Group of Proletarian Revolutionaries - Collectivists
Principles of GPRC*
We, Group of Proletarian Revolutionaries Collectivists, stand on next positions:
GPRC directs its efforts to unification of proletarian revolutionaries worldwide in one party. Unification can’t be reached by means of such ideological compromises which preserve an opening for opportunist tacticism; but splits between revolutionaries for theoretical differences, which hasn’t as consequence deviations from revolutionary proletarian political course, are not admissible. Obviously, real party of proletariat can be organized and developed only in conditions of rise of mass activity of our class. But already today it is not only possible, but necessary to create germ of such party.
After WW-2 rise of capitalism, which had created scientific-technical revolution, already exhaust itself. Monopolistic capitalism, as before WW-2, entered into a phase of intensified putrefaction. Third imperialist re-division of the world is near. New epoch of wars and revolutions is beginning
PROLETARIAN REVOLUTIONARIES OF THE WORLD, UNITE!.
The questions of Lotta comunista to GPRC.
Problem of labor activity.
Do you agree with position of Lenin in question of "labor aristocracy" (from article "Karl Marx")?
1. - "Imperialism, highest stage of capitalism", - "Note-books about imperialism".
2.2. In which case bourgeois states are imperialist or not imperialist? Are "second-rank" bourgeois states imperialist?
2.3. Do you have some remarks about Lenin`s "Note-books about imperialism"?
2. - "The Infantile disorder of left-wing in communism".
The answers of GPRC on questions of Lotta comunista
1. - The place of man in society is determined first of all by his place in a historically defined system of social production, including the system of relations of management over it and the system of property over productive forces. The level of income has only secondary significance relative to this place. Because it we define labor aristocracy as "labor lieutenants of bourgeoisie", the upper stratum of the proletariat, a layer, which participates in management over rank-and-file workers. Hence this layer is transitional group between proletariat itself and bourgeoisie, petty bourgeoisie and other "middle classes" of capitalist society. It is a mistake to think, every well-paid worker is part of labor aristocracy and participant in exploitation of proletariat. We consider necessary to wage intensive propaganda and agitation as much among most oppressed and miserable layers of proletariat as among high-qualified rank-and-file workers (last usually is most important in period of primary accumulation of cadres)
We recognise all essential positions of Lenin’s article "Karl Marx", but we have to add to it something:
a) Marxist theory of knowledge is not only materialist, but historically-materialist.
b) Relations of management over production, distribution, exchange and consumption are as such an element of production relations system, only from which is possible to understand all system.
c) Necessary condition of socialist revolution is level of development of productive forces, where technical means, which do possible for huge masses of rank-and-file workers to decide collectively, appear, and because of it, the overcoming of the division of labor into managerial and executive is possible; today such a level generally is reached by productive forces of mankind, which have generated such technical means – computers and computer systems.
d) It is necessary to develop consequently marxist-leninist theory of nation and to recognise that an organising and consolidating kernel of such a community as a nation always is bourgeoisie or its substitute – bureaucracy. Hence today, when all exploiting classes have lost any progressive role, slogan "right of nations to self-determination" had become outmoded. It is necessary to change it by slogan "right of self-determination of the exploited population of territories with leading role of class self-organised proletarians.
e) Class essence of political organisation, its place in political spectre (for example, "right" or "left") isn’t determined by subjective goals and strivings of its members, but by objective, indepedent from consciousness of its members relation to existing (for example, bourgeois) state machinery. For instance, objective relation of post-CPSU "red-flag’s" political organisations to state machinery of republics of ex-USSR makes them bourgeois organisations in their class essence; so, majority of such organisations in Russia, that confesses, apologises and motivates imperialist expansion of Russian capital by slogan of "resurrection of USSR", are ultra-right, and part of them, oriented mainly on extra-parliamentary struggle, are fascist organisations. Any cooperation with them, as with another bourgeois (i. e. objectively intent on preserving and strengthening of bourgeois state) political organisations, is impossible; cooperation with individual proletarians, who are members of these organisations, must have the goal of splitting these proletarians from such organisations.
