisis, due mainly to rising government debt. Moreover, the

ratio of total debt to GDP has declined in only three countries in our sample:

the United States, South Korea, and Australia.

In terms of percentage of GDP to debt the UK tops the world’s debt league. UK aggregate debt has now gone beyond 500% of GDP, closely followed by Japan. For Spain the percentage is over 300%.[4]

The Capitalist Choice

And to try to get these under control they have only one policy. It is to make the working class pay in cuts in welfare, health spending, wages, pensions and jobs. But as we wrote in Revolutionary Perspectives 59

Austerity is resulting precisely in the opposite of what was intended*[5]*

As the working class are thrown out of work, as welfare is cut so the economy contracts and government revenues diminish and so borrowing increases. The debts of the all countries, but particularly the so-called PIIGS, continues to rise and only further debt forgiveness and international bailouts will be needed.

Meanwhile the agony for millions increases daily. The latest unemployment figures given in the Guardian [1.5.2012] show that:

Across the European Union, there are now 24.7 million men and women out of work.

Within the eurozone, the youth unemployment rate jumped to 22.1% from 20.6%, with 3.345m adults under the age of 25 out of work.

ADD GRAPH[S]

Spain and Greece have unemployment amongst under 25s of over 50%. Even in Italy it has reached 36%. And this is official. What would it be like if all those in temporary, casual and part-time work were taken into account? Given that the general forecast is for this to last a decade we are looking at a lost generation. On top of that across Europe millions of families have reached a desperate situation with some families drowning under debt which continues to mount. Suicides are already on the increase in Greece and Italy in particular.[6] In Greece the average fall in family income over the last four years has been at 30%. Many families with children have only ?10 a day to spend on food and many will never get out of debt.[7]

The total bankruptcy (if we can be forgiven the irony) of the cuts policy has dented the confidence of the apostles of austerity. Amongst the global ruling class what could be described as the neo-Keynesians are making a comeback. Headed by economists like James Krugman and Larry Summers they are now pointing to the futility of current policy and calling for “stimulus”. And, taking their tone from this, the social democrats, in Britain and France particularly, are pretending they have a new policy to soften the blow of austerity. To many debt-laden and poverty-stricken workers who are totally cynical about the political establishment it seems a worth a try. It cannot be worse than the present.

It is however based on sand and in any case in real terms is not an alternative. The foundations of Keynesianism is deficit financing. The state borrows money (or just prints it) to invest now in projects which create jobs for workers who are then able to give a boost to spending (the so-called multiplier effect) and we get the magical growth. What this forgets is that historically Keynesian policies have only been applied after years of austerity have got down government borrowing. Now however the states are all saddled with so much debt how can they launch a policy for growth based on further deficit financing? These states will find it difficult to finance some of their borrowing through bonds issues to investors (i.e. big financial institutions) who are already running scared of sovereign debt! As it is they are already pursuing a policy of quantitative easing (printing money) just to give to the banks to keep the system going. Once this sort of money gets into circulation then the Merkel Weimar inflation nightmare will be the reality.

Bankrupt Policies on Offer

In fact, the politicians like Ed Balls and Francois Holland who are offering “change” or to do something different, are only offering to postpone austerity for a year or so longer than their right wing opponents. The idea of launching a policy for growth via the financing (on borrowed or printed money) of new infrastructure will only exacerbate the problem. In truth every segment of our ruling class has no better policy for getting out of the capitalist mess we are in than Charles Dickens’ Wilkins Micawber. But desperate voters will probably buy into it. Labour’s success in the local elections in the UK (albeit 7 out of 10 voters did not even go to the polls) and Hollande’s victory in the French Presidential elections are both signs of this. But nothing will change for workers as a result.

