Saturday, April 01, 2006

To the "Lefties" of Defeatist Theory

This is primarily targets the remainders of the LCP (even though the LCP has wonderful active members), the issue lately I face is that "comrades" celebrate that the country should be annhilated into economic depression, messed up, and hopefully (at least they hope) people will go down to the street for a "workers' revolution."


One glitch, the defeatest theory was stated during the World War I by Lenin. Lenin argued then that the more the situation is messed up, the worse the Lavrov (and later Kerensky) Government will be positioned. This led the Bolshevici Party to be prepared to choose the right moment to stage their insurrection. Indeed, while the Bolshevici Party and their comrades were few while the Menshevics and Right Wing Social Revolutionaries harvested the fruits of the February Revoulution (1917) even though they really did not have any effective role in it. The Boleshevici Movement kept distributing Leaflets and advocated "Land, Bread, and Peace" logo, while the Boleshevici hubs were busy building an informal infrastructure for the Workers' Party. The moment came, (and here Lenin and Trotsky's theories merged in some aspects while Orthodox Marxists' theories collapsed) and the situation got no worse than that to the extent that the Boleshevici transformed from a small hunted movement to a mass revolutionary rebellion in a matter of few monthes.

Returning to the Nature of the Theory and Lebanon

The theory presupposes that a marxist party is ready and organized to lead the workers to their own emancipation. In Lebanon's case, the defeatist theory would lead a set of Bourgeoisie class overthrowing another class (similar to what happened in 14th March summary), excluding the fact that plenty of international interventions can occur on the spot (special thanks to media, mass communications, upgraded transportations...etc).

The Second glitch proceeds to tackle a war situation. The working class is in constant war for survival, the worse the situation, the more they might generate a class recognition; however, let us look a bit closer: the classes are divided into sects and even secular people would feel threatened and subconsciously hide within their sects. Hence, the concept of Secularism is far attained because the means and envirenment to attain it is not available (Civil Marriage, Sects following leaders to the end, lack of real interaction to overcome Sect loyalty, lack of a real socialist party to be the mediator). So returning to the defeatist theory, things take a different curve in Lebanon, when an extreme economic crisis will take place, the balance of power within Lebanon would be broken, and the leaders of the sects would attempt to capitalize on the matter to maximize their own personal and political power (after all those with the bargaining power are those with a quantative followers). Hence we will have a free for all nation?

100% free for all nation? Not really, one party has almost established a hegemony over their own Sect, which is the largest (you know who) : Hizbullah. Already that party has freelancing figures and allies unified (via Syria), only difference Hizbullah would no longer be the balancer of power, it would be the undisputed force. The weaker side from 14th March or Neutrals would either bandwagon to the strong party or just sit aside and watch. The stronger side of 14th March might switch sides (as some have been noted to do so). Hence Lebanon, instead of shifting towards a Proletariat revolution, would end up to be trapped in a single dominant Sect with allies, while the rest politically would be minorities. Again, the cause of resistence would cause arab sympathy, and wouldn't mind to see quick stabilities. Instabilities would overcharge the region which has proven already unstabble when the United States and United Kingdom invaded Iraq (plenty nations faced difficulties in controlling their streets). As for the undisputed U.S.A, it can either pull a deal or back-out (as happened in 1984) when the Syrians returned to the Lebanese Arena with AMAL movement as the spearhead, or go to war with Syria which is in no condition to do so. Actually due to yesterday's clash between President Lahoud and Prime Minister Seniora signals the return of Syrian dominance (or they are using their joker card in this blizzard fiasco that Lebanon has sunk to).

Balance of Power and Defeatism

To the "lefties" and "Communist Monadilloon", I would like to express to them that class awareness can never happen unless there is a real communist party with its own network active on the ground. The Bolecheviki were prepared to it (even though the majority objected to the October Revolution such as Stalin, Kamenev, Zinoviev and even denounced Lenin and Trotsky's motion for a Workers' revolution in Pravda Newspaper)*. Lenin and Trotsky prepared the hubs and the Revolutionary Committee. In our case, we have nothing of the sort (yet). We are trapped in a balance of power which gives the Marxists a chance to breath (at least the free lancing marxists), and we are not sure to where this balance of power is heading to. The only thing we used to think about was that 8th and 14th March balanced each other due to the fact they both accepted to sit on the "Round Table" which is to me really "Poker Table".

The return of President Lahoud with utmost aggressivenes from the Arab Summit signals a threat within the balance of power as the news today were flooded with news of anti-14th Bloc with stronger esteem (and I do not mean Suleiman Franjieh's vegabond style of expression). Prime Minister Seniora is trying to balance by sending out delegates to check out the Palestinian Refugee camps (at least where the Lebanese delegates are able to access). It would be good to see the Palestinians living in better and more secure situation. We already know the ties of Fateh and USA during the latest Palestinian elections, and Seniora is trying to balance (how thick the thread between the allies in the international arena of 14th March and Fateh is yet to be revealed with time), yet the name of the game is reaching new dimensions (and hopefully not to war as some people expect). In Monday at least we will see if the balance of power is sustained or tilted. As for us Communists, what can we do? Bourgeoisie come and go, so practically we have to start with our party building (and international ties with Social Movements and the Red Non-Reactionary Internationals) while trying to achieve as much of our goals. We can't just say it is over for us, or let us go to the Arab Nationalism of LCP or Lebanese Ultra-Nationalism of DLM.

The Future?

Time will tell, and hopefully the balance is not tilted (at least not towards 8th of March), noting that 14th March will send to the workers within Lebanon the bullet of mercy when the IMF initiates the liberation programs under the title "Structural Adjustment" (I refer to Bullet of Mercy = Youthanasia). Moreover, I can't believe it is that simple from the lefties (ex-LCP) to demand privatization just to see the situation worse, this is outrageous. Every economic situation leads to disasters and every human life of a Proletariat counts (specially the rights attained in the first place as a human). I mean the Proletariat already are struggling to break even with their costs, and few got the good salaries (most cases to bureaucratic/political ties) and the Workers/Farmers suffered enough. It is strange not to see people discussing the Agricultural disasters striking Lebanon this year while the Government awaits the arrival of WTO. Who wants Defeatism still?



Angry Anarchist said...

My critique.

Thaer Daem said...

You write that the party is necessary for class consciousness. I disagree. It rises in the struggle. Check Glaberman on that:
"The ordinary understanding of working-class activity is based on the idea that consciousness leads to, or causes, action. It would seem more valid to say that action leads to consciousness or, more precisely, that activity and consciousness interact in ways that are rarely predictable."

Angry Anarchist said...

I agree with Thaer Daem on this one. :)

MarxistFromLebanon said...

I didn't go with the details, but yes the Social Interaction is the base of change, the party is the co-ordinator, consiousness on its own can not take place in few occasions, and usually short-run. Notice in the case of the WSF scenario, it was forged from various movements... my concern is the workers' movement...