What Next for TANIT?

Posted: April 22, 2011 in TANIT-Forum

To all comrades and especially those who have not yet made up their mind about the debate on “vanguard” organisation

Now that the conference is over, it is very clear that there are two opposing views on the organisational orientation towards the work amongst the masses for achieving of socialism.

The basis of this organisational disagreement lays, fundamentally, on differences on our understanding of characterisation of nature of capitalism and how it should be dealt with to pave the way to socialism. Also, on the differences of understanding of the concept of socialism and especially of the “transitional from capitalism to socialism”. So, if we have differences on how to get rid of capitalism and also what sort of society we will enter after capitalism, it is obvious that we also develop differences on the organisational methods of bridging this gap (from capitalism to socialism).

In the debates in Stockholm conference of TANIT, there was a clear difference on the nature of capitalism. Some comrades where indicating the possibility of achieving “socialism by parliamentarism”; or fighting for “democratisation of bourgeois state” to achieve socialism. On the other hand some comrades were clearly indicating that only by smashing the totality of bourgeois state apparatus, and establishment of workers state, we can begin building socialism. As was indicated by Karl Marx in Communist Manifesto that: “The immediate aim of the Communists is: Formation of the proletariat into a class, overthrow of the bourgeois supremacy, conquest of political power by the proletariat”.

On the transitional period from capitalism to socialism the idea based on Karl Marx’s Grundrisse, and “Critique of the Gotha Programme” indicating that:“…Between capitalist and communist society there lies the period of the revolutionary transformation of the one into the other. Corresponding to this is also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat…”, was not accepted by some comrades.

Finally on the concept vanguard organisation based on Karl Marx’s view in Communist Manifesto that: “The Communists, are on the one hand practically, the most advanced and resolute section of the working-class parties of every country, that section which pushes forward all others; on the other hand, theoretically, they have over the great mass of the proletariat the advantage of clearly understanding the lines of march, the conditions, and the ultimate general results of the proletarian movement”, (The Communist League 1834–1850 was the first Marxist international organisation formed by Karl Marx), and the concept of party building based on rich experience of the Russian Revolution and Lenin’s views, were totally rejected and ridiculed by some comrades.

In my opinion, the recent crisis of capitalism, leads us to revival of Marxism. The revolutionary Marxists, of course, have their vision and perspective of the the future and what they wish to achieve. In order to construct this vision there are three interlinked study and understanding to be achieved. Firstly, the understanding of Capitalism and its crisis (the roots of crisis, trajectory to present, and political conclusions). Secondly, the understanding the future society, that is the “transition from capitalism to socialism”. (the concept of socialism and the role of state). Thirdly and most importantly, the organisational methods of surmounting and transcending from capitalism to socialism (concept of revolutionary organisation and its intervention in mass institutions).

The first and second points is characterised by development of Marxist theories by returning to Marx (we are witnessing this trend in international scale). The third point is characterised by construction of “revived avant-garde tendencies” (fundamentally different to traditional so called “Marxist”, “Leninist”, “Trotskyist” organisations which formed the caricature of revolutionary organisation in the past)  by returning to the positive and negative experiences of the Russian Revolution (this process is not obvious to many activists and is counterposed by “neo-utopian socialists” tendencies within TANIT). These three elements form a unity. One from other is incomplete, and does not give a totality of solution to capitalist system and building a socialist society.

I sincerely propose that those comrades who not yet made up their minds about the differences in TANIT, should re examine the above issues without preconceived ideas or pressure by some other comrades. For those comrades who have made up their mind, as I proposed in TANIT conference, we all should implement and put into practice what we preach, without insulting each other, getting upset and irritated, and falsifying each others positions. Then after a period (say a year) we should all get together to draw a balance sheet of the practical activities and our achievements based on our different approaches. Only time will prove the correctness of a method and line of action.

Maziar Razi
22 April 2011


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s