Part One
Nasser Paydar, February 2013
The existence of the state or any administrative, legal, political and disciplinary institution above the citizens is in fundamental contradiction with socialism or socialist work organization. The background of the emergence or the reason for the existence of the state must be explored in the necessity of inducing and declaring the common interests of the individuals of a social stratum or class as “public interests”. The foundation of the state’s work lies in inverting the facts and exposing the radical contradiction between the interests of fundamentally hostile classes. The dominant class of every era and every society insists on introducing its demands, goals, expectations and all social interests as the interests of life and the interests of all the inhabitants of the society, and the state is an institution that takes on the task of inducing this lie or distortion in the public minds of people. In this way, it places itself above the society, declares itself beyond the existence of classes, calls itself the representative and protector of the interests of all, proclaims its laws, decrees, resolutions and contracts as guaranteeing the welfare, security and comfort of the general people. It portrays each of its institutions as a response to the demands and needs of the masses. The state denies the existence of classes, the irreconcilable antagonism between classes, the exploitation of one class by another, the class struggle, and everything that constitutes the true fabric of society. Marx points out that the common good is a real phenomenon, while the “public good” is a baseless and illusory term. The state is the representative and responsible institution of the common good, in that it represents the homogeneous interests of individuals of the same class, but it clings to a fundamentally illusory and baseless theme, meaning that it uses the false title of “the general good of the whole of society” as the scaffolding of its identity, and in this regard distorts the true concept of society.
“Because individuals seek their own special interest, which for them does not coincide with their common interest, this common interest appears to them as an “alien” interest, “independent” of them, and in turn as a special and distinct “public” interest. Or they themselves must remain in this disagreement, as in democracy. On the other hand, the practical struggle of these special interests with each other, which in fact constantly runs in opposition to the common interest and the imaginary common interest, necessitates the practical intervention and prevention of the imaginary “public” interest in the form of the state.” (German Ideology)
The state has emerged in a certain period of historical development on the basis of the insoluble contradiction between classes and as an instrument of political domination of the dominant economic class. A powerful political institution that responds to the requirements of self-expansion or survival of the dominant mode of production and the defence of the social order corresponding to this self-expansion and survival. The phenomenon of the state can take on a certain political form, structure and composition in proportion to the development of the struggle between the basic classes and the balance of power of various social forces.
“The state is the product of society at a stage of development. The state is the recognition that this society is caught up in an insoluble conflict with itself and is divided into irreconcilable contradictions that it is unable to resolve. But in order for this conflict between classes with conflicting economic interests not to destroy itself and society in a fruitless struggle, it became necessary for a power to arise that would ostensibly stand at the head of society, to moderate the conflicts and keep it within the bounds of order. This power, which arises from society but places itself at the head of it and alienates itself more and more from it, is called the state.” (Engels, The Origin of the Family and the State)
The development of capitalism brought about the comprehensive completion of the state. From the very first minutes of its ascension to the throne of political power, the bourgeoisie developed and perfected its structure of governance in accordance with the requirements of profitability and the reproduction of social capital. There has been an organic and close relationship between the process of transformation of private property and the process of expansion of state power. The story, of course, has a different appearance. The dynamics of the transformation of property from tribal to agrarian, feudal, guild, manufacturing to modern and bourgeois forms are apparently accompanied by regression and a decrease in the nature of the sharing of interests of individuals. In this regard, the role of the state as an institution that protects the common interests of a class or a section of society should be on the decline, but the reality is exactly the opposite. In the capitalist system, although we witness the emergence of the most complete and developed form of private property, and although every owner of capital is a serious opponent of any level of government intervention in the sphere of his property, the bourgeois state is, in terms of full representation and all the common interests of the capitalist class on the one hand, and in terms of the degree of development, the extent of influence, and the scope of its octopus domination, in very astonishing dimensions, more complete and more organized than previous forms of state. The main reason for the incident must be sought in the role of capital. The contemporary state is in reality capital personified in the form of the state, political, civil, and legal structures, and social order. Capital is a social relationship and the starting and returning point of all interactions within existing society. In the process of reproducing and maintaining its sovereignty, capital dissolves everything and all realms of human life within itself. Capitalist society revolves in its entire fabric around the relationship of surplus value production and makes every breath of people a function of the requirements of capital’s profitability. The bourgeois state is the