A-Infos (en) France, OCL CA #362 - Positions OCL: HOW WE SEE... (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

...The class struggle --- "The history of all hitherto existing society 
is the history of class struggles," declared Marx. Before him, the class 
struggle had been recognized by revolutionaries like Proudhon and 
Babeuf, but also by bourgeois economists like Guizot. Marx's originality 
lies in his assertion that classes are linked to specific phases in the 
development of the productive forces; and that the class struggle, in 
industrialized societies, would automatically lead to a transitional 
phase (the dictatorship of the proletariat) toward a classless society. 
While we agree with the first point, we do not share
the linear view of history contained in the second. For us, communism is 
not inevitable, and the development of capitalism, the formation of 
nation-states, and parliamentary democracies are not necessary steps 
toward a classless society. This "progressive" view of history has often 
led revolutionaries to participate in accelerating capitalist 
development rather than destroying it: against their will, they 
completed the bourgeois revolution, that is, they eliminated 
pre-capitalism more than capitalism itself. It is within this framework 
that we must also understand the history and role of trade unionism-both 
as representative of the exploited people's emancipatory will, as an 
element of integration, and as an intermediary between capital and 
labor. Trade unionism is therefore, in our view, only one means among 
others, contributing at specific times to the class struggle, chosen by 
workers according to the moment and the circumstances.
It is never a question for us of unconditionally supporting any 
particular union, but simply of being present where workers are 
fighting, when we believe there are opportunities for rupture and 
openness. Nor is it our intention to fight within bureaucratic 
structures or to occupy leadership or full-time union positions. However 
radical the struggle waged through union means may be at any given 
moment, we never lose sight of the fact that it cannot be an end in itself.

... Citizenship

Citizenism is a political and ideological position that incorporates the 
idea that all people are equal before the rules of the state. We do not 
believe in such "equality," because we believe that what defines an 
individual in this society is their social class, corresponding to 
economic interests and standardized cultural reproduction. Citizenism 
tries to make people believe that the state is managed "democratically" 
by all citizens, when in reality it is in the hands of the most 
powerful, the wealthiest-in short, a social class called the bourgeoisie.
To suggest that the bourgeoisie, the "middle classes," and the 
proletariat have the same interests is simply fallacious.
If citizenism (particularly republican citizenship) has been spreading 
more and more in recent years, it is because the dominant order needs it 
to deny class struggle and ensure social cohesion that serves its 
interests. The usual civic rhetoric rings out when rebels attack the 
police during counter-
summits, or when cars are burned in working-class neighborhoods, for 
example, but never when bosses lay off workers or ministers award 
themselves exorbitant salaries. Only the poor are asked to be citizens.

...Ecology

Almost all ecological disasters, present or future, are direct 
consequences of the mode of production that dominates the planet: it can 
only exist through endless development, the absolute necessity of 
destroying in order to rebuild profitably, and it inherently carries 
within it a logic of death. The success of an ecological struggle cannot 
therefore come from the sum of individual behavioral changes. Nor can it 
be embodied in structures that accommodate themselves, however 
imperfectly, to the capitalist mode of production and the political 
structures that support it. To separate ecological struggles from an 
anti-capitalist fight is to demonstrate both culpable unrealistic 
thinking and boundless demagoguery. The economic principles that govern 
us imply a destruction of the planet that no reform can slow or 
mitigate. It is the will for an egalitarian future that must guide 
environmental struggles, and not the reference to a supposedly natural 
and mythical past or to any mystical symbiosis with "Mother Nature".

...The patriarchy

We fight against patriarchy, a system of oppression that imposes 
inequality between the sexes, because we do not recognize anyone's right 
to dictate our identity and our lives, nor to control our bodies. The 
perpetuation of this inequality grants men the rights of the public 
sphere (strength, power, violence, decision-making, representation, 
etc.) and women the duties of the private sphere (fertility, raising 
children, housework, sexual and social submission, conformity to beauty 
standards, etc.). Man and Woman, like the "real man" and the "good 
woman," are merely images, representations, and constructs that the 
patriarchal system organizes and perpetuates according to separate, 
hierarchical, and unequal principles to maintain male domination over 
society.
We are part of the history of the women's movement and believe that the 
anti-patriarchal struggle must be neither isolated nor secondary, but 
waged alongside other social struggles: no victory on the grounds of 
anti-capitalism or anti-colonialism, for example, guarantees the end of 
patriarchal oppression.
We are highly critical of pseudo-feminist advances such as the law on 
gender parity in politics, as well as of the superwoman models that 
combine paid work with tasks traditionally imposed on women (housework, 
childcare, etc.). And we fight against the return to moral order-in 
which religions and "secularism" participate at their own level-which is 
achieved through the shaping of sexual and social behaviors imposed by 
puritanical society on both women and men. An anti-patriarchal and 
sexual revolution remains to be waged.

