|
John: 1)Their political program and platform is not petty
bourgeois. They want
to implement a Soviet Union style command economy (or something more reformist) which certainly isn't in the interests of the Columbian bourgeoisie. George: Yeah! Sinn Fein/IRA said they wanted to implement a
programme that would lead to the achievement of thirty two county independent
Irish Republic. And look what they are doing now --begging to be let sit on a
Northern Ireland Executive that will perpetuate and reinforce petition.
John: 2)The class composition of the FARC/ELN is not bourgeoisie. George: This probable fact is neither here nor there. The
class composition of the NAZI party in Germany was not in general bourgeois yet
it represented the class interests of the German monopoly bourgeoisie.
John: The FARC is opposed by international and internal
capital, which
funds both the Columbian State and its rich landowners in their respective efforts to crush the FARC. George: Hitler was opposed by the British and American
capitalist class which means that for you he was a revolutionary commie.
John: I think the only way in which you are correct in saying that they are "petty bourgeois" is to the extent that the FARC (less so the ELN) represent the interests of peasants. However most revolutionary movements (which I am defining as popular class struggles directed against their own ruling class) have made extensive use of peasants, so I don't think this takes anything away from the ELN/FARC. George: But what are the interests of the peasants? There is
no real future for the peasants. To suggest that the class interests of the
peasants is being advanced by FARC is to say that FARC support the extinction of
the peasantry since the Colombian peasantry have no future and are ultimately
--like all peasantry-- doomed to extinction. Neither under capitalism nor
communism is there any future for the peasantry. Communal based farming means an
end to the peasantry. Consequently if the FARC are revolutionary then
rather than protecting the interests of the peasantry they are,
willy-nilly, seeking their extinction.
However since FARC are not revolutionary they are still
promoting their extinction by their essential support for the bourgeoisie. At
the moment they are engaged in peace talks with Pastrana which amounts to
seeking a price at which it is prepared to sell out the very peasants
whose interests according to you they represent.
By pretending to represent the interests of the Colombian
peasantry FARC are sowing illusions in the masses concerning the nature of
capitalist society. Their programme is ipso facto utopian in the sense
that they are claiming that they can achieve a society that is unachievable --a
society that sustains the existence of a peasantry. They are reactionary in the
sense that they seek a return to the past --since it only in the past that the
conditions for a burgeoning peasantry would have existed. By contrast
revolutionaries look to the future --the establishment of communal social
relations.
Either way they thereby promote the class interests of the
bourgeoisie since they sow and reinforce illusion in the masses. Such illusion
only serves to disarm the masses politically and ideologically and render them
vulnerable to defeat by the bourgeoisie. Consequently by assisting in the defeat
of the masses FARC's politics assist the bourgeoisie in its struggle
against the masses. This means, then, that FARC's politics are essentially
bourgeois. Whether FARC are aware of this or not is beside the point. FARC is
not necessarily consciously and intentionally deceiving the masses. Many of its
lading fiures may passionately believe that they are serving the interests of
the masses. Indeed the more passionate they are about such illusions the more
effective they may be in assisting the bourgeoisie in the political and
ideological disarmament of the working class.
Warm regards
George Pennefather Be free to check out our Communist Think-Tank web site
at
http://homepage.tinet.ie/~beprepared/ |