institution for exercising the existence, power, and sovereignty of capital. The philosophy of the octopus-like and omnipresent existence of this state originates from here. Explaining the relationship between the bourgeois state and capitalist private property, Marx says: “This new private property is accompanied by a new state, which has been purchased by the owners of capital through taxes, has passed entirely into the hands of these buyers through national debts, and its existence, as reflected in the rise and fall of government bonds on the stock market, has become entirely dependent on the credits placed at its disposal by the bourgeois. The bourgeoisie, because it is not a class but a class, must organize itself not locally but on a national scale and give a general form to its average interests. With the liberation of private property from society, the state has become a distinct identity alongside civil society. The state, however, is nothing but that form of organization which the bourgeoisie, by their own internal and external purposes, are compelled to adopt in order to mutually guarantee their property and their interests.” (The German Ideology)
It will be explained below that the state of the bourgeoisie today has moved away from the state of Marx’s time in deepening its homogenization, organic integration and internal adaptation to the cycle of capital reproduction and has become more complete. However, what is important in the above statements is the emphasis on the interconnection of the process of formation and development of the bourgeois state with the theme of the capitalist mode of production or the relationship of surplus value production. Any description of the place, objectivity and role of this state without precise reference to the existence of capital will definitely be demagoguery and misleading. Here, a point must be explained. The intellectual representatives of capitalism have filled the earth and time with discussions around the phenomenon of “civil society” and in many cases put it in front of the institution of the state! They introduce the latter as the representative of general interests and the former as the sphere of special rights or “citizens” and it is clear that they also imply that “citizens” are something like the population of the country, the entire population and independent of the raised class boundaries or the existence of classes. This narrative is fundamentally at odds with reality and contains all the distortions inherent in capital and the capitalist system. Civil society in its precise sense emerged with the bourgeoisie, and its application to pre-capitalist economic superstructures is an unscientific generalization. Even assuming that the term civil society can be applied to the dominant social organization of pre-capitalist societies, the truth is that what is spoken of today under the name emerged in the eighteenth century and in the context of the process of liberating property from the constraints of ancient communities and increasingly becoming more and more private. Civil society is therefore a social organization based on capitalist private property, or, to put it more precisely and eloquently, based on the relationship of wage labour or capital as a social relationship. The role that civil society plays are not in opposition to the role of the state, but on the contrary, in continuation of it and in the direction of its expansion, completion and enforcement. It dresses capital in human clothing, calling wage slavery the safe haven of rights, freedom, equality, prosperity, growth, maturity and human dignity. It sanctifies the law of capital, which is the expanded form of the law of value, the commodity nature of labour, and the source of all barbarity and savagery of the present age, as the true covenant of a free, honourable, and just human existence. It exposes the existence of classes, class exploitation, and the brutal crimes of the exploiting class against the exploited class. It profoundly denies the basis of man’s separation from work and the product of work, and the right to determine the fate of his own life. It hides the self-alienation of man in the dusty world of capital’s fabrication and inversion, and it hides the real root of this disaster from people’s knowledge. In a word, it humanizes and adorns all the exploitation, oppression, and misery created by capital, and it presents them all as the general social interests of the mass of citizens or as the result of free agreement and informed opinions of the entire “people”!!
Let us return to the discussion of the state. If in previous social systems the phenomenon of the state was mainly summarized in the existence of a machine of violence, killing and suppression, in capitalist society, in addition to playing this role completely and completely, it is an inseparable part of the organization of work, the division of labour and the vast and long planning and implementation system of the economic, political, civil, cultural, artistic and everything capitalist order. Just as capital continuously reproduces the conditions of its own valuation and profitability, it also recreates and develops the state as a continuous loop of all the requirements of its own survival and self-expansion. The state here is not only the parliament, the police, the army, the legal system and prisons, but also education and training, universities, the network of medicine and treatment and health, the environmental organization, the institution for the elimination of sexual discrimination!!, the organization for children’s rights!!, the employment and employment office, the container of health insurance!! and pension insurance!! and unemployment!! and the like. The main point is that the bourgeois state in this entire global structure of power and sovereignty is the planning organization of all spheres of the capitalist order, it guarantees the maximum profitability of capital, it is the mechanism for intensifying the exploitation of workers by capital, it is the instrument of sacrificing the working class in the slaughterhouse of profit-making and self-expansion of capital, it is the answer to all aspects of the requirements of capital’s survival and, finally, it imposes all these calamities on the working masses.