Down the road more desperate solutions are on offer. The extreme right is on the rise proposing “simple” if illusory solutions. For them unemployment and falling earnings are not consequences of the failure of the capitalist system but due to the European Union and immigration. In the Greek situation our comrades have already raised the alarm over the rise of xenophobic and ultra-nationalist alliances which have sprung up as the crisis is increasingly portrayed as one “Made in Germany”.[8] The likes of Golden Dawn in Greece which has now entered parliament for the first time (with 21 seats), Geert Wilders party in the Netherlands and, not least, the National Front in France have all stepped up the anti-immigrant and anti-EU message. In Greece the thugs of Golden Dawn, like the Nazis they ape, will start to make life more hellish for immigrants than it is already. The more subtle Marine Le Pen hopes to build on Sarkozy’s failure by splitting his party over the issues of immigration and crime in order to make the National Front the main party of the right. Playing the “national” card comes naturally for our ruling class. The “we are all in it together” and sacrifices are needed for the “good of the country” messages are all aimed at diverting attention away from the fact that the working class are paying for the ruling class to continue enjoying the fruits of our exploitation. No doubt the political climate will get nastier. Our Greek comrades have tried to counteract this growing nationalism with an appeal to both German and Greek workers. This has been distributed in its thousands and has been well-received in factories in Germany.[9] The leaflet shows that the working class in Germany have already paid and are still paying for the “economic miracle”.

The other side of the German “economic miracle” of the last decade are the shrinking wages of the population dependent on employment, because they have paid and are still paying the price of “improving the competitiveness” of the German economy. Real wages of German workers are falling year by year and companies’ profits “inflate” constantly. Purchasing power is now well below inflation. 7 million (about 20% of the workforce) work part-time under fixed-term contracts (“mini-jobs”), with monthly earnings below 400 euros and without insurance. While real wages have declined over the last 10 years, banks have increased their profits by 39%.

And this is what the ruling class everywhere want for us all. Take the following piece on the eve of the French Presidential election from Josef Joffe in the Financial Times [3 May]

Francois Hollande is odds-on favourite to win the French Presidency, a bleak prospect for all but new Keynesians and old socialists. … he should take the lead from his fellow social democrat, Gerhard Schröder.

Why the former German chancellor? Because he dared tell his own electorate what neither Mr Hollande nor Nicholas Sarkozy would have uttered even on the rack. Nine years ago, Mr Schröder warned his country: reduce social benefits, loosen up labour markets and accept individual responsibility – or else. Then he carried through with his “Agenda 2010”. And lo, Germany went from zero to 3 per cent growth in the two years before the crash – and back to 3 per cent thereafter.[10]

Today German workers are no better off but the mass of surplus value they create has given weapons for the likes of Merkel to use in trying to force through more austerity. And as our comrades point out the problem is the same everywhere.

Elections or Real Change?

Since the crisis broke 4 years ago twelve governments in the major capitalist states have been replaced including those in Greece and France this month (May 2012).

Elections, as the article from a French comrade which follows this makes clear, are only the means by which the ruling class get us to give them legitimacy. By nominally choosing our rulers we become accomplices in what they do to us. The options on offer from our rulers are increasingly narrowing. For us the electoral choice the capitalist class offers is like that of the concentration camp – either death by overwork or through starvation. Greek workers have naturally tried to avoid such a choice as the election results there showed. Despite it being illegal not to vote more than a third of the electorate did not do so. Those that did vote (in contrast to France) massively abandoned the social democrats of PASOK for those left parties who oppose the deal with the EU. Hollande won in France for promising to renegotiate the European stability pact but PASOK was almost wiped out for accepting the EU terms for its bailout.

That apart the Greek election result gave no clear indication as to a course of action for the Greek ruling class. Indeed the stand-off in Greece is almost a metaphor for the whole world economy. The difference is that Greeks are already experiencing what we will all face in years to come. In fact the Greek elections only confirm! the economic and political impasse of capitalism today. The state of the crisis has led to heavy losses for the two parties of the coalition which negotiated the austerity package with the EU and IMF. Despite the peculiarities of the Greek parliamentary system which gives the leading party 50 extra seats PASOK and New Democracy have fallen two MPs short of being able to form a government to carry on with the EU deal. In fact it would be a travesty if they had been able to achieve it as 7 out 10 of those that did vote gave their votes to parties which campaigned against the deal.