Fascism

Fascism is a dictatorship based on a doctrine of class reconciliation, 
serving a nation-state that combines a corporatist and hierarchical 
organization of workers with an all-powerful, militarized state. It 
professes an anti-capitalism that is merely a facade, since in reality, 
it only comes to power with the support and approval of big capital and 
a segment of the bourgeoisie, and often quite legally, that is, through 
elections.
The historical causes of fascism in the 1920s and 30s were the crisis of 
capitalism (a new, uncontrolled industrial revolution) and the absence 
of revolutionary momentum (the defeat of the workers' movement in 1914, 
leading to the bloody suppression of all genuinely socialist attempts).
Parliamentary democracy is therefore by no means a bulwark against 
fascism, nor against any other form of totalitarianism that might 
emerge. History has taught us that when faced with a choice between 
social revolution and fascism, social democracy itself (and the 
Stalinists!) does not hesitate to fight revolution, at the proven risk 
of allowing fascism to triumph (the Sacred Union in 1914, Germany in 
1920, Spain in 1937, the granting of full powers to Pétain in France, etc.).
Our antifascism, which is one element of our political commitment 
against current society, cannot accommodate any alliance, even 
temporary, with these forces, which are only antifascist when capitalism 
does not demand dictatorship; we are therefore opposed to front-line 
strategies (such as a common front against...). True antifascism can 
only be anticapitalist, and it is only on this basis that an effective 
struggle can be waged.

...National liberation struggles

As internationalists, we are by definition anti-colonialist and 
anti-imperialist. However, national liberation struggles have often been 
a revolt against the situation endured by exploited, dominated, and 
colonized populations. Like all other struggles, they are not without 
contradictions and are permeated by class struggle: they can participate 
in the fight for the reappropriation of collective power within a 
concrete and controlled space, but they can also cross a threshold 
beyond which the affirmation of belonging becomes a logic of exclusion; 
they can promote a social and egalitarian project, but they are also 
frequently the stepping stone for the rise to power of a local 
bourgeoisie previously deprived of its prerogatives by the colonizer.
This is why, when we support or participate in a national liberation 
struggle, we emphasize the concept of national and social liberation. 
This means:

to defend the idea that real liberation comes through a reorganization 
of production according to the needs expressed by the exploited classes, 
and not according to the "imperatives" of the market and profit;
combat integration tactics within institutions and promote grassroots 
and counter-power structures at the expense of party power;
to fight against demands that would tend to strengthen the power of a 
future bourgeoisie or local notables;
favouring in the bond of belonging what is acquired (language, 
struggle...) at the expense of what is given (blood ties, etc);
to refuse to allow armed struggle, when it exists, to have a leading role.
... A movement

A movement, as we understand it, is a group of people, activists or not, 
who attempt to react collectively to some form of oppression or 
exploitation. It is made up of who these people are, their social 
reality, the reasons and objectives for which they fight, as well as the 
contradictions that run through them.
We do not measure the value of a movement by its "revolutionary 
potential," but by the dynamic it is capable of creating. Thus, even a 
movement at a low level of protest can prove exciting because the 
openings it creates give people the opportunity to open up, discover 
themselves, and move at their own pace toward greater radicalism-that 
is, toward greater understanding and therefore a questioning of society. 
It is in this spirit that we intervene in movements (it being understood 
that OCL activists do not join a movement for tactical reasons, but 
because they share the social reality, the needs, and the objectives of 
the people who are fighting).
To act within a movement is to point out contradictions, introduce 
elements of reflection (for example by posing problems in 
anti-capitalist terms) and promote the self-organization of its actors; 
it is in fact to build an impulse of social liberation, by creating the 
conditions allowing the development of a spirit of distrust towards the 
State, a spirit of rebellion, disobedience and insubordination; it is to 
work towards everything that can promote popular autonomy and the break 
with this society at the expense of reformist and integrationist projects.

https://oclibertaire.lautre.net/spip.php?article4764
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe https://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en