Socialism and the Socialist Organization of Labor Just as the law of value abolishes the relationship of purchase and sale of labour power, the existence of classes and class relations, it also puts an end to the existence of the state in any of its forms forever. The organization of the All-Union Socialist Labor Councils implies the broadest and deepest form of involvement of all workers in the planning of the economy and the management of all the affairs of society and, on this basis, has no similarity with any form of state. How this new civilization will be established in society is precisely determined by the socialist mode of production, work, and life, that is, production and livelihood for all based on the elimination of wage labour. In order for no one to appropriate the product of another’s labour, in order for no one to exploit the labour power of another, in order for the means of production and all economic facilities or service, welfare, and social institutions to cease to be capital, and in a word, in order for the relationship between capital and wage labour to practically and truly disappear from the realm of human life, the existence of any state must be brought to an end. To accept the survival of the state, even under the name of the proletariat and as an instrument of oppression for the exploiters, is to fall into the abyss of a contradiction. It is absolutely true that Marx spoke of something called a “transitional workers’ state,” but this statement of Marx should not be used as an axe to uproot his most fundamental achievements in the field of the critique of bourgeois political economy and the correct narrative of socialism. Throughout his political life, Marx has continuously deepened and broadened his revolutionary and practical materialism, deepened his dissection of capitalism, and pursued the anatomy of social and political events and the problems of the class struggle of the working masses more consciously, effectively, and instructively. Apart from all this, the dictatorship of the proletariat that Marx is talking about has nothing in common with Lenin’s “dictatorship of the proletariat” or the terrifying model of the left-wing populist and party-rulers. He spoke with complete clarity about the vast political power of the proletariat as a class, and the means of exercising this power could be nothing other than the anti-wage workers’ councils. There is only one reason why he did not state this in the Communist Manifesto or the Declaration of the First International: he did not yet have the experience of workers’ revolutions, and following the uprising of the Communards and the establishment of the Paris Commune, he saw the model of the Commune as a suitable form of exercising proletarian power and tried to introduce it. The fact is that if Marx had been faced with the experience of the October Revolution and the record of the government produced by this revolution in 1919 and onwards, he would almost certainly have criticized this government with all his might.
In short, the proletariat cannot come to power in any form other than the anti-wage labour national councils, and the socialist council socialization of the working masses is not a state institution but a vessel for ending the existence of any kind of state. Every step of the workers’ revolution and the socialist transformation of the economy is precisely a step towards the decline and dissolution of the workers’ state, and when the revolution eliminates the relationship of buying and selling labour power, the category called the state will cease to exist. Many people say that with the advent of the socialist revolution, classes will not disappear, the bourgeoisie will resist with all its ferocity, and on this basis the proletariat needs a state to crush this resistance. This is absolutely true, and Marx also put it forward. The problem, however, is that there is a deep gap between the Leninist version of the story and the Marxian version. The bourgeoisie is not purged from the body of society suddenly and overnight with the advent of the revolution. It is also obvious that the entire world capitalist class will enter the campaign behind the defeated and overthrown bourgeoisie to defeat the revolution. There is no doubt about this, the main issue is why the work of defending the revolution should be carried out by a party, official and conventional state headed by the proletariat in the name of the working class. Why is such a state capable of carrying out this mission, but the conscious, united and organized masses of workers in socialist and anti-wage labour councils are not able to do so!! Why is the official army capable of playing this role, but the councils with the free, conscious and creative presence and involvement of all workers lack this ability!! Why is a party state a successful field of this campaign, but the socialist soviet organization of labour and production of the working masses does not have the competence to do this!!