The surprise second largest party was the so-called left coalition of SYRIZA which benefitted most from the discontent with the EU deal. It gained votes from PASOK but also from of young professionals who would lose their professional association status under the proposed EU-sponsored reforms.[11] As many of these were former New Democracy supporters it can hardly be trumpeted as a new rise of the electoral left as some are doing both inside and outside Greece. The voters have not given a vote of confidence to SYRIZA, because this party apparently lacks any serious alternative to the deep crisis. Its vote was achieved through a reaction against increasingly harsh austerity. Another paradox of the situation is that the voters want to renegotiate with the EU rather than leave the eurozone for a fistful of dodgy drachma and an even more uncertain future. The resultant confusion is political paralysis for which the only solution the Greek ruling class are offering is – another election. Not one of these parties offers an alternative to the continuation of the capitalist system which is the root of all the misery in the first place. And it is not

The Unions

Even where an increasing number of workers are abandoning hope in the electoral system there is still no clarity about a way forward. Many agree that workers should resist austerity but think that uniting as workers means putting our trust in unions. On face value the idea of all being together to force some redress has a certain appeal but it falls down on two counts. In the first place the unions don’t unite us but actually divide us. In second place the assumption behind all the union campaigns is that there is still plenty of money about, it just needs to come our way a bit more. In other words capitalism is really OK and just needs to be better run to be fairer. This is utopian but not surprising. The unions which once were real workers’ organisations are today bloated bureaucracies with paid officials on 6 figure salaries. They are a well-integrated part of the capitalist system.

All the above features were made obvious in the recent street protests in Spain after the Rajoy government announced that the austerity measures already undertaken were not enough. A further ?36 billion of cuts would have to be made to meet the agreed debt reduction target agreed with the EU.[12] Spain already has the highest unemployment in Europe and this latest cut will reduce its people to the same level of desperation as those in Greece. The anger on the streets was predictable but the unions were divided as to how to react. The two biggest establishment unions the Workers’ Commission (CC.OO linked to the Communist Party) and the General Workers’ Union (UGT – linked to the Socialist Party) tried to take control of class anger by calling a general strike (for only one day of course). The Daily Telegraph reported

In Madrid, protestors stopped traffic through the capital as they took to the streets braving the rain to protest austerity measures. Coming together for a rally in Puerta del Sol, the site of Los Indignados protest last summer, demonstrators were fired up by the words of union leaders.

"Nearly a million workers across Spain are in the streets saying 'No' to this way of understanding labour _relations," said Ignacio Fernandez Toxo, secretary general of the CC.OO union._

Eh? Were workers only complaining that the unions had not been consulted before they were sacked? We don’t think so but the emphasis is indicative of the union mentality – they just want to be asked nicely by the state before they manage our exploitation. And then they will still negotiate away our jobs and conditions. The time, however, for negotiations is long past.

The Real Alternative

The real alternative to playing the game the capitalist way is much harder to take in and, despite the misery inflicted on us, most are not yet ready to contemplate it. This is no less than the overthrow of the capitalist system and its replacement by a new social order in which money, debt and exploitation will no longer exist.

This is clearly not going to be an immediate quick fix. The process of mounting a fightback has to begin from the working class itself autonomously organising their own struggle via mass assemblies and strike committees which are accountable to those mass meetings of all the workers in the struggle. To some extent this is already happening, particularly in Spain. The Indignados and Occupy movements have helped to raise the political awareness of the need for an anti-capitalist agenda. In some places the mass meetings have recognised that the real secret of success is to keep everyone involved by having wider debates about the current situation and what we do now. To take one example, here is an extract from a leaflet put out by the Workers’ Group of Palencia:

FOR A STRIKE WITHOUT INTERMEDIARIES

Once again the ruling class has reminded us who is in charge; this time with the Labour Reform which leave workers even more at the mercy of the employer. From now on, whether you keep your job or not will depend exclusively upon the boss’s need to maximise profits. This is not due to this or that government but rather expresses the fact that for Capital we are nothing more than commodities. Faced with this prospect we have no other option than to struggle: What should this struggle be? How to carry it out?

The majority unions offer us their model: they command, we obey. They make a lot of fuss about the Labour Reform, but at the same time they cut deals that make things worse for the workers. In reality, our rights are of no importance to them. For them we are nothing more than a number that justifies their existence and their subsidies. What is important to them is that we are exploited and enslaved while they continue their charade! They are nothing more than puppets in the service of the capitalists. Their real function, which is why they continue to exist, is to absorb, divert and subdue the real struggle of the working class; to stop it becoming a real danger to the system and its ruling class.

