💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › des-mccarron-evolution-or-revolution.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 09:13:11. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Evolution or Revolution?
Author: Des McCarron
Date: 1994
Language: en
Topics: evolution, revolution, Workers Solidarity, Ireland
Source: Retrieved on 18th November 2021 from http://struggle.ws/ws94/ws42_evolve.html
Notes: Published in Workers Solidarity No. 42 — Summer 1994.

Des McCarron

Evolution or Revolution?

THE IDEA OF evolution has always been important to socialists. Except

for a handful of utopians most have thought of socialism in terms of

human progress and improvment. This idea was given a scientific basis in

the nineteenth century by socialists who saw society as evolving through

stages towards socialism (not that it would stop here socialism would

just be the end of pre-history real history could then begin.) Most

socialists believed that the struggle towards socialism was a striving

of people to develop and move forward.

So socialists have been united by the idea of the human race advancing

towards a better society. They have been divided about how to get there.

A major division has arisen between does who believe that socialism can

evolve passively through education and example and those who believe it

has to be fought for.

Can change occur by itself?

As capitalism began to develop during the nineteenth century small

groups began to question the system and whether it ran in the interests

of everyone. Most of this criticism was moral. capitalism was seen as

evil because it dennied humans their through potential and freedom. One

of the first practical solutions put forward was to build a new society

from within capitalism. This was the idea of forming socialist

co-operatives.

Some of these settlements were models of socialist ideas in practice

with all goods held in common and an equal say for all. For example a

Co-op set up at Rahiline Co. Clare in 1831.

This was founded when the owner John Scott Vandeleur donated his 618

acre estate to the orginal tenants. The Ralahine Agricultural and

Manufacturing Co-operative Association was an instant success. All land

was held in common and workers were paid in labour notes. These could be

redeemed for supplies from the committee but such was the abundance they

were hardly required. The committee was elected by all the ex-tennants

and was made up of both men and women.

Unfortunately Vandeleur lost all his money gambling and the estate was

sold to pay debts. The worker’s signed a declaration”We the under-signed

members of the Ralahine Agricultural and Manufacturng Co-Operative

Association have experienced over the last 2 years contentment, peace

and happiness..” (quoted in P. Berrisford Eliss History of the Irish

Working Class)

The area quickly settled down to the old pattern of police and landlord

violence and agricultural revolts exactly as before. Despite the best

intentions of the co-operativists few wanted to follow their example and

just hand land to the peasants. None of their schemes led to socialism

though some gave a clue as to how it might work in practise. In Ireland

today modern farm co-ops are just limited companies. Many are among the

most sucessful capitalist enteprises in the country.

Islands in the stream

Unfortunately these isolated social experiments are doomed to failure.

There can be no islands in the stream of capitalism. Any such group has

to enter into economic relations with the modern capitalist economy

eventually.

The only other choice is total self containment and isolation like the

religious colonies of Hutterites, Menonites and Amish in America. Though

these societies spurn war and violence and hold all goods in common they

are also conservative, sexist and rooted in tradition. They have

basically stood still for 400 years and ignored the world around them.

They cannot move forward because progress and evolution is ultimately

based on social and human contact.

Is that a ballot box in your pocket?

So socialism won’t evolve from islands within capitalism. Neither will

it evolve from example, education or voting to put the “good guys” in

power. Only a total idiot (and I’ve met a few in my time) could believe

that voting social democrats into power could bring about socialism. A

study of parliamentry democracy in Western Europe between 1970 and 1985

noted that “all European parties of any reasonable size have enjoyed at

least one period of power in this period.”

“Socialists” have been in government everywhere! Yet through out Europe

it has been business as usual. No matter what party was in power

economic policty remained unchanged In the election in Australia last

year a panel of leading economic experts could not see any difference

between the Labour party and neo-thatcherite Liberal party on economic

policy.

The striking thing about parliamentry democracy is its entirely

undemocractic character. John Stuart Mill the 19^(th) century liberal

philosopher saw democracy as a form of government in which “the

intellectual classes would lead the government and the government would

lead the stupid classes” Whatever about the intelligence of “democratic”

governments they certainly rule in the interests of a minority class.

The “stupid classes” get to mark a card every few years and otherwise

put up or shut up. Capitalist democracy is merely an exercise in mass

disefranchisement.

Biological crisis

So how do we anarchists see socialist ideas evolving? Evolution is not

necessarily a smooth and even process. The modern veiw of evolution in

biology is a story of long periods of stability with little change

separated by brief crisis periods. Within this short periods of

evolutionary time there were huge waves of evolutionary change along

with mass extinctions. During this time hundreds of species perished and

hundreds of new ones evolved. This idea was first put forward by a

materialist zoologist; Stephen J Gould. It is to the idea of materialism

that we turn to for our veiw of how societies evolve.

Society does not progress slowly and smoothly but after long periods of

evolution there are briefer periods of revolutionary change. Capitalism,

for example, evolved slowly from within feudalism. However the actual

transition from feudalism to capitalism was marked by upheaval and

social revolution throughout Europe. A new class of merchants and

capitalists overthrew an old order of lords and monarchs. Democracy and

the nation state replaced a network of earldoms and dukedoms losely

bound together by a king or queen.

Revolutions

Our view is that, unfortunately, Major social change does not happen

quickly or easilly. Anarchism won’t just happen. It will only succeed

when the majority of society have the ability and the wish to run it in

their own interests.

In practice we see revolution as building from the ground up. Workers

infringing more and more on the bosses’ profit margins and eventually

questioning their right to make a profit on the backs of the working

class and taking over their workplace. As the struggle progresses more

workers setup workplace commitees, councils and eventually defence

militias. Groups begin to federate upwards on the basis of democracy,

delegation and recallability. This is a revolution desired by many not

imposed by a few (as most past revolutions have been.)

Inevitably when faced with a major challenge the bosses and state will

be ready to fight to defend their wealth and power. We have to be ready

to fight to defend and forward the revolution.

With good organisation, most people on our side and the army coming over

we would hope this would not be a long or bloody fight. We are certain

the system can’t be reformed out of existence. It has to be destroyed.

We are revolutionaries not out of blood lust or because we think it

sounds cool. We are revolutionaries because it is the only way forward.