It is clear that both Marx and the abolitionist movement see the danger of the bourgeoisie’s brutal and hostile array against the revolution, and Popular’s Communism has spoken and continues to speak about it sufficiently. The main point is that these two have different understandings of all issues related to the class struggle and the labour movement. They see capitalism, socialism, the role and position of the working class, the movement of this class, the revolution, political power, and everything else from different perspectives. Something called the “transitional state” is also among these concepts. One sees it in the structure of party power and the party’s multi-member bureau, and the other seeks it in the existence of a united anti-wage labour movement of the all-Union council, the victor of the revolution. The first considers the task of warding off the danger of the defeated bourgeoisie to be the work of the party state, because the top and bottom of all its theories and speeches are the role of the party, the party’s leadership, the revolution by the party, and the masses lining up behind the party. The latter sees this task as the work of the revolutionary anti-wage labour workers’ councils, because they firmly believe that only the conscious anti-capitalist all-out council movement of the working masses can bring about the victory of the revolution. The former does not see the working class as the source of any power, the founder and agent of any revolution without the party elite. The latter, on the contrary, considers no fundamental change in the existing reality possible without the existence of the broad mass of the conscious proletariat organized in the councils. The horizon of the former’s struggle is ultimately state capitalism, the latter fights for the radical abolition of the system of wage slavery. In the socialist and council organization of work, no one rules over another or others. No official institution or organization at the top of society determines the fate of citizens. No organ, institution, individual or group rules over society under the title of elected representative of the people. The communist principle “no one should exploit another” can only be realized in light of the realization of this principle that no one, no institution or no government should plan and make decisions for the mass of citizens. With the establishment of the socialist organization of work, the principle of separation of planning and decision-making from implementation, intellectual work from manual work, policymaking from service and production activities, and consequently the separation of man from his work, is practically abolished. Socialism is the embodiment of the emergence of free men, self-government without a state, freed from the bondage of any kind of power and government beyond themselves, free men free from every bondage, even the bondage of work.
Socialist Council Organization of Labour, Production and Life
Basic Councils
The socialist labour organization has a completely council structure. The basic councils, the commune, and the general congress determine the geographical divisions of this organization. The basic councils are the natural platform for the establishment of the socialist labour organization, which at the same time reflects the ordinary and everyday life of the citizens. The vast mass of the population, each of whom, on the basis of the new social order and in response to the requirements of socialist life, voluntarily takes a place in the process of labour and production of the whole, join hands in their councils in the very sphere of their life, work, and occupation. Membership in these councils is as essential and vital for each citizen as his participation in the process of production of necessities of life or welfare and social facilities can be vital and necessary. The basis is that everyone who works and produces or is simply a member of society should have a direct and effective involvement in the planning of social production, how the products produced are distributed, the definition of socialist work, determining what will and will not be produced, how much will be produced, etc. These councils are the centre of education, training, the growth of creativity, the flourishing of talent, self-expression, consensus, solidarity, unity, criticism, protest, struggle, decision-making, the exercise of collective power, and socialist socialization for each and every citizen.
The basic councils are the platform for the direct social presence and intervention of all people who, according to their working and living conditions and within the framework of the overall socialist planning, jointly carry out economic, educational, health, cultural, welfare, defence or any other socially useful activity within a given geographical unit. For example: all workers who work in a small or large production centre; teachers and students who teach or study in a complex; educators and childcare workers who work within a region; doctors, nurses and all employees of a hospital and finally, people who are responsible for distributing the general needs of citizens, all become members of these councils as citizens of the socialist society. The basic councils are the container for the nationwide organization and unity of all members of the masses and represent their real, integral and direct participation in the administration of society’s affairs. The workers in these councils produce while they govern. They educate and train children while they plan the affairs of society. They perform surgery while they are members of the decision-making community. The councils are the most beautiful social relations and the most glorious form of free human solidarity within a modern civilization free from any kind of exploitation, oppression, or inequality. The scope of authority and exercise of the will of these councils is not limited by any administrative, bureaucratic, or governmental boundaries. What limits or expands the scope of these authorities is only the criteria and standards approved by all members of society and the equality of all segments of the population in terms of participation in production and work, equal share in the distribution of the social product or services and public welfare, and equal role in planning and policymaking.