... we cannot follow the majority unions nor their strategies. In order to nullify all revolutionary struggle, they have agreed to hold a strike with conditions, the so-called “minimum services”. When have we ever seen a war where a pact has been signed with the enemy in order to “not cause too many problems”? The aim of a strike is to cause harm, to oblige the employers to bend before our interests. To strike where it hurts them most: the economy. This will not be done with an agreed strike and only on one day: it will be achieved through indefinite wildcat strikes.

We cannot give the traitorous unions and the opportunists on the Left of Capital more time. We must organise ourselves and without intermediaries in assemblies, in workers’ councils. Only through determined action and without conditions can we defeat the exploiters and their servants in all areas: from the stopping of the Labour Reform to the destruction of the capitalist system.

AGAINST THE CUTS

ORGANISE OURSELVES WITHOUT INTERMEDIARIES![13]

What is equally significant here is that the leaflet does not stop at a mere defensive struggle against the cuts but puts the issue of the system that causes it. This is already a step beyond that of the Indignados and Occupy movement agendas. The issue raised here is not to make capitalism fair but to get rid of it.

And this is not only a question of how we organise. It requires political consciousness. The problem is that all these movements arise now in one place then in another. Political consciousness is so hard to hold onto. Moreover, if we are to avoid the pitfalls of the past we have to take on board the lessons of our own history. In our understanding those who share the political agenda of the need to overthrow capitalism, the need for a society without money or exploitation, without a state and oppression need to get together in a global political entity which for want a better word we call a party. This party is not a government in waiting but an international fighting body whose single aim is to advance the programme of the world revolution In itself it does not take power in any place. The party’s organs are not the medium for the mass struggle. Rather the international party will fight for the establishment of organs of workers’ power (or “workers’ councils” as the Palencia workers say in their leaflet). And once these organs are established it fights within them, as part of the class to which it belongs, against any return to capitalist schemas (not least those which will be proposed by the state capitalist and social democratic left). This is obviously not a perspective which will be taken up immediately by masses of workers but it is the only perspective which offers us a real alternative. This is the perspective which we are patiently fighting for everywhere we can.

Footnotes

[1] See for example “Banking and credit, however, thereby also become the most powerful means for driving capitalist production beyond its own barriers and one of the most effective vehicles for crisi and swindling” Capital Vol III p. 742 Penguin version.

[2] bbc.co.uk UK’s Debts Biggest in the World

[3] It is this overdependence on the financial sector that has led to the total isolation of the British government in Europe over the nature and scope of the Basel III regulations. See “Osborne hand hovers over No vote on key reform” in the Financial Times 4.5.2012

[4] Report by Mckinsey Global Institute, available on mckinsey.com

[5] See “Capitalism in the Quagmire of Debt”. Those looking for our opinion on the future of the Eurozone will find more on that issue there.

[6] See blog.occupiedlondon.org

[7] See channel4.com and for the UK “Credit boom left low-income groups in debt forever” Financial Times 4.5.2012

[8] See leftcom.org

[9] See leftcom.org or read Aurora, Bulletin of the Communist workers’ Organisation. Free to anyone who sends a stamped addressed envelope to BM CWO, WC1N 3XX.

[10] ft.com

[11] In Greece there is a special status for dozens of professions. These professions are “closed” because a special permission is required in order for someone to practice. For example, a would-be notary, taxi driver or pharmacist has to buy a licence from a retiring one. The cost for a pharmacy licence is upward of 400,000$. There are more than 130 “closed” professions: beauticians, drama and dance school instructors, bakers, antiques dealers, insurance agents, insurance consultants, employment consultants, diagnostics centre staff, divers, cameramen, driving school instructors, cab drivers, tourist bus drivers, newspaper stand owners, electricians, sound technicians, private school owners, tobacco sellers, gun manufacturers and sellers, hairdressers, private investigators, port workers, real estate agents, lifeguards, carpenters, financiers, opticians, auditors, movie/theatre director and even car mechanic.

