Post A Follow Up Discussion Page
Posted by E.L.A.Z on 12th December 2000
Country: England
After reading some of the posts in the archive, and the current topics, I have to say that I can see where your detractors are coming from. I am an anarchist socialist in the mould of Bey, Bakunin and many others, who simply want order, prosperity and equality, without control, without having it done for us. As humans we are the planets most advancede species, and yet it seems that a majority of us worldwide are not trusted to make our own responsible decisions. Whether the LSA's 'socialists', those middle class champagne socialists who tell us to toe the party line, or if we are capitalist sheep, rhetoric -and it is rhetoric- only provides illusion. Even a label merely defines you and limits you.
My educational background is in Physics, and one example i would give is that any theory is at best a model, never a complete description, only an approximation. Politically, economically ecologically and socially, the human race must adapt to the situation, and this is best done on a sustainable ecological platform FIRST AND FOREMOST. My personal view on an 'organisation' (much as i dislike the word) would be a local elected representative from every segment of an area (i.e, a village in rural areas would have a council of the population, but a town would have to elect council members on some small scale) From these councils, members are elected up to national level. Note that the participation of population in the system is total. There would be no elite justifiable body with supreme authority.
My view is that the organisation must be organic in function. It should react to situations, while embracing both the largrest scale collective interest, and caring for every individual that requires it.
for example, if a scheme will act in detriment to 1000 people but benefit 100'000, then it should go ahead. But if 1 person would benefit to a slight change in that plan that yes, might cost more -but we are socialists- then we should respect the individuals rights as well as the collective. That might seem silly to you, to be changing the will of the people in response to 1 valid reason, but if it was you in that position you would like the consideration to be given to you.
But im digressing, as i often do. My point is, that a labelled organisation, with limits, rules etc, only sometimes parrallels what is needed, and then only by chance. the workers movemnet of the future should be organic, flexible and reactant to realities that confront it. It should work for the greater good, but it should not forget that the collective is made of little people too, not just demagogues and 'champagne socialists'