AUT: Mid-year Report on the work of Ben Seattle (Proletarism / gift economy of Burning Man / pof-200 list )

["Ben Seattle" <left-transparency@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi to everyone on the aut-op-sy list,

It has been several months since I posted here.

Twice a year I send out a report on the status of my political
work.  These reports not only sum up my work -- but also provide
a concrete example of the practical application of transparent
"bottom-up" methods for the development of a new kind of
revolutionary organization.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Contents:
----------
(1) Proletarism is anti-revisionist Marxism for the 21st century
(2) Desert Goddesses Saturate Emergent Community with Eye-Candy
(3) "Anarcho-Leninist Debate on the State" winds down ...
(4) The pof-200 email list reveals its limitations

Appendix 1 -- Full text of my article on Proletarism
Appendix 2 -- Introduction to my article on Burning Man
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Please note: I am sending this report out to several email lists.
I am subscribed to some of these lists in such a way that I do
not receive all of the message traffic.  I am therefore asking
that anyone who wants a response from me to remember to place my
email address on the "cc" line of their reply -- that way I will
have an opportunity to see the reply.

------------------------------------------------------------
1. Proletarism is anti-revisionist Marxism for the 21st century
------------------------------------------------------------

The most important article I have written recently argues that
the time has come for militant activists worldwide to support the
proposal by Russian activists to call the anti-revisionist
communist movement the movement for "proletarism".  The precedent
is Lenin's proposal, in 1914, for a decisive break with the
treachery of the 2nd International (which supported the mutual
slaughter of worker by worker known as the first world war).
Lenin argued that a decisive break required a change in the name
of the movement from "social democracy" to "communism".  Our
Russian comrades argue today that the treachery of the
"communist" leadership in the former Soviet Union is fully
comparable, in every way, with the betrayal of 1914.

We must recognize, of course, that innumerable proprosals have
been made in the past decades for a break from communism in the
rightward direction (ie: in the direction of social-democracy:
reformism).  And anarchist-minded activists have also, all along,
insisted that the goal of a workers' state can only lead to
repression.  However the proposal from our Russian comrades is
different from both of these bankrupt paths.

Our Russian comrades have proposed a break with "communism" from
the left--not from the right.  And they are in favor (as am I) of
recognizing the need for the rule of the working class (ie: the
"dictatorship of the proletariat") in the period following the
overthrow of bourgeois rule.  Our Russian comrades, however,
believe it is necessary to make a clear distinction between the
rule of an organization which claims to represent the interests
of the working class -- and the rule of the working class, as a
class, itself.  The later has never really existed in anything
more than a fleeting, embryonic sense.

Without a goal that is clear and theoretically accurate, militant
activists will never be able to create a movement that represents
the marriage of our present-day tasks and our future goals.  And
until we can make a clear distinction between the cynical
distortions of marxism that were used in the former Soviet Union
to justify the repression of the independent political life of
the working class -- and the feudal-style rule of a corrupt
ruling class -- our movement will never be deserving of the
respect and attention of the working class.

My article is short (less than 1600 words) and was written to be
understandable to readers who may be as young as 14 and who may
have very little knowledge of revolutionary history.  The full
text of the article can be seen (below) in appendix 1.  The
article, together with photos, a timeline chart of history and an
online forum is posted at: http://struggle.net/proletarism )

------------------------------------------------------------
2. Desert Goddesses Saturate Emergent Community with Eye-Candy
------------------------------------------------------------

> A community of artists opens a window
> into a human future based on a gift economy and
> the emergence of a deeper form of beauty and sexuality

My essay on culture (and humanity's future gift economy) is now
complete and on the web.  It can be found, together with photos
and an online forum (where you can post public comments or
questions) at:

    http://struggle.net/ben/2004/burningman.htm

It has been my conviction for many years that the politics of the
new world which we are all struggling to create have a deep and
profound _connection_ to the deepest needs of members of our
class who find themselves struggling, at a personal level,
against the inner frustrations and turmoil which we all feel when
confronted with a world which systematically seeks to deny us
consciousness or any kind of living relationship to an authentic
community.

I have understood that there must be ways to make vivid this
connection in powerful, living ways.  I felt this connection
myself, as a young boy when I watched the movie "Spartacus".
Recently, I saw an opportunity to help illustrate this connection
during my vacation at an arts festival that is known to the world
as "Burning Man".  I may have, in this article, found a way to
help demonstrate that the theory, politics and economics of
humanity's future gift economy are not only cool and exciting --
they are infinitely sexy.

Below (see appendix 2) is the introduction to my essay.