The basic councils have all the rights, facilities and powers necessary for organizing plans, planning and implementing production, service and welfare projects in their sphere of work and life. Within each basic council, the routine process of work and planning and the internal discussions or disputes of other councils are reflected as accurately as possible. The socialist labour organization will use all technological, informatics and computer facilities to reflect as clearly and accurately as possible all information related to the work and life and ongoing efforts of the citizens of the society within each basic council. Just as it uses all these facilities to further enhance the awareness and knowledge of citizens regarding the situation of life and work and the struggle of the world working class. Through this information, each member of the basic councils routinely and naturally feels himself in the context of the life and work of all citizens of the socialist society and the entire world working class. Citizens organized in basic councils will understand more deeply, within this atmosphere filled with awareness, knowledge and understanding, the close connection between the fate of their work and life with that of all citizens of society. With the help of this clear information, they will coordinate their goals and demands by reflecting on the common socialist interests. Just as every member of the basic council in every corner of the socialist labour organization will consider the interests of the lives of all citizens of society in the course of work and production, planning and local policymaking of his council.
Commune councils
A commune is a geographical, economic and political unit consisting of citizens or residents of a certain number of basic councils. The commune council is formed by the representatives sent by these basic councils. Citizens residing in the area of the work and life councils appoint representatives and send them to the commune council to discuss all the opinions, plans, considerations and orientations within the basic councils of their region during this mission. In the commune council, all the needs and necessities of life of the citizens residing in this geographical unit in terms of food, housing, clothing, health and medical care, education, defence, sports, recreation, environmental pollution removal, public welfare, public services, research and development, upbringing and care of children, affairs of the elderly and pensioners, internationalist tasks of the proletariat, etc. are discussed and discussed carefully and on the basis of necessary statistical research. The region’s various economic facilities, resources, and reserves, how to exploit them, new perspectives for improving the standard of living and civic life, the results of scientific and social research and assessments in all areas of social life, all matters related to the economic system and socialist labour organization, such as production planning, what to produce and what not to produce, the relationship between the different sectors of social production, the definition of socialist voluntary labour, and determining the type of economic, social, cultural, and welfare activities that are needed and meet the material and spiritual needs of citizens. The average socialist voluntary work time for each citizen, the organization of the socialist distribution of products and means of subsistence, the creation and distribution of housing among the citizens of the commune, and in a word, everything related to the flow of life, work and production of the population, are discussed in this council. The internal relations of the commune council are such that they reflect all tendencies, approaches, horizons, criticisms, solutions and everything related to the intellectual orientation, will, initiative, disagreements or agreements, scientific, cultural and moral upheavals of people, completely freely and without any restrictions. All the basic councils have a sufficient number of representatives in this council. These representatives do not make decisions on behalf of the broad masses of the council members and have absolutely no role of planners or rulers. They reflect the opinions and agreements, plans and expectations of their respective councils and coordinate these plans, agreements and expectations within the framework of the delegated powers. Representatives can be dismissed at any time without any formalities and only upon the request of the majority of the members of the respective Basic Council. The meetings of the council are absolutely public. Attendance at the meetings is free for all residents. The council’s discussions are made freely and directly available to all citizens of the socialist society, without any restrictions or limitations, through the mass media and using all technical and information technology facilities. All members of society have the duty and right to express their objections, suggestions, criticisms, or favourable or unfavourable observations regarding the decisions of the commune council, and the mass media are obliged to bring all these favourable and unfavourable opinions to the public’s attention at the community level. The commune council is inviolable in the normal course of work, life, and social activities of citizens. The members of the council are in no way administrative figures, and their presence in the council has absolutely no professional aspect. At the end of the meetings and the performance of their council duties, the members return to their routine working and productive conditions and resume their productive, educational, health, treatment, service, and research activities alongside other citizens. The issues and matters that are examined in the commune council are predominantly decision-making at the local level. Among these are matters that concern the collective interests of all citizens of a socialist society. For example, the definition of socialist voluntary work, the exploitation of underground resources and natural resources, defence, the foundations and standards of public welfare, the standard of housing or the share of each citizen in the distribution of living resources, and the like. Such matters are referred to the All-Union Congress of Councils for final assignment after all necessary discussions and studies.
