night_son
Diamond Member
From Wikipedia: Vanguardism - Wikipedia
"In the context of the theory of Marxist–Leninist revolutionary struggle, vanguardism is a strategy whereby the most class-conscious and politically advanced sections of the proletariat or working class, described as the revolutionary vanguard, form organizations in order to draw larger sections of the working class towards revolutionary politics and serve as manifestations of proletarian political power against its class enemies."
From Mark Bray, Anti-Fascist Handbook
“Undoubtedly street blockades and other forms of confrontational opposition can be very useful against any political opponent, but once far-right formations have managed to broadcast their xenophobic, dystopian platforms, it is incumbent upon us to drown them out with even better alternatives to the austerity and incompetence of the governing parties of the Right & Left.
On its own, militant anti-fascism is necessary but not sufficient to build a new world in the shell of the old.”
― Mark Bray, Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook
Antifa speaks to building a new world in the 'shelf of the old'. A sentiment very similar to the purpose of the Marxist-Leninist revolutionary vanguard. Countless You Tube videos clearly illustrate Antifa direct action taken to prevent First Amendment peaceable assembly, and efforts to rewire young American thought away from current government policy.
From Wikipedia: Vanguardism - Wikipedia
"In its first phase, the vanguard party would exist for two reasons. Firstly, it would protect Marxism from outside corruption from other ideas as well as advance its concepts. Secondly, it would educate the proletariat in Marxism in order to cleanse them of their "false individual consciousness" and instill the revolutionary "class consciousness" in them.
"Our task is not to champion the degrading of the revolutionary to the level of an amateur, but to raise the amateurs to the level of revolutionaries.[4]
"If the party is successful in this goal, on the eve of revolution, a critical mass of the working class population would be prepared to usher forth the transformation of society. Furthermore, a great number of them, namely their most dedicated members, would belong to the party cadres as professional revolutionaries and would be elected to leadership positions by the mass party membership. Thus the organization would quickly include the entire working class.[5]
"Once the proletariat gained class consciousness and thus was prepared to revolt against the ruling classes, the vanguard party would serve another purpose. The party would coordinate the proletariat through its revolution by acting as a military command hub of sorts. This is, according to Leninists, a vital function as mass revolutions can sometimes be easily crushed by the disciplined military of the ruling classes. The vanguards would serve as commanders of the revolt, chosen to their positions by "democratic natural selection".
From Mark Bray, Anti-Fascist Handbook:
“You fight them by writing letters and making phone calls so you don’t have to fight them with fists. You fight them with fists so you don’t have to fight them with knives. You fight them with knives so you don’t have to fight them with guns. You fight them with guns so you don’t have to fight them with tanks.”
― Mark Bray, Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook
From an NBC interview with Mark Bray: Antifa violence is ethical? This author explains why
"NBC News: How would you define the antifa movement?
BRAY: It’s basically a politics or an activity of social revolutionary self defense. It’s a pan-left radical politics uniting communists, socialists, anarchists and various different radical leftists together for the shared purpose of combating the far right."
"To zero in a bit, though: Your book references actions targeting actual neo-Nazi groups, who were very visible in Charlottesville, but also general clashes with police and property damage as means of protest, like at the Berkeley rally which was about a controversial speaker. Doesn’t that extend the lens?
Antifa are revolutionaries and they are almost always anti-police. That’s partly why they organize how they do: If they were pro-police they’d be more inclined to say, 'Hey, police, why don’t you take care of this.' But as anti-capitalist with a sort of police-abolitionist lens, they view the police as problems, as defenders of the capitalist order, and also all too often as sympathizers with the far right. So they view both sides as being opponents, but once again opposition to police is fairly clear cut and comes from a political tradition stretching back 200 years — so it’s not arbitrary, even if you disagree with it."
"Another book on protest movements out now is by Zeynep Tufecki, who takes the exact opposite view. To quote Tufecki: "Plainly: historically, anything that looks like street brawls helps fascists consolidate power. 'Many sides' is their core tactic. [It] works." In other words, they often use violence to justify an electoral backlash which they then use that to justify a state crackdown.
The question is more what to do when you’re at the early stages of struggle, before you get to the point where there are tanks and airplanes. I agree most of the time, in most circumstances, non-violent means are effective and it’s really very fundamental to building a popular movement to influence public opinion. The question is how bad does it have to get before self-defense becomes legitimate."
"One concern is that a movement, especially one facing an emboldened far right and a president pouring fuel on the fire, could become more radical over time. In the 60's and 70's, they went from street protests to eventually splinter groups of terrorists, especially in Europe, some of whom used anti-fascism a rallying cry.
