In concrete terms, the anti-social offensive takes different
forms. The theoretical basis of this offensive denies the role of
the society in satisfying the claims of all people over it.
Everyone must fend for themselves is the basic demand of those who
see no role for a society that guarantees the wellbeing of its
members.
Developing discussion means to use every occasion to raise the
question that the basis of the anti-social offensive is the
anti-human factor/anti-consciousness. Immediate work has to be
undertaken in the sphere of ideology to fight against the
anti-human factor/anti-consciousness. An uncompromising ideological
struggle has to be waged against the anti-human factor/
anti-consciousness as a component part of developing discussion on
the way forward.
A question immediately arises: Should the work be taken up to
explain the anti-human factor/anti-consciousness or should a
program of action be worked out against it? It is the latter that
should be undertaken; however, what must be done in precise terms
has to be settled. What concrete actions are to be taken to fight
the anti-human factor/anti-consciousness? Should the struggle be
taken up in a manner which claims that the anti-human
factor/anti-consciousness is the enemy, and everyone must be
rallied against it? Or is the struggle something else?
The ideological struggle against the anti-human factor/anti-
consciousness is actually something else. If the ideological
struggle is waged by indicting the capitalist society on the basis
of taking concrete examples from life to show how the bourgeoisie
is using the anti-human factor/anti-consciousness against the
people, and if the people are called upon to take center stage
against it, a discussion is bound to develop. There is, of course,
the danger of this becoming merely reactive, waiting for events to
unfold. Such a danger can be averted by carrying on the theoretical
work required to show that the anti-social offensive is directed
against the creation of a truly humane society. The anti-social
offensive seeks to develop the anti-human factor/anti-social
consciousness as the material/spiritual weapon against the way
forward. Its aim is to block the path for the progress of the society.
The anti-human factor/anti-consciousness as a material weapon
is directed towards stopping the working class from placing itself
as the leading and the main force for the transformation of the
society. This weapon takes the form of the labor aristocracy. The
anti-human factor/anti-consciousness as a spiritual factor is
irrationalism raised to the level of principle in order to ensure
that the working class does not see any way forward. The
anti-human factor/anti-consciousness as a material/spiritual weapon
is the quintessence of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, the
dictate that the entire world must remain subordinate to the aims
of the financial oligarchy.
In the sphere of the economy, the labor aristocracy and the
trade union leaders are involved in a multi-billion dollar
business. The aim of this multi-billion dollar business is to
enrich themselves; but, more importantly, it is to facilitate the
dictate of the bourgeoisie according to whom the economic struggle
of the working class is merely a matter of abiding by the "rule of
law". It does this by promoting the notion that the be-all and
end-all of the working class movement is "collective bargaining".
The working class bargains not with the bourgeoisie, and not as a
class, but with an individual capitalist or group of capitalists
who bargain within the confines of the ground rules set in law by
the capitalist class in power.
All workers must submit to this dictate; they must subordinate
their demands to whatever is acceptable within the confines of the
"collective bargaining" process, to the "rule of law" of the class
which has, as the first thing, placed them in the position of
having to make their living by selling their labor power. Rights
can neither be given nor taken away, but the workers willingly give
up the affirmation of their rights, and part with some of their
wages in return for the bourgeoisie providing them with this
mechanism, the "rule of law" and "collective bargaining". In terms
of its organizing, the working class went from associating as a
class of itself, to a class for itself, to forming associations in
defence of the capitalist system.
Besides submitting to the "rule of law" of the bourgeoisie,
the working class also faces the ideological assault that the "free
market economy" is the greatest road to their prosperity. The free
market economy is merely a phrase, a euphemism for the state
monopoly capitalist system but it has the force of compelling the
workers to be irrational, to believe in the "hidden hand" of a
market economy, to think that things will turn around on their own.
If the entire force of irrationalism is taken into consideration in
the same fashion as the working class submits to the "rule of law"
of the bourgeoisie through collective bargaining, the extent of the
anti-human factor/anti- consciousness directed against the people
can be seen.
Developing discussion is to go over each and every point by
actually taking a stand. How will the workers take a stand against
what is called "collective bargaining"? The role it plays is hidden
from the workers and defended; collective bargaining is presented
as the highest principle there is. There is no need for the working
class to take a stand against this or that mechanism of the
bourgeoisie. What the workers have to do is affirm the rights which
they do not wish to give up. The right to a livelihood is a human
right. It cannot be given to the worker by anyone. It cannot be
taken away by anyone either. This right belongs to the holder by
dint of the concrete condition the holder is in. This right belongs
to a worker by dint of being a worker and a human being.
The apologists of the bourgeoisie and the champions of
business unionism, the labor aristocrats, argue that by
"collective bargaining" some of the rights of the workers are in
fact defended. This is not the case. Collective bargaining is a
mechanism of the bourgeois state power which benefits the
bourgeoisie under certain conditions. Under other conditions it may
prove detrimental to its class interests, if it fails to, or is
unable to make use of it. The bourgeoisie makes use of this
mechanism according to its own interests. If the workers accept
this mechanism as the "be-all and end-all" of their struggle, they
fail to affirm all the rights that belong to them by dint of being
workers. The anti-human factor/anti-consciousness is a
material/spiritual force directed to convince the workers that they
must voluntarily give up all their rights for the pleasure of being
subordinated to the "rule of law" of the bourgeoisie through its
mechanism of "collective bargaining."
The question, who looks after whom -the capitalist or the
worker- is one of the most vital questions of rational thinking.
The discovery of the theory of surplus value placed the worker as
the source of all wealth. Karl Marx proved that it is the worker
who looks after the capitalist and not the other way around. In
doing so, the workers suffer and bring upon themselves all the
indignities the capitalist can shower on them. The very class which
makes capitalism function is the one which must pay for its sin of
doing so. The capitalist class, this moloch living off the blood of
the entire society, declares that the worker is really dependent on
the capitalist. The workers should be grateful to the moloch for
providing it the pleasure of sucking their blood.
The anti-human factor/anti-consciousness is directed towards
subordinating everything towards the aim of the capitalist class to
make maximum capitalist profit. It is precisely this force to
subordinate everything to the making of maximum capitalist profit
which is the anti-human factor/anti-consciousness. When capitalist
investors begin an enterprise, they declare that this is being done
for the wellbeing of the people who will work there, and to
contribute to the prosperity of society. Maybe so, but all that is
incidental to making maximum profit; the point is, why would the
capitalist investors be interested in the wellbeing of anyone who
works there or the prosperity of the society? These things are of
no consideration when investing. They are ideological
considerations. It is crucial for the capitalists to have this
fairy tale told repeatedly in order to ensure that the workers do
not look at the capitalist as the exploiter. Once the enterprise is
shut down, the same capitalist investors blame the workers for
their high expectations or blame fate for the lack of a market for
the goods manufactured there, or both.
Shawgi Tell
University at Buffalo
Graduate School of Education
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
