- Without entering the text with the words of a philosopher, I would like to take advantage of a (largely sterile) debate that is taking place lately to make a reflection that is necessary to us. The compass of communism among those of us who have the candle for struggle, to talk about the lack of connection between the partial struggles and the lanes of the political project.
In recent years, there have been many struggles in the youth movement as well as in the popular movement, in social and dynamic projects for all ages. Cooperatives created in different areas, spaces for political reflection and the confluence of alternatives are also created. Although they have been conceived with different objectives, functioning and speeches, (the majority) have, of course, been born of a broader political strategy, or of several, from a clear tactical perspective. The reflection arises from the relationship between these and the political project.
Tactical struggles and discourses are fundamental for the empowerment of the people, criticism and the generation of alternatives. But this cannot put aside the apology of the political project, and in this case the apology of the Socialist State, which is at the heart of the debate I want to launch. In the struggle of the workers, a trench of rights or partial struggles is essential. But behind this there must be the objective and the instruments for the integral struggle of social liberation.
Although behind tactical projects there is always (or almost always) a deeper militant reflection to contribute to the political strategy, if that reflection stays only in the heads of the drivers, we fall into the hole of “micro”, isolated projects and reformist speeches. That is, you may be clear that you understand a project as a tool for a larger goal, but what is on the other side of that reading does not have to have that tactical vision.
It is usually said that there are different reasons or origins to join the struggle for the national and social liberation of the Basque Country. In some cases, patriotism is the main reason or source of approximation to the struggle. For others, it is a desire to fight against the feminist struggle and against the gender system. It usually comes, of course, from adherence to struggles.
On the opposite side, charlatanery, of course, brings nothing if there is no project and a political praxis behind it, or if there is no proportionality between this and the words you sell. But at the same time, a revolutionary political project and praxis needs at least one offer and an apology of political majorities. Firstly, as has already been said, to make it clear that small and isolated projects and struggles are not strategic objectives, but rather a gear for a whole machinery. Secondly, because in the struggle for the workers’ struggle and for a new society, if our compass is the Socialist State (painted with a thick brush, without entering into discussions of concretions), in addition to the partial struggles, a discourse and an imaginary for the same objective is necessary. Thirdly, because militants and workers with the potential to join the struggle need not understand the strategic position behind partial struggles. And finally, because creating a common apology and ideology in favor of maxima generates, of course, a motivation and a passion for struggle.
Regarding this last reason, it is usually said that there are different reasons or origins that add us to the struggle for the national and social liberation of Euskal Herria. In some cases, patriotism is the main reason or source of approximation to the struggle. For others, it is a desire to fight against the feminist struggle and against the gender system. Usually, of course, it comes from adherence to the different struggles (and then it is consolidated). In my case, the 20th century. From the excitement of the revolutionary experiences of the 21st century. Also some dependents). Soviet Union, Cuba, Vietnam, Yugoslavia... From admiration for the peoples who have fought with the red flag of Marxism.
Lately, due to the prominence that other struggles have acquired (of course, without attributing anything to them, but making much of the general thesis of a book that has generated a stir in summer), the struggle between classes has lost political presence (or the struggles appear disconnected, as if they had nothing to do with the class), and when in some place it has been done the leftist “currents” that strategically see the “micro” more. Is it their fault? Of course not. The problem is the lack of discursive work by those of us who defend the Socialist State. The essential contribution of Marxism to the interpretation of reality and to the impulse of a comprehensive liberating project also needs a projection to the outside without masks.
And in the face of this what? I would say it's up to us to move the tab. From local and national struggles, small and large, we are not only opposed to the system, but, to avoid falling into the sterile comfort of “worse than worse”, also in the conflict between classes we must occasionally recover the discourse of the comprehensive solution. Without falling into the fetishism of the discourse, with new and old forms and words, with a thick brush and from a minimum consensus, to clearly propose the commitment to a socialist Basque Country. Although it is far from being at the centre of the political agenda, at least so as not to fall into the risks mentioned above.