I don’t think so. You’re right to point out some of the armed-struggle groups of the US and Europe in 60's and 70's, such as the Red Army Faction (in Germany), for example, saw what they were doing as anti-fascist struggle against a West German state they considered to be insufficiently de-Nazified. But the more specific form of anti-fascism that informs the groups today is the antifa model of the 70's and 80's which grew out of street confrontations, not out of an armed struggle background.
The kind of profile of the armed struggle within radical left thought in the U.S. since the 80's has basically disappeared. No one ever seriously considers forming a small cell with arms to attack the government. It’s, at best, a joke."
Antifa demonstrations haven't been a very funny joke thus far. They really think they limit violence from escalation to a call for revolution?
"So basically, you don’t want to take a clear position on that specific distinction (between self defense and preemptive attack).
In the abstract. I’m going to leave it at that if you don’t mind."
From Wikipedia: Vanguardism - Wikipedia
"A vanguard party is a political party at the fore of a mass-action political movement and of a revolution. In the praxis of political science, the concept of the vanguard party, composed of professional revolutionaries, was first effected by the Bolshevik Party in the Russian Revolution of 1917. Lenin (Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov), the first leader of the Bolsheviks, coined the term vanguard party, and argued that such a party was necessary in order to provide the practical and political leadership that would impel the proletariat to achieve a communist revolution. Hence, as a political-science concept and term, vanguard party most often is associated with Leninism; however, similar concepts (under different names) also are present in other revolutionary ideologies.
Friedrich Engels and Karl Marx presented the concept of the vanguard party as solely qualified to politically lead the proletariat in revolution; in Chapter II: "Proletarians and Communists" of The Communist Manifesto (1848), they said:
The Communists, therefore, are, on the one hand, practically the most advanced and resolute section of the working-class parties of every country, that section which pushes forward all others; on the other hand, theoretically, they have over the great mass of the proletariat the advantage of clearly understanding the lines of march, the conditions, and the ultimate general results of the proletarian movement. The immediate aim of the Communists is the same as that of all other proletarian parties: Formation of the proletariat into a class, overthrow of the bourgeois supremacy, conquest of political power by the proletariat."
In my opinion based on easily available evidence of recent of Antifa activity, their resemblance to Marxist-Leninist Revolutionary Vanguard party is clearly not outside bounds of reason. They are small cells of radical Left activists who unite into larger formations to incite violence at peaceful protests and block access to public spaces, as well as silence First Amendment protected speech.
Much the same as the communist revolutionary Vanguard party, they are the tip of the spear in their self-described crusade against fascism. But who determines fascist from patriot, and who controls this reportedly unorganized shadow group operating in America today, and to what ultimate end?
"In the context of the theory of Marxist–Leninist revolutionary struggle, vanguardism is a strategy whereby the most class-conscious and politically advanced sections of the proletariat or working class, described as the revolutionary vanguard, form organizations in order to draw larger sections of the working class towards revolutionary politics and serve as manifestations of proletarian political power against its class enemies."
From Mark Bray, Anti-Fascist Handbook
“Undoubtedly street blockades and other forms of confrontational opposition can be very useful against any political opponent, but once far-right formations have managed to broadcast their xenophobic, dystopian platforms, it is incumbent upon us to drown them out with even better alternatives to the austerity and incompetence of the governing parties of the Right & Left.
On its own, militant anti-fascism is necessary but not sufficient to build a new world in the shell of the old.”
― Mark Bray, Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook
Antifa speaks to building a new world in the 'shelf of the old'. A sentiment very similar to the purpose of the Marxist-Leninist revolutionary vanguard. Countless You Tube videos clearly illustrate Antifa direct action taken to prevent First Amendment peaceable assembly, and efforts to rewire young American thought away from current government policy.
From Wikipedia: Vanguardism - Wikipedia
"In its first phase, the vanguard party would exist for two reasons. Firstly, it would protect Marxism from outside corruption from other ideas as well as advance its concepts. Secondly, it would educate the proletariat in Marxism in order to cleanse them of their "false individual consciousness" and instill the revolutionary "class consciousness" in them.
"Our task is not to champion the degrading of the revolutionary to the level of an amateur, but to raise the amateurs to the level of revolutionaries.[4]
"If the party is successful in this goal, on the eve of revolution, a critical mass of the working class population would be prepared to usher forth the transformation of society. Furthermore, a great number of them, namely their most dedicated members, would belong to the party cadres as professional revolutionaries and would be elected to leadership positions by the mass party membership. Thus the organization would quickly include the entire working class.[5]
"Once the proletariat gained class consciousness and thus was prepared to revolt against the ruling classes, the vanguard party would serve another purpose. The party would coordinate the proletariat through its revolution by acting as a military command hub of sorts. This is, according to Leninists, a vital function as mass revolutions can sometimes be easily crushed by the disciplined military of the ruling classes. The vanguards would serve as commanders of the revolt, chosen to their positions by "democratic natural selection".