------------------------------------------------------------
3. "Anarcho-Leninist Debate on the State" winds down ...
------------------------------------------------------------

In March of this year I posted my third and final installment of
the anarcho-leninist debate on the state.  This debate was
designed to be a calm, serious and scientific discussion of the
nature of society following the overthrow of bourgeois rule.

My final installment is titled "The World for which We Fight" and
it includes a section titled "The Laws of Commodity Production
for Dummies".

I do not claim to be some kind of expert on the laws of commodity
production.  However I came to the conclusion that a short,
readable and relatively easy-to-understand discussion of these
laws was necessary based on my experience in the debate and my
experience discussing with anarchist-minded activists the need
for a state machine during the period following the overthrow of
bourgeois rule.  Such a state machine, transparent and controlled
by the working class, would make possible the gradual transition
from an economy based on commodity production (and the
circulation of capital) to a gift economy.

The Laws of Commodity Production for Dummies can be found at:
http://struggle.net/ALDS/LOCP.htm

Unfortunately, my anarchist-minded debating partner, Daniel,
appears to have collapsed.  No one has heard from him and there
is no indication that he will be able to write his third and
final installment.  I have set a deadline for the end of this
year.  If he is unable to either reply (or indicate that he is
seriously working on a reply) by then I have made clear that I
will declare victory in the debate.  Many anarchist-minded
activists believe that it will be easy to defeat a "Leninist" in
debate.  However I believe that when Daniel examined my arguments
he discovered that these arguments are very much different from
the kind of "cargo-cult Leninist" arguments that he was
expecting -- and this is the fundamental reason that Daniel has,
unfortunately, been reduced to silence.

If any anarchist-minded activists are reading this posting of
mine -- I hope that you will take a look at my concluding
article: "The World for which We Fight" (online at:
http://struggle.net/ALDS/part_7.htm ).  This article sums up all
of my previous installments as well as the entire debate.  At
this point the anarchist side (of the most serious scientific
debate on the nature of post-bourgeois rule on the internet) has
apparently collapsed.  The need for calm and principled anarchist
response, written by an activist of broad knowledge and high
integrity, will eventually make itself felt.

------------------------------------------------------------
4. The pof-200 email list reveals its limitations
------------------------------------------------------------

I have over the years had many people write to me and express
interest in my work.  In order to facilitate both (a) discussion
and (b) the development of a community focused on building a
movement for the overthrow of bourgeois rule -- I have encouraged
people to join the pof-200 email list, which I created.

This list now includes nearly 70 subscribers.  That is the good
news.  The bad news is that many of these subscribers are,
essentially, bored teenagers who have no practical experience as
political activists and little sense of commitment to any higher
goal than being entertained.

It is possible that my assessment is overly harsh.  However it
remains to be seen if the pof-200 list can play a real role in
the development of an authentic community focused on the
overthrow of bourgeois rule.  In order to maintain an acceptable
signal-to-noise ratio and a serious focus -- it has already
become necessary to ask everyone to limit their posting to once
per week.

At this time the pof-200 list is very short of activists who are
determined to change the world and who have a relatively clear
sense of the kind of things which need to be done.  If you, dear
reader, consider yourself such an activist, then send email to:
pof-200-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx .  We need you.  (Note: we need
only serious people -- who understand how to treat other
subscribers with respect -- and as comrades.)

The good news is that a wiki has been created for the use of the
community (see http://MediaWeapon.com ) and, if I have time to
demonstrate the potential of such a tool as this wiki, the list
and the community which may gradually be emerging around it, may
develop in seriousness and political maturity.

I have been making weekly (sometimes only monthly) posts to the
pof-200 list in which I comment on the list activity from the
perspective of the attitudes and tasks which are essential for
the development of a revolutionary movement which is deserving of
the respect of the working class.  My weekly (or monthly) posts
can be seen on the public archives of the pof-200 list (along
with posts by everyone else) as well as the public archives of my
theorist list (which is reserved for posts by me) at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theorist/messages .  Anyone can
receive posts from the theorist list (average volume is one to
four posts per month) by sending email to:
theorist-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

And, finally, anyone interested in keeping up with my work in a
more minimal way is invited to subscribe to my pof-100 list (two
emails per year only: my annual and mid-year reports) by sending
email to: pof-100-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Sincerely and with revolutionary regards,
Ben Seattle
----//-// November 13, 2004
http://struggle.net/Ben (my elists / theory / infrastructure)

Want to keep updated about my work?
Send email to: pof-100-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
No Spam!--Just 2 emails a year to keep you updated

============================================================
Appendix 1 -- full text of:
Proletarism is anti-revisionist Marxism for the 21st century
============================================================

(Here is the full text of my article.  It can be found at:
http://struggle.net/proletarism together with photos,
charts and an online forum where you can post public comments or
ask questions )

>From the Russian workers' movement (with experience in
underground organizing under the rule of Brezhnev's "communists"
and militant strikes under the rule of Yeltsin's "democrats") has
come a proposal to recognize, with a new name, a decisive break
with the treachery of the "communist" leadership -- which
enslaved the working class and betrayed the revolutionary
movement in a way comparable to the great betrayal of 1914.

