workplaces, in the knowledge that we may also be listed to in
these situations, where rather than trying to install "consciousness"
we will provide, or suggest, concrete tactics and strategies.]
Echanges say that their "activity... eventually might serve others
as well", but they do not explore what this means in any real depth.
One reason why Echanges do not seem to explore this aspect of
their activity might be because the truth of what they must do, by
their own logic, is to actually go against most of the "revolutionary"
communist and anarchist milieu. The difference between
Echanges and the rest of the communist milieu is over the concept
of "consciousness", which Echanges almost completely reject. To
take the logic of their position into the arena of the communist
milieu, as an explicit argument, creates the risk of being totally
rejected by that milieu. To examine the concept of consciousness
in any depth leads to the equating of that concept with leadership
and organization of the working class by "revolutionary experts".
To go down this theoretical road leads to the realization that in an
important aspect there is little real difference between the projects
of anarchism and most of communism and their supposedly deadly
enemy, Leninism. If one is going to make this conclusion then one
is going to lose most of ones "friends" in the political milieu.
Echanges seem to have tried to avoid this, and, indeed, because
of this they have had some limited continuing respect amongst the
communist milieu down the years. [Monsieur Dupont have no wish
to be so circumspect.]