The most fundamental victory the bourgeoisie enjoyed throughout their dominance as a class, and their socio-economic transformation of modern society was not that against communism or even against the idea of communism; their victory runs much deeper into the human soul than the theoretical discussion of the practicalities on the implementation of a socialist or a communist model of administration or the economic basis found in capitalist society that determines the need for a revolutionary transformation of society.
In truth, if the drive to dream of an alternate world is no longer there, the philosophical, political and economic arguments for such a change will remain and continue to exist detached from the individual, only on some theoretical level regardless the individual’s level of inflicted oppression and misery. This is their triumph; the striping of dreaming a different tomorrow and the idea of change from the soul of the oppressed; to the level that the power to change and shape society belongs solely to a ruling class, depriving the oppressed the ability to produce culture as a political entity. Indeed, what characterizes a class is not its economic relation to the productive forces in society, but its ability to produce culture; recognize itself as an entity that through its collective conditions of socio-economic existence can produce the theoretical basis for the political and economic shaping of its world. Revolution is merely a historical extension of this constant cultural production by the working class as a need to smash through all that reacts and opposes its vision of a different tomorrow. Through this process it will eliminate every aspect of reformism that will be thrown in its way to blind it from continuing the road to revolution and every concession that will be handed to slow it down; and the achievement of a revolutionary consciousness is revealed as the path that an individual undertakes from realizing himself as a worker, belonging to a class, with the historic task of democratizing society to a historically unprecedented level.
Today the modern worker does not acknowledge himself as a worker to start with. Gradually detaching and disassociating himself from everything his class has produced in the past, either that be in the form of trade union organizations, political parties or political philosophy, the modern worker has now come to see all these class achievements as extensions of the bourgeois state, the bourgeoisie and their interests in general. Naturally feeling repelled, he chooses to live outside his past, his culture and effectively his class, descending to modern slavery; belonging to nothing, owing nothing being nothing. A modern slave that is, with extended liberties and privileges depending on the ruling class’ needs, equipped with the illusion of democracy and freedom, politically handicapped, only capable of distraction and rebellion rather than construction and revolution; for revolution is the outmost act of consciousness and awareness of who you are and what future you want to be part of. It is a burst of ultimate will and necessity when the consciousness is full of want and sense of history expressed through the cultural maturity of a class ready to push society into a different era.
Yet, the present condition of the modern worker’s existence is neither part of a historical accident nor the logical historical development of the working class. The working class has historically been dependent on its most progressive elements to provide guidance and through trial and error educate and contribute into the development and production of working class culture. Enforcing the working class’ presence in all aspects of the bourgeois state pushing the state to the limits of its ability to provide a humane society and through that exposing the reality and the nature of class oppression and antagonism and the need for revolutionary politics; envisaging a tomorrow, dreaming a future, planning the construction of a new world. Marxist, socialists, communists; today they dream alone, standing apart; and from afar they shout silent words that have no meaning and never reach the workers’ ears, hearts and consciousness. For they were the first to push the working class to new levels of awareness and struggle, but also the first to convince the workers to abandon all they have achieved and produced for the sake of sectarian adventurism and theoretical elitism and purity. From Marx’s economic determinism to the sectarianism of Lenin’s April thesis to the opportunism of Trotsky’s entryism, Marxism instead of progressing alongside, dialectically, shaping and being shaped by the class struggle, it has built immense theoretical walls, impenetrable by the workers, shielding these modern high priests of the working class from having to face theoretical and material criticism; through this, constantly inheriting the sins and failures of the past and constantly building theoretical barriers to conceal them from the workers. For, the revolutionary must always come out of any situation unscathed and politically undamaged; and so, the lack of the development of the class struggle, is always due to the lack of historical socio-economic conditions, or the political un-readiness or even failure of the working class to rise to the occasion. Appalled, by such realisation, the revolutionary withdraws even more organizationally and theoretically, as if trying to become insulated from the spreading of a contagious disease, rewrites history and becomes entrenched in a constant inward search for even more purity, eventually becoming detested by everything that is not, forcing a gap between the material reality the working class exists in and the theoretical understanding of it. Through this, revolution, socialism, a different tomorrow, becomes by the revolutionary possibilities that can only stem from the survival, continuation and strengthening of these ‘pure’ organizational structures, resulting to the formation of a new political entity, a bureaucracy that will put as a theoretical and material priority the guaranteeing of its survival. Not for the sake of selfish material interests, but precisely because the historic material interests of a class and a society is linked to its existence. Determinism, sectarianism, opportunism, Stalinism all elements that Marxism has yet to shed, inherited from generation to generation in disguise in one or another theoretical form.
With immense political gravitational pull, Marxists in their unwillingness to accept Marxism’s inadequacies, have achieved the workers’ detachment from their class, their history and culture, allowing the theoretical gap to be filled by petty bourgeois ideology and the bourgeois state to move in and assimilate all institutions that once allowed the working class to claim a presence and a say in bourgeois society, and through that presence feeling capable of looking ahead, thinking what next, dreaming of a different world. It is, because of this lack of presence, the bourgeoisie, even in these times of crisis feel more certain of their world in a more arrogant way than ever before; conspicuously planning their next inhumane actions shameless but more importantly fearless of any social and political consequences that may come, that would have come in the past. Because of this, this crisis is a bourgeois victory; for they shout “well, what else have you got”. What a great calling and an opportunity handed down by the oppressors to the oppressed. A historic irony that exists as the driving force of our society; staring us in the eyes, griping our hearts with force, compelling us to either address it or perish; what else? Everything that has occurred, occurred in the manner that was supposed too; everything that lies ahead exists in infinite possibilities as long as we exist as true revolutionaries with no theoretical and organizational boundaries.