<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Change the world without taking power, Marxist edition	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://johnriddell.com/2012/05/31/change-the-world-without-taking-power-marxist-edition/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://johnriddell.com/2012/05/31/change-the-world-without-taking-power-marxist-edition/</link>
	<description>MARXIST ESSAYS AND COMMENTARY</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Jun 2012 21:21:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.1.10</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Angel formoso		</title>
		<link>https://johnriddell.com/2012/05/31/change-the-world-without-taking-power-marxist-edition/#comment-569</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Angel formoso]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jun 2012 21:21:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johnriddell.com/?p=980#comment-569</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Socialist and communist countries like Cuba and Vietnam do not spend on luxuries or non-essentials if the costs would exceed their alloted budgets. Capitalist countries must follow suit. Gasoline should be rationed if the state cannot afford to pay for them. With trains and buses, I am sure citizens of these socialist countries will reach their destinations and maybe who knows, faster than when they drive their own private cars. Living up with the Joneses is one of the vices of capitalism. No wonder Vietnamese and Cubans are not burdened with debt!!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Socialist and communist countries like Cuba and Vietnam do not spend on luxuries or non-essentials if the costs would exceed their alloted budgets. Capitalist countries must follow suit. Gasoline should be rationed if the state cannot afford to pay for them. With trains and buses, I am sure citizens of these socialist countries will reach their destinations and maybe who knows, faster than when they drive their own private cars. Living up with the Joneses is one of the vices of capitalism. No wonder Vietnamese and Cubans are not burdened with debt!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Pham Binh		</title>
		<link>https://johnriddell.com/2012/05/31/change-the-world-without-taking-power-marxist-edition/#comment-532</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pham Binh]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Jun 2012 02:43:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johnriddell.com/?p=980#comment-532</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Thanks for reposting this John! I got some interesting comments on the original here: http://www.thenorthstar.info/?p=787

Surprisingly, leaders of Solidarity in NYC are claiming that SYRIZA is &quot;right wing,&quot; reformist, etc. and are supporting ANTARSYA. Maybe it&#039;s not surprising since these are some of the same people who say MAS &quot;reconstituted neoliberalism&quot; in Bolivia.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for reposting this John! I got some interesting comments on the original here: <a href="http://www.thenorthstar.info/?p=787" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.thenorthstar.info/?p=787</a></p>
<p>Surprisingly, leaders of Solidarity in NYC are claiming that SYRIZA is &#8220;right wing,&#8221; reformist, etc. and are supporting ANTARSYA. Maybe it&#8217;s not surprising since these are some of the same people who say MAS &#8220;reconstituted neoliberalism&#8221; in Bolivia.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: peterb1953		</title>
		<link>https://johnriddell.com/2012/05/31/change-the-world-without-taking-power-marxist-edition/#comment-495</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[peterb1953]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jun 2012 06:27:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johnriddell.com/?p=980#comment-495</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I agree with Pham Binh&#039;s argument here. Leftist nitpickers might seize on his use of the phrase &quot;taking power&quot; here to claim that he has conflated winning elections with really taking power, even though that is not his intent I am sure. John Riddell&#039;s work on the Comintern discussions about workers governments and workers and farmers governments is apt here.

Engagement in elections to win (not just to make propaganda) is not alternative to building the movement in the streets, workplaces, campuses and neighbourhoods for serious revolutionary socialists It should go hand in hand.

Hopefully the discussion in the left around the world on the challenge for the Greek left to unite put up a serious challenge to austerity in the coming elections will bury some of the abstentionist madness that is a part of the sectarian heritage that the socialist movement desperately needs to break from.

You only have to watch the frustration and demoralisation of Egytian socialists and other revolutionaries at the recent elections to understand how important is the opening that Syriza&#039;s anti-austerity platform and public support offers.

The other thing that is laughable is the superstitious faith that some people place in the paper programs of tiny outfits which are untested in struggle. Put those people in under the pressure of real political responsibilty and I bet most of them would go to water faster than some of the so-called &quot;reformists&quot; in Syriza, who (unlike the armchair socialists who would stay out of the political fray and hang on to their pure paper programs) will in due course be put to the test.

We continue to distribute from &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.resistancebooks.com/catalog/index.php&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Resistance Books (Australia)&lt;/a&gt; a very useful pamphlet by Maurice Sibelle called &lt;a href=&quot;http://links.org.au/node/877&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Revolutionaries and Parliament&lt;/a&gt;, which surveys the attitude of Marx, Engels and later the Russian Bolsheviks to parliamentary elections. A small excerpt follows:

* * *

In his 1895 introduction to Marx’s Class Struggles in France, Engels noted that “The Communist Manifesto had already proclaimed the winning of universal suffrage, of democracy, as one of the first and most important tasks of the militant proletariat.”

When universal male suffrage was granted in Prussia by Bismarck’s government in 1866, “our workers immediately took it in earnest and sent August Bebel to the first, constituent Reichstag.” Through such socialist election campaigns, the German Marxists had been able to transform the parliamentary franchise “from a means of deception, which it was before, into an instrument of emancipation.” Engels continued:

&quot;And if universal suffrage had offered no other advantage than that it allowed us to count our numbers every three years; that by the regularly established, unexpected rapid rise in the number of our votes it increased in equal measure the workers’ certainty of victory and the dismay of their opponents, and so became our best means of propaganda; that it accurately informed us concerning our own strength and that of all hostile parties, and thereby provided us with a measure of proportion for our actions second to none, safeguarding us from untimely timidity as much as untimely foolhardiness — if this had been the only advantage we gained from the suffrage, it would have still been much more than enough. But it did more than this by far. In election agitation it provided us with a means, second to none, of getting in touch with the masses of the people where they still stand aloof from us; of forcing all parties to defend their views and actions against our attacks before all the people; and, further, it provided our representatives in the parliament with a platform from which they could speak to their opponents in parliament and to the masses without, with quite other authority and freedom than in the press or at meetings.&quot;

