History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

R48G: does the working class have class interests in capitalism? stealth revolutionism of the ‘communist’ bourgeoisie

August 26th, 2017 · No Comments

Our discussions of the universal versus the working class could backfire but in fact the distinction is more likely to buttress the thinking of many leftists on the question. However, many are unaware of the difficulties with the working class emphasis: it proposed upside down inequality and many instinctively recoil from the idea. They should not: the working class in fact includes virtually everyone, if we consider the set to equate with ‘wage earners’. In fact the universal class concept is more a way force a rethinking of what the ‘working class revolution’ means.

We should note in passing that a revolutionary communism has the option of being a version of bourgeois revolution by proposing a revolutionary democracy as requiring communist axioms. This might be not unlike the revolution of the american rebs with its elite leadership save that in our version we require a foundation in the Commons as the outcome. Marx would turn in his grave here, but our point is, once again, a card out of the deck of ‘virtual revolution’, and a concept experiment that points to the reality that an alliance of bourgeoisie and working class leftists (there are few revolutionary working class leftist in the US, please note) is almost as good a depiction of the Russia revolution as any other. Lenin was no proletarian. Once we think this way we may soon return to the working class formulation! But this time with a better sense that the working class is really broader than its classic versions: it is really the universal class and this includes many other sectors.
In the end the working class focus can backfire because the working class very likely has class interests in the capitalist order of things.
So in the end we have a left based on a combination set from the universal class and this elite, mostly bourgeois, can foundalionalize postcapitalism as well as the working, or better. Agree or disagree we have made our point: look at Marx/Engels: it was a bourgeois vanguard that founded the revolution. In the Russian case, of course, the proletariat had a crucial yet subordinaate role, next to the peasants. The Bolshevik revolution, mon vieux, was a bourgeois elite with a strategy to speak in the name of the working class. In they end they couldn’t even allow trade unions.

Tags: General

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment