#vanguardist

Redesigns for Libsoc and Vanguardist!!! (Also another continuation of my previous posts...) You can find their old designs here. ^_^ My favourite butches ever, they're so gorgeous...

   It is the source of confusion often times, when a socialist, communist or otherwise leftist, talks about vanguards. Vanguard is a word that has sadly also been used by the Nazis, to describe a group of people who rule over the general populace, and decide the direction society is headed in all matters, under the guise of doing everything for the common good. And due to the misconception, that Nazis somehow fall in the same ideological group as socialism, it creates some mistrust when brought up by one of us. In reality what a ‘’radical leftist’’ (to use colloquial terms) means when they refer to vanguards and Vanguardism is something else entirely. And what I mainly want to talk about, that even communists are often confused when they hear the term Vanguardism, being used to describe a separate movement amongst the sects of communism.

   The term vanguard in socialist thought was popularised and greatly expanded by Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, otherwise known as Lenin, in a multitude of his works, dating back to 1902, first appearing in Lenin’s pamphlet ‘’What is to be done?’’. However it has appeared further back, detailed by Marxist philosopher Karl Kautsky a big influencer in Lenin’s initial work and thought due to his prowess amongst the German socialist party (whose principles Lenin greatly aspised), and later a staunch anti-Bolshevik, in clash with Lenin. As one might expect however, he was directly influenced too by none other than Karl Marx himself, who referenced the concept of Vanguardism in it’s more basic state, in the communist manifesto. So in order to understand what ‘’leftist’’ Vanguardism exactly is, let’s start from the beginning. 

   In the communist manifesto it is detailed that the communists and the proletariat, though having the same goal, are not one and the same necessarily. While members of the proletariat may be communists not all proletarians are. Why is that ? Well Marx describes the communists as a small facet of society, made up of revolutionaries that are not just class-concious, but understand socialist and communist theory to such a degree, and have the will and the determination to make it a reality, that they become distinguished amongst the masses and lead the revolution to succeed in not just liberation of the working class, but instillation of socialism as well. The communists are not necessarily proletarians, (Marx himself was a high-class individual), but do still understand the most basic principle, that mankind’s collective interest lies with the proletariat. What is this group of communists but a Vanguard ? Intellectuals whose personality boons allow for such individuals to lead all others in the path to liberation. Determined, skilled, knowledgeable, selfless leaders, who truly have the collective’s interest in mind, and have the foresight to recognise and secure it. This is a Vanguard, in it’s most basic form. Figures such as Lenin himself may come to mind following this description. Let’s jump a bit forward in time however.

  Kautsky is and was regarded as a controversial yet respected figure within the Bolshevik party, and more so respected by Lenin himself, despite their disagreements. After all, Lenin even highly regarded and respected figures such as Kropotkin, in whose case while we are on the subject, Lenin not only allowed Anarchist demonstrations following his funeral, but sent a cache of supplies and medical personnel to aid in his recovery during his last days suffering to pneumonia. Lenin’s aid did not reach Kropotkin in time, however clearly Lenin was a gentler soul, and more dialectical and a humanist than people give him credit for. In any case, when it comes to Kautsky, Lenin was just as accepting of the disagreement between them, and was not shy to adopt a lot of his contributions to socialist thought, namely the concept of Vanguardism he proposed into his own theories, despite Kautsky’s staunch anti-Bolshevik rhetoric. Which leads us well into Lenin’s Vanguardism.

  Lenin’s advancement of the concept of Vanguardism, into such an extend that it became a critical part of communist theory is clearly exhibited in his aforementioned pamphlet ‘’What is to be done?’’ which I highly suggest you look into. 

