tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6263577133333272085.post4087317897096469825..comments2024-03-28T11:04:16.315+00:00Comments on Boffy's Blog: Can Co-operatives Work - Part 1Boffyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08157650969929097569noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6263577133333272085.post-47194112433941473892009-03-22T12:10:00.000+00:002009-03-22T12:10:00.000+00:00Marko,Good to hear from you again. What can I say...Marko,<BR/><BR/>Good to hear from you again. What can I say abour your comments, but thanks.<BR/><BR/>My only criticism of what you say would be to take issue with the idea that perhaps the Left has "good reason" to have lost faith in the working class. I think its the other way around. I think that the working class has good reason to have lost faith in the Left, and I say that as someone who spent a couple of decades in frantic activity as part of that Left.<BR/><BR/>The reason I say that is that although I accept what you say about members of that Left continuing to engage in that same kind of activity that I sepnt all that time wearing myself out in, and although as an individual activist you do that work with the best intentions in the world, the framework in which you conduct that activity is all wrong. That framework continues to be that of "party building". In other words, however, worthy the specific activities you engage yourself with at any one time, thef rame of reference is always, how can my involvement in this activity help recruit to the organisation. There is, of course, a strong personal motivation to that too. We all like to have people agree with us, and so if you can recruit people to your own local organisation, by definition they are people who generally agree with what you have had to say to them, and in so doing you strengthen your own position within the local movement. But, of course, - and especially, on the scale with which most Left organisations operate - this small scale personal victory, and victory for the organisation, can actually represent a huge waste of personal resources when viewed from the perspective of the Labour Movement and of the interests of the working class as a whole.<BR/><BR/>In short, it comes down to part of the main thrust of the argument set out here, about the Two Souls of Socialism, the two basic philosophies about how socialism can be won. That former of which I was an adherrent for much of my adult life says, Socialism can only come about from above, by the actions of a dedicated minority, who through activism lead the rest, bring about the necessaary changes and hand them down to the masses. Therefore, the most important task of all is to build that revoluiotnary party - and each group of a few dozen beleives they ARE that revolutionary party.<BR/><BR/>The other method says, its necessary to have leadership, yes, its important to think out where you are going, and use organisation to fight for those ideas. BUT, socialism can only be created from below by the workers themselves. So, building the revolutionary party, winning an increasing number of people to your ideas is a necessary by-product of your activity NOT, the fundamental goal of your activity. The first task is to go to where the workers are, accept their existing level of conscioussness, work with them, encourage them to organise and self-activate, to create organisations and forms through which that self-activism can take place, educate them in that process, help them change the material conditions of their existence, so that that education and change in conscioiussness is based on soemthing real then the Workers Party will grow naturally and on a solid foundation, then it becomes possible to "win the battle of demcoracy" as Marx put it, then that Party will advance in its programme, then socialism becomes possible.Boffyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08157650969929097569noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6263577133333272085.post-87172168972861967872009-03-21T17:35:00.000+00:002009-03-21T17:35:00.000+00:00This has to be the best English Marxist site on th...This has to be the best English Marxist site on the web, absolutely brilliant.<BR/><BR/>Jim Moody's reaction to your co-operative idea is really staggering.<BR/><BR/>I do think the left have to some degree lost faith in the working class and some would say for good reason. However, we must recognise the good work the left do on a daily basis to protect the interest of the workers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6263577133333272085.post-55704154605515844812009-03-21T11:20:00.000+00:002009-03-21T11:20:00.000+00:00To be fair I think the goal of these articles is t...To be fair I think the goal of these articles is to re-align the left back to Marx and away from Lassalle and it is in the nature of the left to claim ownership of Marx. I think Mr Bough had to start his article from this perspective.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6263577133333272085.post-42910772944566809882009-03-21T10:13:00.000+00:002009-03-21T10:13:00.000+00:00Marwra,Thanks for your comments. I agree with you...Marwra,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your comments. I agree with your statement that we shouldn't just take what Marx had to say, and assume it is either a) correct, or b) that it is corrrect or applicable today. As Marx and Engels said what they had left us was a method for analysing the world not some Bible which meant that such analysis was no longer necessary.<BR/><BR/>In defence of beginning with what M&E, and also with what other Marxists said I would say the following. Firstly, I am writing AS a Marxist and so in large part I accept that what he DID say in respect of his own time was correct, and I do accept that his method of analysis is correct. So, it seems logical to me to begin with what he DID say in his own time, and his reasons for saying, looking at how he used his method to come to those conclusions.<BR/><BR/>Secondly, the article is written as an ANTIDOTE to all of that 100 or so years of what has passed as MARXISM, and its attitude to the conception of bottom up socialism, of which the attitude towards the building of Co-operatives is symptomatic. Were it not for the fact that nearly all of what passes for Marxism today REJECTS the idea of Co-operatives and similar such strategies, and does so on the basis of a misrepresentation of Marx and other Marxists views on the issue, such a work of uncovering the true Marx would have been unneccessary.<BR/><BR/>Now I agree that having done that it does not then follow that what Marx's position was back in the 2nd third of the 19th century, or what Engels position was to thee end of thaat century, or what Lenin and Gramsci's position was in the first qurter of the twentieth century is necessarily applicaable today, but I have tried in the last part to deal with that, by looking systematically at the objections to Co-operatives that are raised. I have to say though that those objections are no different than the objections to bottom up socialism than those raised against Marx by State Socialists of the Lasallean type in his own day, no different than the arguments in favour of a top down statist socialism raised at the beginning of the twentieth century.<BR/><BR/>I think the examples I have given show those arguments are false both empirically, logically and strategically. They are wrong for the very reasons that Marx gave - they contradict the very method of Marxism - historical materialism - and the contradict the very principles of Marxist socialism which is the idea of socialism having to be built by workers themselves.<BR/><BR/>It was my intnetion to devote more time to looking at these latter questions, but I think the links I have given to the examples of modern day Co-ops are a quick way of achieving that without me having to regurgitate information that is already out there. I do want to look more closely at the economic theory of Co-operatives, but that as a specialist area which would have needlessly clogged up what is already a long piece, and took me longer to get out than I had originally intended.<BR/><BR/>I hope you like the rest, and welcome your further comments.Boffyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08157650969929097569noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6263577133333272085.post-61959035552610794872009-03-20T18:07:00.000+00:002009-03-20T18:07:00.000+00:00Your method of starting the article with what Marx...Your method of starting the article with what Marx and Engels had to say seems incorrect to me. Yes, as a Marxist you should follow his method but not what he said. You seem to be falling in the trap of Robert Owens supporters and treating Marx writings as some sort of gospel. It is necessary first to define a co-operative and how they interact with the capitalist system based on the historical evidence and expand your argument from this point. You have to recognise the possibility that what Marx believed then he may not believe now.<BR/><BR/><BR/>I will make further comments when I have fully digested your article.<BR/><BR/>cheers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com