Komunumo de Parizo en 1871
Jean-Patrick Annequin : Pensi la Komunumon hodiaŭ
elfrancigis Petro Levi
(Jean-Patrick Annequin, La Châtre, Indre ; "La Commune",
Bulteno de la Asocio de la Amikoj de la Komunumo
de Parizo - 1871 ; 2006 Automne-Hiver numero 29 ;
elfrancigis Petro Levi.)
La Komunumo de Parizo de 1871 estas la referenco en la historio de la laborista movado por la formo de registaro alprenita kaj la estigitaj promesoj. Por realigi la tiel deziratan socian kaj demokratan Respublikon, ĝi elpensis novaĵojn sur la tereno de la laborista demokratio kaj organizado. Oni estas vere konvinkita, ke la principoj proklamitaj de la Komunumo de Parizo estas ankoraŭ hodiaŭ aktualaj - kaj tiaj ili estas pli ol iam ajn -, ĉar ĝia skizo de vere nova, egaleca kaj frateca socio restas konkreta utopio : fundamente estas, ke oni havu klaran konscion de tiuj grandaj principoj, kiuj ne povis koruptiĝi, sed ke oni apliku ilin en la spirito dezirita de la Komunumanoj. Ni restu simple ĉe la du grandaj unuaj urĝaj taskoj, kiujn la Komunumo de Parizo difinis al si.
Unue, instali la rektan demokration. Tiu de la komunumanoj ripozis
sur la imperativa kaj nuligebla mandato. Tiu formo de rekta
demokratio havas nenion komunan kun ia ajn partoprena demokratio, kiu
metas la civitanojn antaŭ falsan agliberecon kaj neniel donas al ili
la rimedon denunci la mandatajn perfidojn : ne ekzistas demokratio,
krom tiu, kiu kontrolas la povon, kaj la popolo estas la demokratio.
Tia estis la senco de la alvoko de la 23a de marto 1871, kiu postulis
la emancipon de la laboristoj. Ankoraŭ pli hodiaŭ, la imperativa
kaj nuligebla mandato esas necesa kaj ĉia rekta demokratio estas konceptebla nur kun tiu kondiĉo, ke konstante la ricevintoj de
mandatoj publike respondas al la demandoj de la donintoj, aŭ pli
koncize la demokratio ne bezonas kvalifikon.
Poste disvolvi la laboristan mastrumadon. La Komunumo situis,
certe, en la kadro de la naskiĝanta kapitalismo, sed kapitalismo kun
bone markitaj karakterizoj, kiu nur estis la bazo de la nuna
tutmondiĝinta kapitalismo. La interklasa kontraŭstaro, kiun la
membroj de la Unua Internacio tiel bone perceptis, estas tute certe
la nuna realo : organizo, kiu havas konstantan, perforteman,
senanimstatan klaskonscion, estas ja MEDEF (franca mastra movado).
El Sennaciulo, februaro 2007
The Paris Commune of 1871,
Thinking about the Commune today
by Jeanne-Patrick Annequin
The Paris Commune of 1871 is the reference in the labour movement for the formation of a government and the promises it made. To realise the desired social and democratic republic, it created new methods on the terrain of workers democracy and organisation. I am truly convinced that the principle proclamations of the Paris Commune are still relevant today - and that they are more so now than at any other time - because its outline of a truly new egalitarian and fraternal society remain a concrete utopia. Fundamentally it is necessary that we have a clear awareness of those great principles which cannot be corrupted, and apply them in the spirit desired by the Communards. Let's just stick with the two big tasks that the Paris Commune set itself.
Firstly the installation of direct democracy. That of the Communal delegates rested on the imperative and recallable mandate. This form of democracy has nothing in common with any kind of participatory democracy which places before the citizens a false freedom and will not give them the means to denounce mandated betrayals. Democracy does not exist, other than one that controls power, and the people are democracy. That was the meaning of the call on the 23rd of March 1871, which demanded the emancipation of the workers. Still more today, the imperative and recallable mandate is necessary and all direct democracy is conceivable only on condition that the mandated members constantly respond to the questions of the voters, or more precisely, democracy does not need qualification.
Then developing workers management. The Commune is situated certainly in the frame of the birth of capitalism, but capitalism with well marked characteristics which were only the basis of modern global capitalism. The inter class opposition which the members of the first international well percieved, is definitely the present reality. An organisation that has a constant, violent, and disenfranchised class consciousness is the MDEF (French bosses movement).
No one can unite a worker to his boss, yesterday or today, and the working class in the fullest sense of the word of course opposes the "reforms" of successive governments. Not because of nostalgia for past times or an inability to evolve ( a worker also thinks so) but simply because those "reforms" are against the interests of the working class and destroys fundamental social gains. The working class who continue to rely upon strikes (the International understood this) to defend their work and to defend their rights. But which for many years has been betrayed by many union leaders or abandoned by so called "progressive" leaders. For the union as much political and financial independence as possible is necessary because all subordination will destroy syndicalism/trade unionism[1]. The Federal Chamber of Labour Societies of 1871 were the example of workers self mobilisation and independence. The refusal of all kinds of association between workers and bosses was the strong principle of the internationalists and Communards, because that type of association always has the same final goal. To make the workers collaborate with management for the capitalist profit. Léo Fränkel (Leo Frankel[2]) elected as leader of a workers delegation asserted during one of the many meetings of the Commune that "we have to apply every kind of just social decision without bothering to consult the bosses". The Communards did not have enough time to finish establishing the co-operative societies which functioned as the opposite of the co-management between workers and bosses, which we would like to install now. What is happening now in Argentina and Brazil with workers occupying factories and taking them over would impassion the Internationalists who searched for new methods of production and consumption. The specific example of the Zanon factory[3] is a symbol of this. Let us rethink the working government of the Commune and its pathways. What kinds of differences are in the present context? None! Are there no longer oppressed and oppressors, profiteers who continue to exploit workers? Thinking the opposite is to lead the workers movement to an impasse. The Commune certainly consisted of many tendencies, but the declaration of the 19th of April 1871 idealised the Communal structure as the base of direct democracy. Today it is still more purpose-oriented for it is a structure of maximum closeness, but an attempt is made to remove it on the pretext of structural simplification. Also the Federation of Communes, which the Communards dreamed of is our defensible heritage, and it remains totally modern. Fidelity to the Commune's principles does not require them to be carried out today as they were proposed in 1871. They are fully current, realistic and realisable only if we think that capitalism is against collective happiness, but in that happiness is a new idea.
_________________________________________________
1: In Esperanto and French and many other languages the word for labour union is Syndicate, which makes it difficult at times to distinguish when a speaker is talking about syndicalism a specific version of labour organising or just trade unions in general. I'm not sure which he means here.
2: Hungarian born social democrat who collaborated for several years with Ferdinand Lassalle in the German states. He was in Paris during the outbreak of the Franco-Prussian war and joined the National Guard, he was elected to the Commune on the 26th of March 1871. He survived the Commune and worked in London and the Hapsburg Empire until his death in Paris in 1896.
3: Argentinian ceramics factory, occupied by its workers during the 2001 financial crisis.
No comments:
Post a Comment