Epoch of the Marxist Youth

For aspiring and studying marxist youth to come together and discuss the true way forward
 
HomeHome  PortalPortal  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  MemberlistMemberlist  UsergroupsUsergroups  RegisterRegister  Log in  

Share | 
 

 Vanguard Parties

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : 1, 2  Next
AuthorMessage
solpacvoicis
Soviet Administrator


Posts : 365
Join date : 2008-07-03

PostSubject: Vanguard Parties   Sat Jul 05, 2008 11:06 pm

Pros and Cons anyone?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Sun Jul 06, 2008 3:41 pm

They mobilize revolution and help protect the proletariat after revolution but after that they need to relinquish power
Back to top Go down
solpacvoicis
Soviet Administrator


Posts : 365
Join date : 2008-07-03

PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Sun Jul 06, 2008 3:51 pm

therein lies the biggest problem, though. why would they give up power?

also, vanguard parties can easily become corrupted, how would one prevent this from happening?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Sun Jul 06, 2008 3:56 pm

Well if they were true communist it would be easy for them to give up power. I would personally. The corruption would be a problem though wouldnt it. I guess you would just have to make examples out of them if you know what i mean.
Back to top Go down
solpacvoicis
Soviet Administrator


Posts : 365
Join date : 2008-07-03

PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Sun Jul 06, 2008 4:06 pm

lol, true, true.

so in some cases a vanguard party can be very effective, if everyone in it was truly dedicated to the cause?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Sun Jul 06, 2008 4:16 pm

Of course. I think its the most direct way and the best bet in a revolution but only as long as there is no corruption. Shabazz could argue better becuase he is a devote trot
Back to top Go down
solpacvoicis
Soviet Administrator


Posts : 365
Join date : 2008-07-03

PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Sun Jul 06, 2008 4:23 pm

alright, i can't wait to hear his argument on this, then =D

however, i would like to point out, a much more direct way would be a global uprising lol XD
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Sun Jul 06, 2008 4:27 pm

Yes but the vanguard would organize it otherwise it would fail against a military.
Back to top Go down
solpacvoicis
Soviet Administrator


Posts : 365
Join date : 2008-07-03

PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Sun Jul 06, 2008 4:33 pm

=O not so, there are many ways to acquire weapons, and guerrilla tactics are effective against armies =D

there's no need for strict organization, people just need to organize themselves into task forces and destroy weapons and facilities of the army....

a vanguard party might make organization easier, but is it worth it to create another hierarchy?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Sun Jul 06, 2008 4:36 pm

It's not a hierarchy anymore than a decentralized democracy we love would be.
Back to top Go down
solpacvoicis
Soviet Administrator


Posts : 365
Join date : 2008-07-03

PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Sun Jul 06, 2008 4:38 pm

um, if we are talking about democratically centralized vanguard parties, and this vanguard party, not elected or controlled by the people, organizing them....then it is different from a decentralized democracy....
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Sun Jul 06, 2008 4:41 pm

i was only comparing them simply by the fact its not a hierarchy. A vanguard would still be made up of proletariat. but i should stop there before i start talking out of my ass and let shabazz take over
Back to top Go down
bolshevik
Soviet Administrator
avatar

Posts : 164
Join date : 2008-07-06
Age : 27
Location : ameriKKKa

PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Tue Jul 08, 2008 12:38 pm

i say the vanguard be comprised of the proletariat and professional revolutionaries, to give the party fair balance, and to keep the intrests of the oppressed at heart.

_________________
We will hang the capitalists with the rope they sell us.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
KGB5097
Radical
avatar

Posts : 63
Join date : 2008-07-07
Age : 29
Location : Philadelphia, PA

PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Tue Jul 08, 2008 1:23 pm

Ruadhan wrote:
Well if they were true communist it would be easy for them to give up power. I would personally. The corruption would be a problem though wouldnt it. I guess you would just have to make examples out of them if you know what i mean.

Thats the problem, the disillusion of the vanguard after its served its purpose relies in the vanguard itself. The honor system is no failsafe, IMO.