It may be said that each group of delegates of the basic councils belongs to a certain sphere of work and life and social needs of citizens, and therefore their participation in planning areas that are outside the realm of their experience, knowledge and understanding takes on a more formal and caricatured aspect. Such a criticism can be an indication of communist sensitivity to the fate of socialism and the people of socialist society, but it has its own specific response and solution. A topic that we will discuss in other chapters of the book. For the time being, we will suffice with saying that in the socialist labour council organization, the foundation of labour is based on eliminating the contradiction between intellectual and manual labour or the difference between the level of knowledge and expertise of the members of society and the creative effort to elevate all people to the highest level of knowledge in all issues related to the various spheres of social life. This is quite possible. It is not a question of, for example, that all members of society become heart surgeons, Patho biologists, nuclear physicists, architects, or chemists. What is important is that first of all, all the facilities to acquire this knowledge and expertise are available to everyone. Secondly, the possibility of raising the knowledge of each citizen in all these areas to a high and higher level is not a fantasy that is among the obvious. The commune council lacks any bureaucratic or governmental character. Membership in it is not a job, but simply a mission. Decision-making in the council is based on the majority of votes of the representatives, but attendance is free for all citizens. All discussions, decisions and disagreements within the council are directly communicated to everyone through the mass media. At the end of the discussion and decision-making sessions, the council representatives return to their normal work and life, and their re-participation in the sessions is subject to their re-election by the basic councils.
National Congress of Socialist Councils
The All-Union Congress of Councils is the highest authority for coordination and decision-making of the Councils at the national level and for the entire socialist society. This congress is attended by the elected representatives of the commune councils. All plans, programs, solutions, values, principles, laws and social contracts, everything that concerns the life and collective interests of citizens and has previously been discussed within the basic and commune councils, are transformed here into all-union decisions based on the common interests of all citizens. In the course of these studies, the All-Union Congress of Councils examines and specifies the general lines of socialist planning in various spheres of social life. The types of these issues are:
– The amount of the annual product of social labour and production in various areas
– The existing standard of living, housing, education, health, treatment and general welfare, upbringing of children and youth, the elderly and other social groups,
– Scientific research and planning,
– The relative coefficient of allocation of annual social labour of citizens to the reproduction of production conditions or depreciation of labour tools
– Determination of a share of social labour that should be spent on improving technology, developing and completing basic economic facilities, road construction, urban planning, asphalting streets, research, annual promotion of production efficiency and continuous raising of the living standards of citizens,
– Part of the annual product of socialist labour of citizens that should be allocated to housing, living and meeting their vital needs,
– The share of education and training, health and medicine and treatment, child welfare and upbringing, youth affairs, physical education and recreation, affairs of the elderly and disabled and pensioners, culture and art, defence, assistance to the labour movement among international and the type of these from the product of labour and annual production,
– Definition of voluntary labour in a socialist society with regard to all the above and an estimate of needs, possibilities and capacities
– Calculation of the population ready to work and willing to participate in the process of work and production in various social spheres, planning the distribution of work and activities among volunteers, taking into account the coefficients of intensity, speed and difficulty of work,
– How to distribute socialist and in all respects equal all economic, educational, health, research, cultural, welfare, housing, service facilities among communes and various geographical areas on the one hand and individual citizens on the other
The General Congress of Councils, by addressing all these matters and through its deliberations, coordination, planning and decision-making, ensures the establishment of a work organization and an economic system corresponding to the abolition of the relationship between capital and the purchase and sale of labour power. It realizes the distribution of all living and social facilities on the basis of meeting all the needs of citizens, and it materializes the abolition of the market and money and all the consequences of capitalist production.