Engels went on to say that electoral propaganda was a more effective means of struggle than “revolutionary” adventures “carried through by small conscious minorities at the head of unconscious masses” — referring to various ultraleft attempts by small groups to seize power through street fighting. He viewed the participation of socialists in elections as “one of the sharpest weapons” to fight the state institutions and expose the other parties to the masses; as an effective method of reaching the masses of people with the ideas of the party; as a useful platform to express the ideas of the party and attack its opponents if the party succeeded in winning seats; as a gauge of strength and support of the party among the masses; as a means of legitimising the party before the masses and putting the party in a position where attempts to outlaw the party could be fought more easily. This was particularly important in Germany in light of the Anti-Socialist Law. The party’s legal activities — its election campaigns — were powerful weapons enabling it to fight for the right of the party to exist.

More here: &lt;a href=&quot;http://links.org.au/node/877&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Revolutionaries and Parliament&lt;/a&gt;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with Pham Binh&#8217;s argument here. Leftist nitpickers might seize on his use of the phrase &#8220;taking power&#8221; here to claim that he has conflated winning elections with really taking power, even though that is not his intent I am sure. John Riddell&#8217;s work on the Comintern discussions about workers governments and workers and farmers governments is apt here.</p>
<p>Engagement in elections to win (not just to make propaganda) is not alternative to building the movement in the streets, workplaces, campuses and neighbourhoods for serious revolutionary socialists It should go hand in hand.</p>
<p>Hopefully the discussion in the left around the world on the challenge for the Greek left to unite put up a serious challenge to austerity in the coming elections will bury some of the abstentionist madness that is a part of the sectarian heritage that the socialist movement desperately needs to break from.</p>
<p>You only have to watch the frustration and demoralisation of Egytian socialists and other revolutionaries at the recent elections to understand how important is the opening that Syriza&#8217;s anti-austerity platform and public support offers.</p>
<p>The other thing that is laughable is the superstitious faith that some people place in the paper programs of tiny outfits which are untested in struggle. Put those people in under the pressure of real political responsibilty and I bet most of them would go to water faster than some of the so-called &#8220;reformists&#8221; in Syriza, who (unlike the armchair socialists who would stay out of the political fray and hang on to their pure paper programs) will in due course be put to the test.</p>
<p>We continue to distribute from <a href="http://www.resistancebooks.com/catalog/index.php" rel="nofollow">Resistance Books (Australia)</a> a very useful pamphlet by Maurice Sibelle called <a href="http://links.org.au/node/877" rel="nofollow">Revolutionaries and Parliament</a>, which surveys the attitude of Marx, Engels and later the Russian Bolsheviks to parliamentary elections. A small excerpt follows:</p>
<p>* * *</p>
<p>In his 1895 introduction to Marx’s Class Struggles in France, Engels noted that “The Communist Manifesto had already proclaimed the winning of universal suffrage, of democracy, as one of the first and most important tasks of the militant proletariat.”</p>
<p>When universal male suffrage was granted in Prussia by Bismarck’s government in 1866, “our workers immediately took it in earnest and sent August Bebel to the first, constituent Reichstag.” Through such socialist election campaigns, the German Marxists had been able to transform the parliamentary franchise “from a means of deception, which it was before, into an instrument of emancipation.” Engels continued:</p>
<p>&#8220;And if universal suffrage had offered no other advantage than that it allowed us to count our numbers every three years; that by the regularly established, unexpected rapid rise in the number of our votes it increased in equal measure the workers’ certainty of victory and the dismay of their opponents, and so became our best means of propaganda; that it accurately informed us concerning our own strength and that of all hostile parties, and thereby provided us with a measure of proportion for our actions second to none, safeguarding us from untimely timidity as much as untimely foolhardiness — if this had been the only advantage we gained from the suffrage, it would have still been much more than enough. But it did more than this by far. In election agitation it provided us with a means, second to none, of getting in touch with the masses of the people where they still stand aloof from us; of forcing all parties to defend their views and actions against our attacks before all the people; and, further, it provided our representatives in the parliament with a platform from which they could speak to their opponents in parliament and to the masses without, with quite other authority and freedom than in the press or at meetings.&#8221;</p>
<p>Engels went on to say that electoral propaganda was a more effective means of struggle than “revolutionary” adventures “carried through by small conscious minorities at the head of unconscious masses” — referring to various ultraleft attempts by small groups to seize power through street fighting. He viewed the participation of socialists in elections as “one of the sharpest weapons” to fight the state institutions and expose the other parties to the masses; as an effective method of reaching the masses of people with the ideas of the party; as a useful platform to express the ideas of the party and attack its opponents if the party succeeded in winning seats; as a gauge of strength and support of the party among the masses; as a means of legitimising the party before the masses and putting the party in a position where attempts to outlaw the party could be fought more easily. This was particularly important in Germany in light of the Anti-Socialist Law. The party’s legal activities — its election campaigns — were powerful weapons enabling it to fight for the right of the party to exist.</p>
<p>More here: <a href="http://links.org.au/node/877" rel="nofollow">Revolutionaries and Parliament</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!--
Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: https://www.boldgrid.com/w3-total-cache/

Object Caching 16/47 objects using Disk
Page Caching using Disk: Enhanced 
Database Caching using Memcached

Served from: johnriddell.com @ 2026-05-23 13:40:47 by W3 Total Cache
-->