Vanguardism is elitist and dangerous... there is no reason why a democratic system cannot be set up post-revolution. "Its hard" is no good argument.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Shabazz Freeman
Soviet Administrator
avatar

Posts : 373
Join date : 2008-07-02
Location : Bay Area

PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Tue Jul 08, 2008 1:25 pm

Unlike the Bougerois revolutions that overthrew feudalism, the working class does not have the same access to the means of production the bourgeoisie had when forming their revolutions. The working class, often times, must pick between education and food. It is the Vanguard's job to educate the working masses about that which they have been sheltered from. In accordance, the Vanguard part serves as a political ground for the working class to discuss the true way forward and organize. Democratic Centralism is how they function. Within the party, mass discussions, arguments, and polemics take place, but after the party votes on what action is the best, the party will represent the stance that was voted on. United in action. A separate Vanguard Party is needed, not the pressure politics that many resort to in voting for dems. As a marxist one understands that the Greens, Dems, and Reps are CAPITALIST politicians that have no interest in the working class NOR do they even have the POWER to correct the irrationalities and injustices of capitalism that are irreconcilable with capitalism. A vanguard party would be a strictly working class party separate from Capitalist politicians. Granted, it's aim would not be to get elected because as marx stated "One cannot lay hands on the ready made state machinery and wield it for his own purposes". It's major function would be to merely organize the united working class in the coming and growing class struggle battles and get the TRUE revolutionary politics out there, not that shitty ron paul rLOVEution crap. The party exists to train the exploited masses and make them into professional revolutionaries that are capable of carrying out a revolution. While the vanguard party cannot absorb the entire working class, it will serve as an invaluable weapon when class antagonisms become accute and the time for insurrection is near. The party will lead the insurection that will unleash the working class already engaged in class struggle, be they in the party or not. When the revolution begins to roll down the hill that will be the time that the professional revolutionaries are dispatched to lead the varying sections of the working class in the smashing of the state.

Now the next question that is always on people mind is "what keeps them from becoming corrupt and not giving up 'power'?"

"Power" is effectively having a monopoly on violence (controlling of the state) or a control of the means of production. Socialism stands for arming ALL workers which effectively smashes the monopoly on violence that the capitalist state. And organizing the workers- without "special privileges" and ranks that the current state receives-in defending the collectivized means of production NOT private ownership. At no one point do members of the Vanguard Party OWN the means of production OR create it's own state forthe purpose of repression of the working class. Democratic Centralism is DEMOCRATIC! Meaning that if a member of the party betrays the working class or misrepresents their interest then they can and will be pulled and replaced IMMEDIATELY. Because the Vangaurd is made up of professional revolutionaries that have experience, they will likely become the soviet reps that organize the state but that is not a guarantee! They must be elected! They are not paid more than the average Worker! They merely have a job to organize the state according to the division of labor they represent! Because power stems from the collection of surplus labor produced by the workers (money made from the exploitation of workers) The Soviets CANNOT become a ruling class that exploits labor for it's own purposes because it doesn't own any means of production. AND they do not have a monopoly on violence, for the workers will already be armed from the revolution!

now HOW the USSR soviets fell to stalin is a story that will have to be told in my class series
hoefully you will read it and participate!
afro

excuse the grammar! lol!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://themarxistyouth.forumotion.com
solpacvoicis
Soviet Administrator


Posts : 365
Join date : 2008-07-03

PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Tue Jul 08, 2008 3:22 pm

the basic concept of democratic centralism irks me - with the fundamentals, yeah, sure, bring it to a final vote. but when you talk about tactics or method, what if that decided method isn't going well, will it be treason to criticize what has already been decided?

i suppose you could also have a system by which you can bring up past decisions for analysis...?

so the vanguard party just exists to educate/assist in arming the workers, decide on tactics, etc.? so how come the vanguard party seized control during the USSR period? that wasn't just stalin, the vanguard party had become elevated above the people.....for the purpose of effectively fighting the civil war.....that leads me to ask if there was a plan for the party to step down...?

also, i suppose you are against vanguard elitism, where they are considered somehow "better" than the rest of the working class....
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Shabazz Freeman
Soviet Administrator
avatar

Posts : 373
Join date : 2008-07-02
Location : Bay Area

PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Tue Jul 08, 2008 3:35 pm

Freedom of criticism is what it's all about.

But if you are protesting or at an insurrection and you suddenly split from the party THERE, then that could be catastrophic. Criticize and debate within the party then move on. It isn't treason to criticize the party's decision during the organizational meeting, but during a time of action if you blatantly go against the party when they have democratically decided on an action then things get rough. Yes the vangaurd took a leadership role in the civil war because a state NEEDED to be formed to pretect them from the white army and the many imperialist nations backing them.

The extreme policies adapted during that time were abolished at the civil war's conclusion. They weren't elevated above the people, they were the organizing authoritarian force against the rich peasants and capitalist-they were the weapon of the poor peasants and workers, not elevated above them.

