Кто владеет информацией,
владеет миром

What Party Is Necessary to the Left?

What Party Is Necessary to the Left?
Baranov Anatoly 03.07.2012

Information occasion to conversation on the question that is taken out in heading appeared by itself – my leaving managing bodies of the Left Front. Why did I do it? After all everything is so good for the Left Front right now?

I will answer using Vasily Kuzmin's words - the coordinator of the LF of the Moscow organization – pronounced there, at the session of the Council: no mass actions of unorganized mass of citizens can shake this power, change of the power is possible only when large productions will stop their existence. Approximately the same was told also by Alexander Shubin: the matter is not that the workers are especially remarkable people in comparison with all other, but the way of their existence allows working class "to have a finger on the gate" and to block it if necessary.

My questions were very simple: what did the Left Front do for years of its existence to become closer to the labor movement and to direct it into the necessary direction? Nothing. PR was good, even magnificent. While there was no organization and what is saddest – it won’t appear. Unless anyone expects that next "action" on the capital boulevard will become the beginning of revolution?

Bourgeois left reformism, youth protest actions - is, undoubtedly, good and necessary thing. Sergey Udaltsov is a very good fellow, he has become similar to the Russian Cohn-Bendit, but this nice way will bring him the same result. While I am simply not ready to discuss idea of "super - mega left-wing party", a question if there’s life on Mars is also not interesting to me. It is much more important that there’s already no life in Russia.

What party is necessary? Probably we nevertheless need the communistic party as uncertainty of party position is inadmissible, it assumes double approaches and triple decisions. Communistic party is clear and definite.

What is party in general? The party is a political representation of a class or some big social group trying to solve problems of this class in political space. It’s not a service club and not lobbyist structure though it often happens that all ends with it. But theoretically the party should be strongly connected with its social group and not only the party should run and look for the one whose interests it could present on the next elections, but each representative of this class should know that this is his party.

The modern party should be properly organized - transparently and available to any. The person should know that his voice will be heard in the party, what private soldier it wouldn't be. The modern system of mass communications is arranged in such a way that there’s nothing technically impossible in it. There would be desire and understanding.

Proceeding from it it’s clear - the communist party can't be small. Its size should correspond to possibilities to express interests of big social group. All small communistic organizations should finally realize that too small size is absolutely invincible obstacle for execution of their main function - class representations. While the Communist Party can't be also too big as gaining of the weight deduces party organism out of limits of interests of a certain class – it already happened so with 18-million CPSU inside of which the anti-communistic kernel led by Yeltsins-sobchaks ripened, "super - mega party" fell into pieces and the working class was, in fact, left to its purchase. You know what followed, there’s no need to continue.

By and large the CPRF should become such party, but 20-year practice of this structure shows that it’s far from interests of the working much strongly, than from interests of the Kremlin, corrupted bureaucracy and upper bourgeoisie related to it – it already has own interests which are very different from the interests of the class it formally represents. No strike organized by the CPRF, none worker not only as a part of parliamentary fraction, but also in the governing bodies of the party for 20 years - it is possible to speak long about signs of complete bourgeois and bureaucratic regeneration of the CPRF.

But I will bring only one, fresh and not worn out example. Both left and not so left organizations took very active part in preservation of Khimki Forest up to its complete destruction. Now Tsagovsky Forest under Zhukovsky is next, there very active role is played by one of the heads of the Left Front Alexey Sakhnin. All this is good and very correct.

Not very correct was support from the part of Sergey Udaltsov (with active participation of Sakhnin) of Gennady Zyuganov on presidential elections - all understood perfectly well that Zyuganov went on elections the 5th time, he did it only for creation of trappings of power and had no chances even to pass into the second round. But instead of exposing of fictitious essence of those pseudo-elections, the management of the Left Front joined the campaign, in fact, into legitimizations of future inevitable "victory" of Putin. Thereby the Left Front started become strongly associated in society as "a group of support" of the CPRF - Udaltsov was simply publicly made an object of ridicule by aged partycrats with his claims on future succession of party leadership. Sometimes it was made simply in insulting and humiliating from.

In last days of his governorship an old friend of the CPRF (it’s not slip of the tongue - regional committee of the CPRF repeatedly publicly refused to nominate its candidates in the Moscow region and urged to vote for candidates from "United Russia" explaining it by good relations with the governor) general Gromov signs the order according to which 1,5 thousand of forest hectare in the most expensive (Rublevka) territory of the Moscow region - Odintsovo - change status and become the territory of city settlements. Cutting down of the forest under construction of cottages has already started. All companies which conduct works owns, it appears, the deputy from the CPRF fraction, the owner of Egoryevsky mechanical plant Sergey Sobko - a person close to Zyuganov – so close that even Gennady Andriyovych's grandson is the assistant of the deputy Sobko. All this is already stated by Oleg Mitvol in his claim into the prosecutor's office.

Now there’s such question: whether the Left Front will take part in protection of the Odintsovsky Forest against predators capitalists from the CPRF fraction? After all 1,5 thousand hectare is not a trifle, it’s many times larger than the Tsagovsky and Khimki Forests taken together...

Here I would like to pass to the most important - to the party program. If you say "party" – get question: whether there is any program?

After all every more or less competent political scientist is capable to write some adequate program – either left or right. The problem is different - all Russian parties have quite adequate programs, but there is no force capable to force them to carry out these programs. Their class or social base is the only such force, but it has no influence on parties. Roughly speaking parties are by themselves and citizens are alone.

Actually the party should be that image of future state system which social group represented by the party imagines - appeal of this party model is that real, not paper party program.

Here you are the question to the most orthodox members of the CPRF: whether you want for yourself and your children and grandsons to live in the state arranged like the party of Zyuganov? I am sure that the answer will be very negative.

Why do you offer then yourself to people?

Actually in ideal the competition of party programs is also competition of party structures. Bourgeoisie offers own party models, working class - own. Just party models - after all one can't forge everyday party life as the party program on paper.

Naturally, party life should be transparent to the most - if you build mass political party, not Masonic lodge, of course. Obviously decision not to allow press and guests to the congress or conference of the party should become such discrediting factor that none party bureaucracy can go on it. Party documents and party archives should be accessible. There should be party forums and social networks. There should be open daily dialogue of the party management of all levels with party mass and non-party citizens. Practice of "broadcastings" and "revelations" like "I said and we agreed” is hopeless anachronism of last era.

Well and the last - about leaders. Let's come at last to obvious conclusion – epoch of party leaders left in the XX century. Who is the leader of the Republican Party of the USA? In the Democratic party Obama is the leader only due to the fact that is elected the president – he will cease to be the president and will cease to be the leader. While someone could say that there are no such parties as the Republican and Democratic? Let's look at the best practices, as Bolsheviks took the best of the American economy and industry in the 20-30s years, the same way now we should take example from the strongest and most effective bourgeois democracy of the West. There’s nothing shameful in it, as long as we, communists, lost our 70-year experience.

Political parties of the West in the political space represent first of all large social groups and represent no leaders at all. Only in Putin's Russia "the national leader" heading "party of crooks and thieves" without even being its member is possible. Unless our task is to replace Putin with someone good, let it even be Sergey Udaltsov? And their "party of crooks and thieves" with ours, in the long term – similar one?

No, our task is to create by personal example (personal example - a keyword, own example is the core of Sergey Udaltsov's success) such image of the future for the country that the vast majority of citizens agree with it - and further to realize this very project, not to deceive the voter and to fill up our pockets, bank accounts and so on.

How it can be done? Only having created mass party, capable to have own program, to have own image of the future – the one which we ourselves would like to live in.

Читайте также:
In other::