Saturday, June 6, 2009


tendencies but at least our concepts are clear and lay down
precise criteria. This cannot be said of most pro-revolutionaries,
who get extremely vague when discussing how such-and-such of
their gestures will engage with, let alone overthrow, present
conditions. We would, perhaps, place more trust in pro-
revolutionaries and thus in a human-based, participatory
revolution, if it were not for the lamentable history of ideas-led
revolutions. Pro-revolutionary practice is synonymous with rivalry,
personal ambition, corruption, stupidity and failure. If the
supporters of these groups did not continue to predict imminent
revolution because of what they are doing and did not adopt a
slavishly affirmative attitude towards their groups, and if they could
maintain a skeptical and critical perspective then the meaning of
themselves might amount to more than the feeble attempts to
alleviate their personal experience of alienation by universalizing
their rebellions and resentments. It is our lot to be bequeathed a
legacy of bad acts, which forecloses the possibility of all acts. It is
our personal experience that 'revolutionaries', as often as not,
behave very badly in ethical terms (the surrendering of the Mayday
2001 crowd to the police in London being the latest example of
losses and defeats incurred through ridiculous stunts), as if their
heightened political consciousness gives them the right to neglect
ordinary decency; this degeneracy is characteristic as much of
anarchists as Trotskyites, anybody in fact, who thinks they have
consciousness and cannot bring themselves to reflect critically
upon it. So there it is, revolution cannot be left to 'conscious'
human actions and our only hope lies in the structural conflict of
social forces created by capitalism/the economy - again, the blind
mole tunneling in the dark.

Note, aside, interjection: We do not pretend articulacy in any
specialized language, our position is developed through our
personal experience. We, as MD, are not interested in explaining
capitalism as a totality of processes and forces, which we feel is
beyond our capabilities, we are content to describe capitalism as
we experience it directly. This is probably the source of our
'difference' to other pro-revolutionary groups. For example, the
theoretical conception of the working class in pro-conscious and
political terms by many pro-revolutionaries is unacceptable to us,
and we fail to see the purpose in these fantastical conjectures if

No comments:

Post a Comment