The opening of the so-called “closed” professions comes after strong pressure from the troika (IMF, ECB, EU) – however some real profit-making professions like pharmacists and lawyers will still remain closed.

[12] And to top it all more money will be needed for Bankia, the bank set up two years ago to absorb much of the bad debt is now in trouble as the banks it took on board had understated their debts and overstated their assets. It has debts of over ?52 billion. The Spanish Government has had to nationalise it in order to save the banking system but this has only added to its sovereign debt burden.

[13] This was quoted by “Ernie” of the ICC on libcom.org and we are grateful to him for pointing us to it.

Tuesday, May 15, 2012

Revolutionary Perspectives

본문

You can’t fight austerity through elections!

After the replacement of President Sarkozy by Hollande in France, and the electoral slump of the parties of the outgoing Greek government, a commentator in the Guardian (8/5/12) was not alone in declaring that “Revolt against austerity is sweeping Europe.” Leftists saw “a growing backlash against austerity across Europe” (Socialist Worker 12/5/12), “deep popular opposition to austerity measures” (wsws.org 8/5/12) and even declared that “Europe turns left” (Workers Power May 2012).

In reality, whatever the level of dissatisfaction felt at election time, the ruling bourgeoisie will continue to impose and intensify its policies of austerity. Voting against governments can happen because of the depth of discontent, but it doesn’t change anything. For the working class it’s only through the mass organisation of its struggles that anything can be achieved. The election game is played entirely on the bourgeoisie’s terms, but workers still troop into the polling stations (if in decreasing numbers) because they still have widespread illusions in what could be achieved. There’s still a belief that elections can somehow be used as a means for social change, or that there are alternative economic policies that the capitalist state could follow. There has been no ‘revolt’ across Europe expressed in these elections, although there is definitely a lot of anger which has been impotently misdirected into the various democratic mechanisms. Having said that, if you actually examine what’s happened in recent elections they do reveal a lot about the capitalist class and the state of its political apparatus.

Not just the usual seesaw

Since the financial crisis of autumn 2008 a number of individual leaders and political parties have been replaced because of their identification with public spending cuts, job losses, wage and pension reductions, and all the other aspects of economic ‘rigour’ and austerity. There is no overall bourgeois strategy, just the removal of parties and individuals and their replacement by others, whether from the left or the right or by coalitions. The ruling class is just reacting to events without a clear idea of how it will arrange its political forces in the future. And it’s not taking long for the new leaders to begin to be discredited as they are exposed as being in continuity with their predecessors.

In November 2008 John McCain was defeated by Barack Obama in the US Presidential election partly because of his connection with the policies of George Bush and the fact that the US economy had been in recession since late 2007 in a crisis deeper than anything since the 1930s.

In the UK, following the general election of May 2010, the Labour Party was replaced by a Conservative and Liberal Democrat government, the first coalition since the Second World War. The British bourgeoisie, usually so assured in its political manoeuvres, was not able to accomplish its usual Labour/Tory swap. Since the election it has also had difficulties in presenting Labour as a viable ‘alternative’.

In Belgium it took 18 months from the election of June 2010 before a government was finally formed.

In the general election in Ireland in February 2011, Fianna Fail, the party that had been the largest since the 1920s, saw its proportion of the vote go from 42% to 17%. The Irish government is now a Right/Left coalition of Fine Gael and Labour. Ireland was in recession in 2008 and 2009. It returned to recession in the third quarter of 2011. The new government has predictably shown itself no different from the previous FF/Green coalition. The myth of the ‘Celtic Tiger’ faded out a long time ago.

In the Portuguese legislative elections of June 2011 the governing Socialist Party saw its support go from 37% to 28%. Electoral turnout declined to a historically low level of 58%. Unemployment continues to rise, up to more than 13%, having been less than 6% in 2002. Portugal is in its worst recession since the 1970s. The conditions for its 2011 bailout from the EU and IMF have meant a vicious series of government spending cuts.

In the Spanish general election of November 2011 the votes for the ruling Socialist Party went from 44% to 29%, and there was growing support for minor parties. Under the conservative People’s Party Spain has fallen back into recession. Unemployment, which has been growing throughout the last five years, has reached record levels with a 24.4% jobless rate (over 50% of under 25s), the highest figures in the EU.

