Council communism - an introduction

[Papa C.]

Council communism - an introduction

A short history and explanation of the ideas and practice of council communism.

Council communism was a radical left movement originating in Germany and the Netherlands in the 1920s. Today it continues as an important theoretical current within libertarian communism.

The central (and simple) argument of council communism, in stark contrast to both reformist social democrats and Leninists, is that the workers’ councils which spring up in workplaces and communities are the natural form of working class organisation. This view is obviously opposed to reformist or Leninist arguments which stress that the working class are incapable of doing anything by ourselves and need to rely on vanguard parties, ballot boxes or governments to sort out our problems.

Following from this, council communists argue that society and the economy should be managed by federations of workers’ councils, made up of delegates elected at workplaces and can be recalled at any moment by those who elected them. As such, council communists oppose bureaucratic state socialism. They also oppose the idea of a revolutionary party seizing power, believing that any social upheaval led by one these ‘revolutionary’ parties will just end up in a party dictatorship.

They also believe that the role of the revolutionary party is not to have a revolution for the working class, but just to agitate amongst the class, encouraging people to take control of their own struggles through the directly democratic institutions of workers’ councils.

It’s sometimes been thought that council communists have maintained an ‘outside and against’ position on bureaucratic reformist trade unions, seeing them as a break on workers’ militancy and believing that the leadership, who’s role is seen as little more than ‘cops with flat caps’, will always eventually sell out the membership. It is true that, historically at least, council communists have been anti-trade union. However, this has largely been due to the context in which council communists were writing. For instance, German council communists of the 1920s were fully aware of the German trade unions’ role in betraying the attempted workers’ revolution in 1918. However, in modern times, though keeping a very critical view of trade unions and their undemocratic nature, council communists generally believe that having a union is better for workers than not having one.

Council communists obviously also held a strong criticism of the ‘successful’ Russian revolution of 1917. Though they felt that originally it had a pro-working class nature about it, it ended up being a bourgeois revolution, with the new ‘communist’ leaders replacing the old feudal aristocracy with a state capitalist bureaucracy. The council communists hold that the Bolshevik Party just took over the role of individual capitalists rather then got rid of it.

The council communists emerged largely out of the German rank-and-file trade union movement, who opposed their unions and organised increasingly radical strikes towards the end of 1917 and the beginning of 1918. These formed into the Communist Workers’ Party of Germany (KAPD) whose hey-day was in the attempted German revolution of 1918-19. Similar tendencies developed within the workers’ movements of Italy, Bulgaria and the Netherlands. Council communist ideas have since been taken on by many libertarian communists around the world with groups like Socialisme ou Barbarie and the Situationist International being greatly influenced by them.

By libcom, 2005

[Papa C.]

This article was taken from libcom.org by the way - libcom.org/thought/council-communism-an-introduction

First of all, do comrades here think this fits in with the Republican Socialist ideal? Second, do you think the way this article is written can be a little hard for younger people or regular people to understand? I don't mean to say that people are simple or stupid, what I mean is, if you are trying to reach out to the entire population and maybe more, wouldn't it be wiser to write is in a much easier way to understand?

I would have to say that I would agree with this type of society, that is one made up of local councils, answerable and at the mercy of working people, that society is run democratically by the people. In fact, I'm not even sure that any councils would be nessecary in society. The working class should be able to organise themselves.

I've heard of Irish republicans leaving the likes of Sinn Fein only to join an Anarchist organisation. Is there really that much difference between left-republicans and anarchists? I suppose the only difference is that left-repubicans/ socialists believe in a transitional period. If the state was disolved tomorrow and the working class favoured a socialist/ communist alternative there would need to be some sort of transition wouldn't there?

Any thoughts here?

[Papa C.]

Wiki - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_communism

[Stallit 2 de Halfo]

There's a few anarchist-republicans knocking about. Cael from IR.net, and affiliated to RSF, describes, or described himself as an anarchist. And also you had Jack White who co-founded the ICA became an anarchist.

There was a guy Peter Urban who was a council communist and a member of the IRSP up until recent enough. Used to write for the starry plough.

So there's no shortage of "far left" republicans. Id be close enough to council communism myself.

I think all socialists favour a transitional period, and that includes anarchists. Drawing a definite line between Marxism and Anarchism is probably not possible, seeing as the lines between the two are vague (with the likes of council communism in between).

Id agree with you btw that the article is abit 'aloof'. Something easier to understand would probably be better.

I think this is good - theplough.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=marxism&action=display&thread=2244

[Papa C.]

I would love if we could get some sort of draft paper on how socialism might function and how it would apply to a 21st century society. A lot of people, through ignorance perhaps, think that socialism is all about 'going back to the stone age', living in caves and so forth. So it would be good to outline how modern day technology can function within a socialist society and how socialism can, in fact, push technology forward. Personally, I would believe in a Council communist model. I've read some of Cael's arguments. Some good articles. I can't fathom Cael being part of RSF though seeing as they're pretty right-wing.

[Stallit 2 de Halfo]

Jul 19, 2009 14:14:27 GMT Papa C. said:

I would love if we could get some sort of draft paper on how socialism might function and how it would apply to a 21st century society. A lot of people, through ignorance perhaps, think that socialism is all about 'going back to the stone age', living in caves and so forth. So it would be good to outline how modern day technology can function within a socialist society and how socialism can, in fact, push technology forward. Personally, I would believe in a Council communist model. I've read some of Cael's arguments. Some good articles. I can't fathom Cael being part of RSF though seeing as they're pretty right-wing.

Yeah I agree with you PC.

There's alot of talk about socialism as 'the alternative', yet all those who propose it (including us) just dont know what it is, to be fair.

I remember reading Kieran Allens book "the corporate takeover of Ireland" (I think) and the final chapter and conclusion were just so weak. Came away being unconvinced, despite already being a socialist.

How can we convince people to change things and to create an alternative if we dont have one...

The prime factor in what sort of economy we want is one where resources are rationally planned, rather than allocated through a market system. How we do that, and whether it is workable and not pie in the sky are the questions.

These two article here I found interesting...

findarticles.com/p/articles/m...g=content;col1

www.cvoice.org/cv3cox.htm

[dangeresque]

I don't like it

[Stallit 2 de Halfo]

Stalinist!! Heretic!!

[Papa C.]

Jul 25, 2009 15:19:10 GMT dangeresque said:

I don't like it

Wow Dangeresque, that was a quick post! You usually write up a 5,000 word essay on the reasons for not liking it.