From Mark Bray, Anti-Fascist Handbook:
“You fight them by writing letters and making phone calls so you don’t have to fight them with fists. You fight them with fists so you don’t have to fight them with knives. You fight them with knives so you don’t have to fight them with guns. You fight them with guns so you don’t have to fight them with tanks.”
― Mark Bray, Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook
From an NBC interview with Mark Bray: Antifa violence is ethical? This author explains why
BRAY: It’s basically a politics or an activity of social revolutionary self defense. It’s a pan-left radical politics uniting communists, socialists, anarchists and various different radical leftists together for the shared purpose of combating the far right."
"To zero in a bit, though: Your book references actions targeting actual neo-Nazi groups, who were very visible in Charlottesville, but also general clashes with police and property damage as means of protest, like at the Berkeley rally which was about a controversial speaker. Doesn’t that extend the lens?
Antifa are revolutionaries and they are almost always anti-police. That’s partly why they organize how they do: If they were pro-police they’d be more inclined to say, 'Hey, police, why don’t you take care of this.' But as anti-capitalist with a sort of police-abolitionist lens, they view the police as problems, as defenders of the capitalist order, and also all too often as sympathizers with the far right. So they view both sides as being opponents, but once again opposition to police is fairly clear cut and comes from a political tradition stretching back 200 years — so it’s not arbitrary, even if you disagree with it."
"Another book on protest movements out now is by Zeynep Tufecki, who takes the exact opposite view. To quote Tufecki: "Plainly: historically, anything that looks like street brawls helps fascists consolidate power. 'Many sides' is their core tactic. [It] works." In other words, they often use violence to justify an electoral backlash which they then use that to justify a state crackdown.
The question is more what to do when you’re at the early stages of struggle, before you get to the point where there are tanks and airplanes. I agree most of the time, in most circumstances, non-violent means are effective and it’s really very fundamental to building a popular movement to influence public opinion. The question is how bad does it have to get before self-defense becomes legitimate."
"One concern is that a movement, especially one facing an emboldened far right and a president pouring fuel on the fire, could become more radical over time. In the 60's and 70's, they went from street protests to eventually splinter groups of terrorists, especially in Europe, some of whom used anti-fascism a rallying cry.
I don’t think so. You’re right to point out some of the armed-struggle groups of the US and Europe in 60's and 70's, such as the Red Army Faction (in Germany), for example, saw what they were doing as anti-fascist struggle against a West German state they considered to be insufficiently de-Nazified. But the more specific form of anti-fascism that informs the groups today is the antifa model of the 70's and 80's which grew out of street confrontations, not out of an armed struggle background.
The kind of profile of the armed struggle within radical left thought in the U.S. since the 80's has basically disappeared. No one ever seriously considers forming a small cell with arms to attack the government. It’s, at best, a joke."
Antifa demonstrations haven't been a very funny joke thus far. They really think they limit violence from escalation to a call for revolution?
"So basically, you don’t want to take a clear position on that specific distinction (between self defense and preemptive attack).
In the abstract. I’m going to leave it at that if you don’t mind."
From Wikipedia: Vanguardism - Wikipedia
"A vanguard party is a political party at the fore of a mass-action political movement and of a revolution. In the praxis of political science, the concept of the vanguard party, composed of professional revolutionaries, was first effected by the Bolshevik Party in the Russian Revolution of 1917. Lenin (Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov), the first leader of the Bolsheviks, coined the term vanguard party, and argued that such a party was necessary in order to provide the practical and political leadership that would impel the proletariat to achieve a communist revolution. Hence, as a political-science concept and term, vanguard party most often is associated with Leninism; however, similar concepts (under different names) also are present in other revolutionary ideologies.
Friedrich Engels and Karl Marx presented the concept of the vanguard party as solely qualified to politically lead the proletariat in revolution; in Chapter II: "Proletarians and Communists" of The Communist Manifesto (1848), they said:
The Communists, therefore, are, on the one hand, practically the most advanced and resolute section of the working-class parties of every country, that section which pushes forward all others; on the other hand, theoretically, they have over the great mass of the proletariat the advantage of clearly understanding the lines of march, the conditions, and the ultimate general results of the proletarian movement. The immediate aim of the Communists is the same as that of all other proletarian parties: Formation of the proletariat into a class, overthrow of the bourgeois supremacy, conquest of political power by the proletariat."
In my opinion based on easily available evidence of recent of Antifa activity, their resemblance to Marxist-Leninist Revolutionary Vanguard party is clearly not outside bounds of reason. They are small cells of radical Left activists who unite into larger formations to incite violence at peaceful protests and block access to public spaces, as well as silence First Amendment protected speech.
Much the same as the communist revolutionary Vanguard party, they are the tip of the spear in their self-described crusade against fascism. But who determines fascist from patriot, and who controls this reportedly unorganized shadow group operating in America today, and to what ultimate end?