In Italy in November 2011 Silvio Berlusconi was replaced by a government led by economist Mario Monti. His cabinet was constituted of unelected ‘technocrats’. He has introduced a range of austerity measures – with the support of most of both Italian houses of parliament.

In Slovenia in December 2011 there was a parliamentary election in which a new party, Positive Slovenia, that had only been founded in late October, got the highest proportion of the vote. After a period of manoeuvres and negotiations the outgoing 4-party coalition was replaced by a 5-party coalition which only had a Pensioners’ Party in common, but not Positive Slovenia. With the Slovenian economy is in recession, a new programme of austerity measures was adopted by the Slovenian Parliament on 11 May. Major unions which had staged demonstrations against the programme have said they would not oppose it with a referendum. Last year four pieces of legislation were rejected by referendum.

In presidential elections held in Finland in January and February this year the long period of the decline of the Social Democratic Party reached a new low point. The new president is the first in 30 years not to be a Social Democrat. Voter turnout was the lowest since 1950.

In the Netherlands in April this year the coalition government resigned after only 558 days in power. The parties have been in dispute over budget cuts.

In the recent French Presidential election Hollande’s victory was in many ways due to his not being Sarkozy. Despite his claims to have a different approach on questions such as investment he will have no choice but to continue the attack on living and working conditions. Hollande said before his first visit to Angela Merkel that he would bring "The gift of growth, jobs, and economic activity." Although this is the usual politician’s hot air, corresponding to no material reality, at least the situation in France is by no means as desperate as that in Greece.

Greek politics in a mess

Following the latest elections in Greece it was clear the parties of the PASOK/New Democracy/LAOS coalition had lost the most support. It should be recalled that the coalition had only been installed last November, to replace George Papendreou’s government and implement the measures required by the IMF/EU/ECB. In the elections, despite there being a choice of 32 parties, there was a significant reduction in the number of people voting to a lowest ever figure of 65%. This contrasts with the previous low figure of 71% in 2009 and previous figures in the high 70s or even more than 80% that Greece was used to. If the French election result mainly expressed opposition to Sarkozy, the Greek result showed mainly opposition to the government coalition and the measures it had undertaken. The fact that the Greek parliament now has four parties of the Left and three of the Right where once it was dominated by PASOK/New Democracy shows the degree to which the bourgeoisie’s political forces have splintered. The prospects of a new coalition without a new election seem limited.

There has been a lot of attention in the media on the role of the leftwing coalition Syriza, portrayed as a new force without whose co-operation or tolerance no government could function. Because they claim to be against austerity they will, for the moment, quite possibly continue to increase their support. However, whether they operate as a buffer between government and striking workers, or actually join a government coalition, they do not represent anything new. Along with its anti-austerity phrases Syriza has clearly stated that Greece should remain in the EU and the euro, debts can not just be written off, but it would prefer some more benign conditions for receiving the latest bailout.

Where the emergence of Syriza is a sign of some residual flexibility from the bourgeoisie, the sharpest evidence of the decomposition of Greek capitalism’s political apparatus is seen in the gains made by Chrysi Avgi (Golden Dawn) at the expense of LAOS. Greece has had right wing parties before (LAOS is the most recent example), and in Metaxas they had a real dictator in the late 1930s, the contemporary of Hitler, Mussolini, Franco and Salazar. However, Chrysi Avgi isn’t just another racist, right-wing party demonised by the Left. It’s anti-immigrant policies are backed up by physical attacks on foreigners. It has also mounted attacks on its political opponents, tried to intimidate journalists and has links with Nazi groups.

Chrysi Avgi campaigned on the slogan “So we can rid the land of filth” with candidates claiming to be more soldiers than politicians. They claim to be ‘Greek nationalists’ in the mould of Metaxas, rather than being neo-Nazis. You could be forgiven for being confused on this when you see the black symbol on the red background of their party flag. It looks very similar to a swastika, although it is in fact a ‘meander’ or ‘Greek fret.’ Whatever label you want to pin on them, Chrysi Avgi are clear evidence of the further decay of bourgeois politics. Parties in Greece that support the return of the monarchy are barred from standing at elections, but Chrysi Avgi has 21 members in the new parliament.

