There is a counter offensive developing it seems throughout Europe, a situation that has existed for sometime as revolution has been and still is in retreat. Yet the signs of transition are there and this period requires some definite preparation and planning.
Transition itself involves movement in time and space and even though a measure of it seems incalculable the change itself is manageable through human intervention and consciousness. It involves advanced thinking and acting by individuals and collectives.
There is much to be learned from experience but as they say, “there is no time like the present!” In the past, their have been examples in historical context and also further afield, on work to found such Parties, to lead the movements of the working class and people.
In the here and now, when the conditions are in a different context and the conditions are similar but not the same, you could say that it is difficult to sum up, particularly when we say that history starts from the present. Yet the past and experience along with the factors of today allow us as humans to abstract absence. It allows us to foresee what we should be able to achieve right now.
The important struggles being carried out by the working class and people’s movements such as safeguarding the right to a health service, the right to education, for a future without war, the struggle against Austerity to settle scores with the elite, are part of one struggle: they are reserves of the struggle of the working class to change society through its revolutionary transformation.
The central struggle is that of empowerment, and a Party’s method of work is key, for instance the question of the conscious participation in setting the agenda, working out what favours the interests of the working class within the situation.
What about the importance in this respect of the question of democratic renewal, the renewal of the political processes and institutions? The call to come and join in and contribute to the work of releasing that human power which will avert the danger of war and build a society with human beings at the centre, this is surely part of solving the problem.
2016 began with renewed verve in the movement and amongst the conscious section set to capture the momentum that has built up and provides inspiration for the tasks of the future. At its centre is the discussion on how to successfully develop the work for change in 2016, the necessity to organise the working class and people for change and go all out to defeat the austerity agenda and work to bring into being an anti-war government. The situation clearly cries out for change. The people’s yearnings and aspirations are not simply for some reforms, but for some fundamental change, for a different kind of world in which the people are at the centre.
The question of “What kind of Party” poses the question for solution: should it not build itself in the heart of the working class so that the class is organised and made conscious that it must take control of what belongs to it and empower the broad masses of the people? The Party should be confident that it must be built professionally and with discipline, on these lines, and that this is the way forward, which will weld all the movements of the working class and people into that torrent which will deprive the ruling elite of its power to deprive the working class and people of that power which is rightfully theirs, which the 21st century is demanding.
In this period there is very big pressure for people to say that the movement is everything, that getting involved with and intervening in the movement is the main thing, while the work to build a Party’s work comes nowhere.
Is there now an issue of a Revolutionary Party? Is this what the conditions are actually pointing to now and is it required?
It cannot be said that the present situation is a revolutionary one in Britain. But will it become such a situation soon? A revolutionary situation requires a political crises containing two elements, first is that the ruling elite cannot rule in the old way and second that the masses of the people will not be ruled in the old way either.
The present situation in Government of divisions in the Westminster cartel parties, ideological and political divisions that are seemingly irreconcilable and ensuing potential chaos is only one aspect or sign. The masses of people are cynical about what these politicians do and how they appear to hold themselves up in the eyes of the Public.
A reflection of how things should change is the advent of a Scottish grouping in Parliament and also a whole section of Anti-Austerity and Anti-War politicians ranging through the SNP, the Greens to Jeremy Corbyn’s faction. The split in the Labour Party, by the change of leader itself, is evident of the demand for something different.
Yet this is not the end of the matter, only the beginning. Is it sufficient to leave it as it is? Will it remain a phenomenon where the content appears to be contrary to the status quo but the form does not match the content? Should it remain reformist or should it become revolutionary? Even the policy is still not clear; there is little or no coherence as of yet. Therefore there can be no real coherence of strategy and tactics either. Is there really suggestion that the phenomenon will simply remain what it is, an anti-austerity grouping, contained, with no possibility to break out of the establishment mould?
Party policy and constitution cannot be revolutionary in content and have revolutionary form or vice versa. Form has to be consistent and reflect content. So a reformist form has reformist content and revolutionary form has revolutionary content. So what is it to be? What is built in the present should take care of the future.
Yet there are already Parties that say that they are revolutionary and exist. There are parties who are Communist and Marxist-Leninist already. So these Parties purport to form and content. So will they be the ones that come to the forefront in the social mind’s eye?
Is the requirement for a Party that is constituted on the basis that the objective conditions are over-ripe for revolution, but the subjective conditions lag behind? An entire raison d’etre, for its existence, to prepare these subjective conditions for revolution would answer the supposition.