------------------------------------------------------------
The great betrayal of 1914
------------------------------------------------------------

The original name of the communist movement (in the late 1800's
and early 1900's) was "social-democracy". The first
social-democratic parties were created with the help and advice
of Marx and Engels. But these parties were corrupted by
reformism -- and when World War I erupted in 1914, these parties
betrayed the working class, sided with their bourgeois
governments and urged workers to "defend the fatherland" and
shoot workers from other countries.

At that time, Lenin argued that the name "social-democracy" had
been hopelessly and permanently compromised -- and should be
abandoned  in order to avoid confusing workers. Lenin proposed
that the revolutionary movement should make use of the name
"communism" (which had been used earlier, in the mid 1800's). The
name "social-democracy" was left to the traitors who had become
obedient bourgeois lap dogs -- and today this term has become
synonymous with "reformism" (ie: the idea that the bourgeoisie
will allow the working class to come to power through a series of
gradual reforms).

------------------------------------------------------------
Suffocation of the revolution
led to the rule of a new exploiting class
------------------------------------------------------------

The degeneration of the Soviet Revolution took place in such a
way that great unclarity was created concerning what had happened
and why.   At the time of Lenin's incapacitation in 1922-23, the
Civil War and imperialist intervention (1918-1920) had shattered
the Soviet economy -- famine was widespread -- and martial law
prevailed.   A series of painful emergency measures had been
taken which included:

(1) the merger of the communist party and the state and
(2) the suppression of nearly all criticism
     of the ruling party/state.

These emergency measures were necessary at the time but were
intended to be temporary. However events were to lead in a
different direction.   At this time the rule of society by the
working class was more of a goal (10 or 20 years distant) than an
existing reality.

In order for the working class to effectively rule society as a
class it needs to have a political life which is independent from
the ruling state.   In practice this means that the workers need
the fundamental democratic rights of speech and independent
organization.   More than this, the rule of society by the
working class requires a clear distinction in principle between:

(a) workers' organizations (which have influence
     based on voluntary compliance) and
(b) the state apparatus (which has the power
     of coercion -- ie: force).

These necessary conditions for the class rule of the workers
could not be met in the extreme conditions of early 1920's Soviet
Russia without setting in motion a train of event which would
have quickly led to the restoration of bourgeois rule.   With a
functioning economy, running factories and electricity it would
have been possible for the Soviet revolution to lessen the
intense dissatisfaction of the peasantry and create conditions
for the rule of society by the working class.   But these things
would take 10 or 20 years to achieve.   And this much time did
not exist.   Under the considerable pressure which existed the
ruling party/state degenerated (probably in the late 1920's).

Without workers having the right to organize independently --
there was no powerful and effective force to oppose the
degeneration of the ruling party/state -- and a new exploiting
class emerged which ruled over the workers like feudal lords over
serfs.

The suffocation of the Soviet revolution resulted in a crisis of
theory which has persisted for many decades as working class
activists in all countries have struggled to confront the nature
of working class rule in the modern world.

------------------------------------------------------------
The crisis of theory has paralysed
the revolutionary workers' movement
------------------------------------------------------------

In the many decades since the suffocation of the Soviet
revolution there have been countless attempts by working class
activists and revolutionary leaders to sort out how it was that
Lenin's October 1917 revolution, once the shinning hope of all
oppressed humankind, degenerated into a permanent police state.
Without a clear understanding that the goal of the workers'
movement was something better than the emergence of a new ruling
class -- the revolutionary workers' movement was crippled -- and
has fallen into complete paralysis. What has remained of the
progressive movement has been dominated by a mixture of craven
reformism and squabbling sectarian cults.

Innumerable social-democratic (ie: reformist) trends have taken
advantage of this degeneration to urge activists to give up on
the idea of fundamental change -- and to instead enter into
demoralizing alliances with liberal institutions or with a
corrupt, bourgeois-controlled strata of trade union bureaucrats,
religious leaders, poverty pimps and progressive media
personalities.   Also popular has been an assortment of third
world nationalist political trends in which activists pin their
hopes on various third world dictators who have come into
conflict with western imperialism.

Many revolutionary (or would-be revolutionary) trends have also
attempted to confront the crisis created by the suffocation of
the October revolution.   Many Trotskyist trends emerged in the
late 1920's to offer their alternative to Stalinism.   The 1960's
witnessed the emergence of the Albanian-Maoist critique of
Krushevite revisionism.   And all along a number of anarchist or
left syndicalist trends have argued that everything would have
been fine if only the Bolsheviks had not suppressed their
enemies.

Many of these trends still exist today, often doing useful
revolutionary work -- but also often falling into the reformist
swamp or isolating themselves as sectarian cults (or both).
None of these trends have created the solid theoretical basis
(ie: breaking from the root of problem: the merger of the
party/state and lack of workers' democratic rights of speech and
organization) that would overcome the crisis of theory and allow
the revolutionary movement to unite around the clear goal of the
rule of the working class, as a class, in the context of modern
conditions.

And few of these trends have understood the immense potential of
the emerging revolution in communications which will allow
revolutionary activists to create electronic news services (and
other mass channels) that could effectively leverage the
contributions, comments, questions and criticisms of hundreds of
thousands of activists. Many of these trends are unable to make
effective use of elists and web-based forums because their
bankruptcy on the theoretical front has left them unable to
answer simple questions or reply to criticisms (ie: these trends
are afraid of political transparency).

------------------------------------------------------------
We need to work together for a decisive break
with the treachery of the past
------------------------------------------------------------

The workers' revolutionary movement today is without effective
leadership. There are, today, no revolutionary leaders with the
clarity of mind of Lenin. But revolutionary activists are making
use of the emerging revolution in communications to collaborate
and to coordinate our actions -- and to gradually overcome our
ignorance. And a number of us believe that the time has come to
make use of a new name to signal a clear and decisive break with
the treachery of the "communist" leaders who have betrayed the
working class -- just as a decisive break was made in 1914.

Many key events in the last few years (the collapse of Soviet
revisionism, the emergence of email and the web, the
politicization of hundreds of thousands as a result of US
imperialism's latest adventures in the Middle East) are creating
conditions for the re-emergence of a revolutionary mass movement
that commands the respect of serious militant activists
everywhere and is deserving of the attention and loyalty of the
working class.

The movement to liberate the working class and all humanity
from bourgeois rule will once again stand at the center
of the hearts and consciousness of progressive activists.

There is a need for a decisive break both from the treachery of
the "communist" leaders and the cluelessness of those trends on
the left that are mired in reformism and sectarianism. In order
for this break to serve the revolutionary movement it must be a
break, not from the right (as urged by craven reformists) but
from the left (to declare war on the bourgeoisie and all their
flunkies) -- in order to once again put the overthrow of
bourgeois rule on the agenda of hundreds of thousands of
activists worldwide.

The proposal from the workers' movement in Russia, where the
revolution was first and most decisively betrayed, for a new name
for the revolutionary workers' movement appears to me to be
consistent with the demands of our time.

The term "proletarism" helps to emphasize that the goal of the
revolutionary workers' movement is the rule of society by the
working class as a class -- rather than the rule of an
organization which claims to represent the interests of the
workers. Only this can lead to the transition to the ultimate
goal of a classless society with no state whatsoever.

Ben Seattle -- Aug 11, 2004

============================================================
Appendix 2 -- Introduction to my article on Burning Man:
Desert Goddesses Saturate Emergent Community with Eye-Candy
============================================================

> Burning Man 2004:
>           Desert Goddesses Saturate
>           Emergent Community with Eye-Candy
>
> A community of artists opens a window
> into a human future based on a gift economy and
> the emergence of a deeper form of beauty and sexuality
>
> We turned off the highway into Black Rock City and were
> greeted by a man wearing a cowboy hat, boots and nothing
> else. "Welcome to Burning Man", he said and gave us a few
> directions. As we drove past he pointed to me and, smiling,
> added "from this point forward seat belts are not required".
>
> ---------------------------------
> Welcome to the gift economy
> ---------------------------------
>
> The next thing I knew I was walking thru the desert,
> surrounded on all sides by nothing but burning sand. Out of
> the distance appeared the desert goddess. Maybe 19 or
> 20 years old, beautiful body, topless with pert breasts at
> which I struggled, without success, to avoid staring.
> The goddess caught my gaze. Embarrassed to be staring
> at her, I managed to say "Hi". Kindly, she looked into my
> eyes, walked directly toward me and informed me, with
> compassion and authority, that I looked very thirsty. A
> half quart water bottle, unopened, rested in my pocket.
> "I am desperately thirsty" I replied. I wasn't lying with
> my heart. Standing very close, she held her plastic water
> tube to my lips and I drank deeply.
>
> I had been welcomed to the gift economy.

The rest of this essay, together with photos and an online forum,
can be seen at:

    http://struggle.net/ben/2004/burningman.htm

























     --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---