The Greek elections are the most obvious example of how the bourgeoisie across Europe is coping politically with the economic crisis. It can’t offer any genuine economic alternatives to austerity, but it is also using up its political alternatives as parties take their turns to impose programmes that will not challenge the impact of the economic crisis. There is no particular political strategy, just a day-to-day reaction to events. Bourgeois democracy continues to function, but the ruling class has a decreasing variety of ways to deploy its political apparatus. The number of people who are voting is in decline; new parties and coalitions are emerging to cope with changed situations. But, for the working class there is nothing to be gained by the replacement of one government by another, or in any participation in the democratic game.

All the political parties are factions of one state capitalist class. This is one of the reasons that democracy is so important for the bourgeoisie, because it gives the illusion of offering a number of different choices. For the working class only struggle on its own terms can set in motion a force that can break the social stalemate between the classes. The bourgeoisie has nothing to offer, not in its economy, and not in its elections. The working class can only rely on its self-organisation, on a growing consciousness of what’s at stake in its struggles.

Car 14/5/12

본문

우창수, 조성웅 동지와 해방글터 노동자 시인들의 노고에 많은 관심과 후원을 !!!

본문

노동자 평의회의 건설 과정과 역할

노동자평의회가 어떻게 발생. 발전하는가에 대한 분석에서, 판네쿡은 평의회는 실질적인 노동자 계급의 실천으로부터 자발적이고 유기적으로 나타나고,  와일드캣 파업(비공인파업)과 공장점거와 같은 활동에 태생적 형태로 이미 존재하고 있다고 주장했다. 그는 와일드캣 파업과 공정 점거를 노동자 평의회로 전환시키는 주요 요인은, 노동자들이 그러한 투쟁을 실행하기 위하여 조직하는 파업위원회 형태일 것이다라고 했다. 그러한 파업위원회들은 평의회조직의 가장 기본적인 두 개의 요소인 직접 민주주의와 계급 자치를 구체화시켰다고 보았다. 일단 와일드캣 파업과 공장 점거가 국가적이고 전체 계급 운동으로 발전한다면, 그것들은 즉각적으로 자본주의 국가와의 갈등으로 전화될 것이다. 그리고 이러한 갈등은 보다 높은 수준의 조직을 필요로 하게 될 것이다. 판네쿡은 노동자 평의회가 모습을 드러내기 시작하는 시점은 바로 이때이며, 자본 국가가 붕괴할 때까지는 혁명과 함께 노동자 평의회의 역할은 확장될 것이다라고 생각했다.

판네쿡은 최소한 부분적으로는 와일드캣 파업과 공장점거 전술을 전통적인 노동조합에 대항하는 불복종의 한 형태라고 보았다. 그는 선진 자본주의의 노동조합들은그들이 전에 가지고 있던 모든 프롤레타리아트 정체성의 흔적들을 잃어버렸고, 또한 자본주의의 통합적인 메카니즘이 되어버렸다고 주장했다. 그는 노동조합을 독점적 자본이 독점자본의 조건을 전체 노동계급에게 짐지우는 수단이라고 생각했다. 자본의 합리성 원칙에 대한 노동조합의 헌신 때문에, 노동조합이 결코 ‘노동자들의 통제'라는 문제를 제기할 수 없었다. 왜냐하면 ‘노동자들의 통제’는 노동조합 권력의 원천을 위협할 것이기 때문이었다. 그리고 노동조합들은 지도자들에 의한 지배 원칙을 기초로 하고 있었기 때문에, 노동조합들은 결국 자본주의 국가의 충실한 재생산 역할을 할 것이기 때문에, 새로운 노동자 운동의 부활은 이 옛날의 조직에 대항한 대중적 반역의 기초 위에서만 가능하다고 판네쿡은 주장했다.

