By the definitions put forward in the article linked to above, I guess I would be an eco-anarchist, not an eco-socialist. I disagree that Bolshevism is a perversion of Marxism. I think, rather, that it is a direct consequence of Marxism in action. You could re-run that scenario as many times as you want and you would end up with roughly the same result every time. Marx's emphasis on the necessity of seizing the state guarantees it.
The last bit about the need for a centralized government that would dissolve itself after five or ten years is pure fantasy. If history has shown us anything, it is that centralized governments never dissolve themselves. The entrenchment of their own power becomes the overriding goal of every governmental body, no matter how revolutionary their rhetoric may have been beforehand.
Groups like this all like to point to Rojava as somehow being their kindred spirit, while completely overlooking what is perhaps the central point of Öcalan's Democratic Confederalism, which is that the state cannot be overthrown. Particular states may be overthrown, but state power itself cannot. Overthrowing one state inevitably results in the ossification of power in a new state apparatus. This new centralized government quickly finds itself locked into a course of action, dictated by the demands of the nation-state model, that results in it devolving into a bureaucratic, state-capitalist model that is no longer worth defending.
Rojava did not overthrow the Syrian state. They stepped into a void left by the near collapse of the Syrian state and filled it with their own decentralized, autonomous bodies. The distinction is crucial. State power cannot be overthrown. It must be transcended.
No comments:
Post a Comment