f) Today, when representative organs of bourgeois state are totally integrated in its machinery and had transformed in a perfect sui generis machine for transformation of any activity inside them for profit of bourgeoisie, proletarian revolutionaries must refuse participation in elections and refuse to work in such organs. All "advantages" that the workers` movement, as it seems, gets from participation in such elections and from pushing forward "its" deputies in bourgeois representative organs, in the best case are temporary, in most cases such "advantages" are illusory and always (today) have as a consequence the strengthening of political power of bourgeoisie over proletariat.
g) Today necessary attributes of proletarian-revolutionary political position are: recognition of bourgeois character of modern trade-unions, as official, as any mass "alternative"; negation of possibility to reconquer and reform them; recognition as goal of work in trade-unions self-organisation of workers by mean of proletarian party and liberation of them from control of trade-union apparatus; recognition of subordinate character of trade-union work in relation to party work.
2.1. We are in agreement with Lenin`s definition of imperialism and with all important conclusions from it. Particularly, we are agree with Lenin`s conception of division of world and with his thesis that in time of imperialism export of capital receives outweighing significance in economics in relation with export of goods.
2.2. Because today the whole world is Imperialist, the existence of any bourgeois state that isn`t imperialist (even potentially) in some degree, is impossible. Even bourgeois state of partially developed and underdeveloped countries are at the same time dependent from leading imperialist states and imperialist states themselves.
Today, when capitalism had lost any progressive character, we haven`t any reason to support any bourgeois state in any conflict between them. Revolutionary defeatism on all sides and struggle for transformation of imperialist war into civil war is only position of proletarian revolutionaries in such conflicts. Support of national-liberation movements, docile tools of bourgeoisie under strict control of bourgeoisie is impossible for us. We can support petty-bourgeois national-liberation movements only limitedly, solely in exceptional cases, only in the degree in which they destroy any – including its own nationally-exploiter’s state-hood.
2.3. Some exerpts, made by N. K. Krupskaya from J. A. Hobson "Imperialism" (note-book "kappa" – V. I. Lenin, Complete Collection of Works, 5th edition, pp. 392, 396, 397, 407, 412 – 413) and Lenin’s commentaries to these excerpts give formal reasons for wrong conclusions which today some people made sometimes: according these conclusions, a majority of proletariat in high-developed imperialist states belongs to a "labor aristocracy" and participates, with its national bourgeoisies, in exploitation of the peoples of the middle- and low-developed countries. But rank-and-file proletarians, however well their work can be paid, can’t participate in exploitation of anybody and they aren’t members of a "labor aristocracy" because they don`t participate in management over any economic practice (see point 1.1): an exploiter is always one who autoritarily manages over some economic practice.
3.1. We are agree with Lenin in his critique of economist, spontaneist and anti-party illusions of German-Dutch Left Communists. But we think that Lenin and majority of early Comintern had did mistake in question of elections, mistake, which had tragic consequences for communist movement. Already in beginning of 20th century proletarian revolutionaries only in exceptional cases (for example, in autocratic Russia, where parliament was not yet totally integrated in state machinery and yet had not the time to become the most effective machine for transformation of workers` deputies and organisations in servants of bourgeoisie) could participate in elections, work in parliament and remain themselves in this process; after World War One the possibility of such exceptions had practically reduced to zero and today isn`t increase (and in sight future hardly will increase in any coin of world).
3.2, 3.3. We think that workers` movement does not mean opportunist, bourgeois trade unions and political parties, but is an active part of proletarians, who wages struggle against capital. Exactly in this active part of proletariat – first of all of industrial proletariat – we must win a majority in order to proletarian party, which is organising this majority, can take power.
* 450106, a/ya 192, Ufa, Bashkortostan, Russia
430023, a/ya 21, Saransk, Mordovia, Russia