In accordance, the workers have the democratic and physical power to replace soviets at anytime. the party was not the reason the USSR became bureaucratically degenerated. Infact, most of the professional revolutionaries were killed in the civil war fighting for the workers. If ANYTHING the bureaucratic degeneration happened because the workers with the most revolutionary experience were killed
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://themarxistyouth.forumotion.com
solpacvoicis
Soviet Administrator


Posts : 365
Join date : 2008-07-03

PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Tue Jul 08, 2008 3:43 pm

...but the surviving participants gained even more experience...right? =o

alright, if the party is formed around this structure, it'll work - i'll concede that (given there is a willingness to use such a party =D which there would be, right...? at least a similar sort of organized structure is needed, however temporary, unless you managed to absorb the army into the working class...hmm...)

so, there haven't been any proper vanguard parties since the original? =/

that's more the fault of stalinism and propaganda than anything else, though, lol

also, how do you ensure the workers/poor peasants retain control of the party? esp. in that situation....
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Shabazz Freeman
Soviet Administrator
avatar

Posts : 373
Join date : 2008-07-02
Location : Bay Area

PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Tue Jul 08, 2008 3:49 pm

solpacvoicis wrote:
...but the surviving participants gained even more experience...right? =o

alright, if the party is formed around this structure, it'll work - i'll concede that (given there is a willingness to use such a party =D which there would be, right...? at least a similar sort of organized structure is needed, however temporary, unless you managed to absorb the army into the working class...hmm...)

so, there haven't been any proper vanguard parties since the original? =/

that's more the fault of stalinism and propaganda than anything else, though, lol

also, how do you ensure the workers/poor peasants retain control of the party? esp. in that situation....

No no we don't wish to absorb the army into the party. That would be "laying hands on the ready made (capitalist) state machinery" we want to forge a new army of the workers. Winning over the working class aprts of the army during the revolution and absorbing it into the party is two different things.

There haven't been others because the USSR was the ONLY socialist revolution of the working class.

The workers and poor peasants will retrain control because they have the monopoly on violence and it is the workers and poor peasants that vote on members .

The socialist revolution will bring about the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. Currently, we live in the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://themarxistyouth.forumotion.com
solpacvoicis
Soviet Administrator


Posts : 365
Join date : 2008-07-03

PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Tue Jul 08, 2008 3:58 pm

ah, no, what i meant was win over the soldiers to the cause of the working class lol XD

that's kinda unfair - any ATTEMPTED revolution in the name of socialism should be called a socialist revolution - it depends on the structure thereafter, its constitution, who has real conrol, etc...then you can say "oh, well, this revolution failed....".

ah, okay, that makes sense =D

well, as in any revolution, its just an attempt to do something, so, the revolution's goal is to create a dictatorship of the proletariat....

the successful ones will =] we will have many, many, many socialist revolutions before the world is socialist and communism can come about
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Shabazz Freeman
Soviet Administrator
avatar

Posts : 373
Join date : 2008-07-02
Location : Bay Area

PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Tue Jul 08, 2008 3:59 pm

When i say that i mean they were the workers revolting.

all of the others have been peasant based which of course has a qualitative outcome...
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://themarxistyouth.forumotion.com
solpacvoicis
Soviet Administrator


Posts : 365
Join date : 2008-07-03

PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:03 pm

but, it was the workers + peasants revolting in the USSR...

and i'm fairly certain that it was workers and peasants in the cuban revolution, too...

so, its just, you insist the workers are there, at least in majority, or...what?

i know peasants are reactionary, but what if they do a good job with the collectivization?

does that mean it was a failed socialist revolution because the workers didn't take part?

or is it also dependent upon the state of the country at the time?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Shabazz Freeman
Soviet Administrator
avatar

Posts : 373
Join date : 2008-07-02
Location : Bay Area

PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:12 pm

solpacvoicis wrote:
but, it was the workers + peasants revolting in the USSR...

and i'm fairly certain that it was workers and peasants in the cuban revolution, too...

so, its just, you insist the workers are there, at least in majority, or...what?

i know peasants are reactionary, but what if they do a good job with the collectivization?

does that mean it was a failed socialist revolution because the workers didn't take part?

or is it also dependent upon the state of the country at the time?

Yes they both revolted but the peasants united under the leadership of the proletariat.

Che focused on organizing the peasantry and so the peasantry lead it

It's not that they are reactionary, it's that they are a heterogeneous class unlike the homogeneous proletariat and bourgeoisie. By "heterogenous" i mean to say that they do not have a united class interest. The peasantry are petty bourgeois. The poor peasants suffer and sympathize with the workers while the well off peasants seek to make more profit and aspire to become true bourgeoisie.