판네쿡의 생애

판네쿡(1873-1960)은  혁명과 반혁명의 시기, 여러 나라에서 활동했던 혁명가이자 지식인이었다. 천문학자로서 국제적인 명성을 얻었던 판네쿡은, 1914년 이전까지는 네덜란드와 독일의 사회 민주주의의 좌익으로 활동했다. 로자 룩셈부르크와 함께, 그는 독일 반수정주의 좌익세력의 주요 지도자로서 두각을 나타내었으며, 사회 민주주의의 정통성에 대해서 강력하게 비판하였다. 제1차 세계대전이 발발한 뒤, 그는 새로운 인터내셔널의 형성을 요구했던 선구자들 중 한 사람이었고, 이후 찜머발트 반전 운동의 유력인사가 되었다. 독일 공산주의 노동자당의 탁월한 이론가였던 판네쿡은 레닌주의에 대해서 강력하게 비판을 하면서, 공산주의에 대한 서구적인 대안적 개념 제시하였다 - 이러한 레닌주의에 대한 그의 비판으로 인하여, 좌익공산주의 내에서 레닌의 계속적인 적대감을 얻게 되었다.

그의 저서들은노동자 계급의 혁명적 자기 해방의 이론과 실천으로서의 맑스주의를 발전시키려는 가장 일관되고 지속적인 시도들 중의 하나였다. 그는 해방세상을 위한 수단으로서의 맑스주의에 대해서 그리고 선진 산업사회에서의 지배와 종속이라는 문제에 대해서 일련의 인상적인 문제제기를 했던, 흥미롭고 독창적인 사상가로 남아 있다.

수학자이자 천문학자였던 판네쿡의 맑스주의 사상은 당대의 로자 룩셈부르크, 그람시, 루카치, 코르쉬 등에 비해 상대적으로 많은 관심을 받지 못했는데, 그 대부분은 판네쿡 사상의 노동자계급 당파성에 대한 좌우의  수정주의와 권위주의 세력의 종파적 대응 때문이었다.

노동자 평의회의 운영 방법

『노동자 평의회』에서  판네쿡은 평의회 체계가 실제로 어떻게 기능하게 될 것인가를 정확하게 세부 묘사하려고 노력하였다.  평의회들은 전문가들로 구성된 것이 아니고, 또한 공장 운영에 책임을 지는 것도 아니다. 평의회의 주된 기능은 노동자들의 결정을 수행하고, 토론을 촉진시키고, 다양한 노동 집단과 공장들 사이의 소통망으로서의 역할을 하게 되는 것이다. 지역 공장 평의회는 협력하는 지역적, 전국적, 산업규모의 평의회를 다양해진 연결망으로 통합되고, 생산은 서로 연관된 하나의 전체를 구성하게 되었을 것이다. 그래서 지역 평의회의 업무를 조정하기 위하여, 중앙 평의회는 보다 규모가 큰 지역 평의회와 같은 구조에 기초하여 형성될 것이다 - 즉, 즉각적인 소환이 가능한 작업장 대의원 원칙에 기초하여 형성될 것이다. 중앙 평의회는 조정, 자료 수집, 정보의 전파에 대한 책임을 지기는 하지만, 그들은 계획을 위한 기구는 아니다. 계획 임무는 지역 평의회의 노동자들에게 주어진 일이다. 지역 평의회의 노동자들은 일단 필요한 정보를 가지게 되면, 그들은 중요한 의사결정을 하게되고, 또한 그러한 의사결정들을 중앙 평의회의 대의원들에게 전달했다. 이러한 것 이외에도, 중앙 평의회는 같은 산업 내에 있는 공장들 사이의 수평적 협동과 그들에게 부품을 제공해주거나 그들의 제품을 사용하는 공장들 사이의 수직적 협동을 유지시키는 데에 대한 책임을 지게 된다. 이런 공장 평의회의 연결망을 보완하기 위하여,  판네쿡은 소비자와 전문가 집단을 위한 수평적 연결망을 생각했다.

판네쿡의 『노동자 평의회』는  현재에도 노동자 자기해방 사상의 고전으로 남아,  수많은 나라들의 프롤레타리아트에게 읽히며,  현실 운동의 무기로 등장하고 있다.  『노동자 평의회』가  낡은 표지를 벗고 다시 노동자들의 품속에 안겨, 거리에서 공장에서 투쟁의 현장에서 해방사상으로 살아날 때,  노동자혁명의 불길은 진정 계급의 가장 아래로부터 타오를 것이다.