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1901/witbd/preface.htm

I will attempt to summarise the principle as best as I can; 

Due to the autocracy present in the Russian system of the time, and the fact that society in Russia had never experienced western capitalism in order to transition into socialism fluidly as is necessary (in Marxism it is a basic principle that society must transition from feudalism to capitalism and then to socialism naturally, in order for the necessary conditions for a successful worker’s revolution to be possible), it was of at most importance to Lenin, to work around the federalist system of Russia, and to create the conditions necessary for revolution manually. A by-product of that attempt, was the advanced ‘’political strategy’’ of Vanguardism. Because the serfs who made up the vast population of Russia, had a distinct lack of class conciousness due to the fact that they had never experienced the urban capitalism present in countries such as England at the time, something needed to be done to work around that restriction. The only thing the serfs really knew was the serfdom enforced by the Tsardom and their feudal lords, and so the responsibility of arming the working class with that essential knowledge had to fall upon the Vanguard party. What is the Vanguard party ? Well that’s a slightly confusing question. The Vanguard party as theorised by Lenin, would be a transparent political entity, accepting all communists *for the kind of communists I’m referring to see paragraph 3*, and working towards radicalising, communising and instilling class-conciousness, into the working class pre-revolution. Post revolution, that party would take an active role, as the effective government of the respective nation, following the directives of the worker’s councils at every turn in most if not all matters, and building towards communism, slowly shrinking as the need of a government diminishes in a world of socialist nations, as they proliferate. What Lenin instilled however was different. Though Vanguardism in Russia was a far cry from what Lenin wanted (something which he recognised himself), the way it was implemented by Lenin mirrors the system it was replacing, working around the restrictions the old order had set as best as was possible. Lenin did not want to implement this system, Lenin HAD to implement this system. The kind of Vanguard party that became the first soviet government was much more authoritarian in nature than it was originally supposed to, in order to iron out the kinks the old system had set, namely a non class-concious proletariat, a serf economy, a previously massively authoritarian power structure and lack of infrastructure and industrialisation. Moreover, the Vanguard party, in order to protect itself in a climate of extreme hostility in outside relations and a very divided nation due to civil war, became quite closed and reserved to itself, almost as if it became another class entirely, a ruling class at that point. And so it was that Lenin’s Vanguard became Russia’s iron fist government. Arguably it was necessary for the Vanguard to take that approach in order to ensure that all went as it should, yet others would object, asking what that costed. Though it is necessary to note, that Lenin never intended that system to be permanent.

  Personally I aspise the theory as it was first written by Lenin, now that the whole world has experienced late stage capitalism I staunchly believe that Lenin’s Vanguardism is more relevant, than it has ever been. I also believe perhaps controversially among communists, that Stalin expanded on the system Lenin had intended to phase out, finalising it’s structure in Russia, and creating not a dictatorship of the proletariat, but a dictatorship, period. As benevolent as his intentions might have been, that is mainly why I refuse to align myself with the ‘’Marxism-Leninism’’ that Stalin shaped, and choose to identify as a Vanguardist. 

  Vanguardism now, has taken on a new meaning for me. More akin to what most refer to as ‘’Classical Leninism’’ or simply Leninism. Another sect of communist thought and theory, that chooses to stick to Leninism, rejecting the direction which the Bolshevik party took, during Stalin’s reign. It is perhaps out of this defiance and rejection, that I chose to refer to myself as Vanguardist, clinging on to Lenin’s basis to his theory. Many of our kin call me and others like me revisionist, but in our eyes that seems quite ironic and hypocritical to say. In any case, to say that Stalin was an evil dictator would be a gross overstatement. In my eyes Stalin was simply mislead. A man of good intentions, with a twisted idea for the theories he supported and the world he wanted to build. His contributions cannot be underestimated, but so can’t his mistakes be forgotten. If there is anything that Maoism taught us, as much as some of us may disagree with it, it is self-criticism. I am happy to see that more and more communists and communist parties around the world, have started to take that Maoist principle in, viewing things more objectively, removing Stalin from his pedestal and recognising his bad side as well. Learning from the mistakes of the past, to build the future was always what we believed in and preached, and that past should extend to our movement’s past as well.