In the other nations they did have a socialist revolution and overthrew capitalism but because they were peasant based and did not have their roots in the proletariat they ended up creating a bureaucracy. As opposed to the proletariat that is a homogenous class and is already united by nature (they socialize with the workers in each department of production as opposed to the peasants that are not very social and work on their own plots of land) and so can set up soviets and organize effectively
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://themarxistyouth.forumotion.com
Anarchist.Dagger
Soviet Administrator
avatar

Posts : 89
Join date : 2008-07-08
Age : 29
Location : Amerikkka

PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Tue Jul 08, 2008 5:57 pm

Shabazz Freeman wrote:
The extreme policies adapted during that time were abolished at the civil war's conclusion. They weren't elevated above the people, they were the organizing authoritarian force against the rich peasants and capitalist-they were the weapon of the poor peasants and workers, not elevated above them.

The Bolsheviks got better rations. Is that not being raised above? That's a pretty big problem as far as i'm concerned.

Quote :
then you can say "oh, well, this revolution failed....".

This shouldn't be allowed? This is no different then when a scientists hypothesis does not come to be; he says the experiment was a failure. It didn't come to the conclusion it was supposed to. And just like a scientist, when our experiments fail, we try to decipher why and fix the problem that created the failure until we are successful.

Quote :
It's not that they are reactionary, it's that they are a heterogeneous class unlike the homogeneous proletariat and bourgeoisie. By "heterogenous" i mean to say that they do not have a united class interest. The peasantry are petty bourgeois. The poor peasants suffer and sympathize with the workers while the well off peasants seek to make more profit and aspire to become true bourgeoisie.

But nowadays capitalists have taken many steps to make the workers they employ have more stake within the capitalists' companies. So you could argue that the proletariat has no more and no less at stake than the peasantry in a capitalist society. Some peasants own land, some proletarians own stock. I don't think the proletariat has what it takes to lead revolution based on this.

Quote :
In the other nations they did have a socialist revolution and overthrew capitalism but because they were peasant based and did not have their roots in the proletariat they ended up creating a bureaucracy.

And what has the proletarian revolution created so far? I don't think comparing success rates is going to make any difference as to choosing who leads the revolution.

Quote :
Well if they were true communist it would be easy for them to give up power. I would personally.

Not that i don't believe you, but we are products of our environment. So once they are in a place of authority, by coincidence or not, could you really count on anyone to give that up. I don't believe anyone has ever done that... ever.

Quote :
I guess you would just have to make examples out of them if you know what i mean.

Hopefully that's a joke.

Quote :
so in some cases a vanguard party can be very effective, if everyone in it was truly dedicated to the cause?

I'd say they're efficient, and can probably react quicker to certain circumstances, but they haven't been all too effective, though what has?

Quote :
Yes but the vanguard would organize it otherwise it would fail against a military.

I don't think this is true. I think the working class can organize itself to fight. Just because we oppose authority doesn't mean we want the army to consist of a bunch of privates doing whatever they think is best. There can be organisation without there being heirarchical authority. I also don't think, even if they are without regard for others, that the bourgeoisie would engage in such a massacre.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
solpacvoicis
Soviet Administrator


Posts : 365
Join date : 2008-07-03

PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   Tue Jul 08, 2008 9:08 pm

Anarchist.Dagger wrote:


Quote :
then you can say "oh, well, this revolution failed....".

This shouldn't be allowed? This is no different then when a scientists hypothesis does not come to be; he says the experiment was a failure. It didn't come to the conclusion it was supposed to. And just like a scientist, when our experiments fail, we try to decipher why and fix the problem that created the failure until we are successful.

hm, well, what i didn't add was reviewing the data gained from the experiment - the point i was trying to make was that you shouldn't assume a socialist revolution will be successful OR unsuccessful....thanks for catching that though =D
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Vanguard Parties   

Back to top Go down
 
Vanguard Parties
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 2Go to page : 1, 2  Next
 Similar topics
-
» Cardfight! Vanguard Zodiac Time Beast decklist (November 2016.)
» Cons of Censorship
» New parties started
» The vanguard Party after complete victory is achieved
» STATEMENT BY JUDGE IN THE LIBEL TRIAL! READ NOW!!!

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Epoch of the Marxist Youth :: Critical Marxist Thinking :: Party Discussion-
Jump to: