Re: On John Percy/democratic centralism

[MARIPOWER716@xxxxxxx]

>1.Binary scheme of democracy and centralism

a correct reading of LeninÂfs work makes clear that Lenin never made a
binary scheme of democracy and centralism. Lenin speaks about centralization
of leadership by the party, decentralization of responsibility to the local
sections, and obligation of regular reporting and publicizing within the
party as condition to realize them, and centralization of secret function
and specification other functions of movement. as for democracy-inner-party
democracy, he regards it as a condition to realize centralization of
leadership and decentralization of responsibility to local sections, in
other words, as a historical concrete or a variable form.
When we are going to speak something about centralism, it is necessary to
make clear what is to be centralized. Without making this point clear, a
ÂgwordÂh of centralization of power can be made to work by itself, and
directly applied to the bureaucratic organization and system of order and
command. That brings about an unnecessary binary opposing democracy against
centralism and individual against organization and the scheme comes to sway
its power.
What is to be centralized is leadership pf the Party. The greatest possible
centralization is necessary for ideological and practical leadership of all
the sort of movements of proletariat. At the same time the greatest possible
decentralization is necessary for the responsibility to the local sections
in order to keep the leadership of the party and decentralization of
responsibility to the local sections may be compared to both sides of a
medal.
>From the viewpoint of Stalinism, the content of centralization of power is
not considered as a pair of centralization of leadership and
decentralization of responsibility, but only centralization of leadership
has been put forward. Centralism is considered only as Âg command from aboveÂh
, and democracy becomes a mere means in pursuit of this.<
 
 
Comment
 
How one remains organized expresses the environment, purpose and 
character/intellectual factors of the people who are organized and why they are 
being 
organized. At the end of the day the organization of any group for any purpose 
must have a way to exist as a distinct thing and realize its purpose or goal.  
Democratic Centralism as a theoretical postulate has no real meaning other than 
democracy and central authority. Democracy means the unfettered right to 
contribute. A complex of factors governs the quantitative and qualitative 
dimensions of ones contribution. The question becomes âwhat authority is 
being 
centralized?â To answer âthe leadersâ makes no sense because the members 
elect the 
leaders. 
 
An Internet form such as Marxline is organized different from say a military 
formation. On Marxline democracy means the protected rights of all 
participants to contribute within the boundary of policy describing the 
framework of 
operations.  The framework of operation in this meaning is called policy. One 
cannot join Marxline and contribute articles if ones point of view is that of a 
fascist. One is not free to advocate murder, kidnapping, robbery or rape. The 
general policy is to enforce a certain framework and limit to misbehaving. This 
framework of misbehaving generally involves several warnings or no warning 
depending on the degree of violating the general policy. 
 
One cannot contribute to Marxline without having the proper âtext 
transmittingâcapability.  One has to sign up to be a member of the discussion 
group. 
Policy operates within an infrastructure that is definable. The infrastructure 
is 
all the factors that makes this specific form of communications and exchange 
possible and Marxline specificity. That is to say Marxline is by definition a 
non-industrial form of organization of associates. The associates are defined 
on the basis of socialism and socialist theory â generally speaking, up to 
and 
including âprogressiveâ left wing policy. All these categories are subject 
to 
individual and collective determination. 
 
In the last instance centralism all ways mean that policy is binding on all 
members. A system of transmitting information is a condition of existence for 
every organization. The form of transmitting information depends on the 
existing infrastructure and the âgravityâ of legality. Generally speaking, 
most 
communist literature â 99%, is still legal and most information can be sent 
on 
open lines. 
 
On Marxline the moderator enforces policy.  The moderator is not the 
leadership but enforces the policy. The moderator is not akin to the police but 
rather 
an administrator. What is being administered and enforced is policy. In 
theory â and to a degree real life, a communist organization is an 
organization of 
leaders who join â are recruited, on the basis of adhering to the group 
policy 
and program. 
 
There is no such thing as democracy or centralism in the abstract as a method 
of operations within a communist group. Lenin's coining of the term 
democratic centralism and its application occurred under vastly different 
conditions 
that what we face. Democratic centralism under Mr. Stalin and its application 
occurred under vastly different conditions than what Lenin faced. Generally 
speaking the democratic socialist have not a clue as to the different between 
the 
Soviet State, Government, party and the system of organizations that 
constituted the dictatorship of the proletariat. 
 
I find it remarkable and not amusing that the communist in the industrial 
sector hardly ever understand centralism to mean centralized leadership but 
rather binding policy. Here there is a fundamental difference between the 
proletarian Marxist and the democratic socialist, who for reasons never 
understood by 
myself consider âusâ dictatorial. 
 
It is true that my understanding of the theory of democratic centralism is 
witnessed as actual organization experience in the industrial sector. A party 
or 
communist organization has administrators not âcentralized leaders.â The 
central authority refers to the administrators.  Administrators are not 
necessarily elected and ensure that the infrastructure base of policy remains 
in force 
although it is the responsibility of every organized body to enforce policy. 
 
Interestingly the âdemocratic socialistâ tends to understand centralism as 
centralized leadership. If I agree to join a communist group it does not mean 
that I take orders âfrom leadersâ but rather that I carry out the program, 
which is âvictory to the workers in their current struggle.â It also means 
that 
I carry out the policy, which means paying dues, selling the party literature 
and press and recruit people on the basis of the struggle they are engaged in. 
Generally speaking this is what democratic centralism meant for Lenin. The 
conditions under which this democratic centralism was implemented varied in 
Russian history. 
 
The bottom line is that anyone that tries to apply the principles that ensure 
the unfettered contributions of the individual within the framework of policy 
on an industrial basis or according to industrial logic will find them self 
in a blind alley. 
 
In terms of party discussions centralism means after the policy and 
discussion has taken place and been decided upon one is not free to reopen the 
discussion outside of preparation for a Convention or Congress or what ever 
constitutes the convening governing body. All organization principles are 
subject to 
human will, mishaps, bad judgments and assault by police agents and rascals. 

Rules are also binding on all members. For example one of the rules we 
enforced was that no one could raise in public form a comrades financial status 
because it is no ones business. I distinctly remember running afoul of this 
rule 
and ended up in big trouble. There are other rules which have very little to do 
with democratic centralism like being on time to meetings and not âover 
meetingâ â meeting longer than an hour generally speaking and twice a 
month. 
 
In terms of faction and their existence that is a policy decided by the 
individuals that make up the group. Personally, I have always voted against 
allowing factions to exist. A faction does not mean a group within an 
organization 
with a different opinion. A faction means a group within the organization that 
organizes itself into a distinct entity, with a different program, policy, 
internal administrative apparatus and separate literature production. A faction 
means an organization within an organization and not a group of people who have 
a different opinion. 

In fact there is no organization of earth where people do not have a 
different opinion. 
 
 
Melvin P.