Catalonia: Competing Nationalisms against the Working Class

The conflict between the factions defending the existing Spanish state and those seeking a separate Catalonian state continues to accelerate. Whatever the outcome or the detailed twists and turns it is clear that class-conscious workers need to be equally independent from those arguing for either a separate Catalan state or the preservation of the existing state order – both represent the façade behind which the bosses’ class exercise their control.

Nationalist Manoeuvring

The latest stage in the ratcheting up of the competing nationalist projects began at the beginning of September when the Catalan parliament approved a motion calling for a referendum on independence to be held on 1 October. The Spanish government declared the decision unconstitutional, based on the Spanish Constitution of 1978 which upholds ‘the indissoluble unity of the Spanish nation’ – a settlement that aimed at firmly controlling any echoes of local separatism that appeared during the Civil War in the 1930s. However, the Catalan Government decided to press on with their proposal hoping to cash in on years of fostering Catalan separatism.

On 20 September the Spanish state launched Operation Anubis – an attempt to prevent the referendum from taking place which included the raiding of Catalan government offices, arresting officials and confiscating ballot papers. This culminated in open state violence by the Spanish State forces around the day that the referendum was held. Protests against this violence took place in Catalonia but at this stage we have no information of any major protests elsewhere in Spain. Instead we have seen massive demonstrations of Spanish nationalism in Madrid and elsewhere – an obvious illustration of nationalism cutting across working class unity.

The events of 1 October galvanised nationalist tendencies on both sides. According to the Catalan regional authorities, 91.96% voted yes to an independent Catalan republic, but overall turnout was low at 42.58%. The day of the vote was marred by turmoil, as the Policia Nacional and the Guardia Civil attempted to close down polling stations. 893 injured civilians revealed the violence inherent within the democratic state – some commentators, among them, ironically, Nicolás Maduro, drew comparisons between the actions of Mariano Rajoy’s government and Francoist Spain. Afterwards, the European Commission declared that ‘under the Spanish Constitution, the 1 October vote in Catalonia was not legal’ and that they trust ‘the leadership of Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy to manage this difficult process’. [1]

Following the September crackdown by the Spanish state, the CGT, followed by the CNT and other small unions, seized the opportunity and called a general strike for 3 October. After the events of 1 October, Spain's biggest unions, the UGT and CCOO, as well as the Catalan independence association (ANC) instead announced what may be best described as a citizen’s walkout – their statement read: ’We call on all of society, on employers' organisations, business owners, unions, workers, self-employed workers, institutions and all the citizens of Catalonia to stop the 'country' on Tuesday, October 3’. The strike on 3 October hit public transport, two major ports, and the agrarian sector. [2] Whether as part of the citizen’s walkout or the general strike call-out, whether motivated by nationalism or anger at the police, workers reacted to the events. It remains unclear how far the reports of local assemblies reflect sparks of working class self-organisation or whether they were creations of the local bourgeois establishment to act as a “stage army” favouring the separatists’ agenda.

Since the beginning of the October both the state machines based in Madrid and Barcelona have justified their own positions claiming that their respective constitutional positions outweigh the others. It would be a fatal mistake if workers in Catalonia or the rest of Spain are dragooned behind either of the competing arguments. Behind the lawyers’ debates about “angels on pinheads” lies the reality of ruling class factions seeking to extend their own ability to exploit the working class – totally irrespective of accidents of birth, nationality or heritage.

The Internationalist Response

The events in Catalonia have to be understood within the context of capitalism’s long term economic crisis which culminated in a financial crash in 2007 from which there has been no real recovery. This has increasingly led local sections of the capitalist class to think they could manage the economy better than the central state. This in turn has produced a global shift towards nationalism and populism. In an economy which still has not recovered ten years after the bubble of speculation burst, the ruling class is running out of ideas and is divided on how to get out of it. The attempt to shift the blame onto the central Spanish government by the Catalan government, to rally workers behind the separatist programme, is supposed to conceal the fact that certain sections of the Catalan ruling class (which is also split on the issue) has been just as responsible for enacting austerity measures as the government in Madrid.

As we have said many times, national liberation does nothing but divide the working class and leaves workers at the mercy of their own national bourgeoisie. Where the various national factions have spread nationalist delusions we argue for the local working class to stand against both sides of the argument around these projects. The examples of this are countless (including recent ones like Ukraine [3], Scotland [4] or Kurdistan [5]). Even as we write, the referendum in Iraqi Kurdistan is being used to prepare the next chapter of death and suffering around struggle for resources in the Turkey/Syria/Iraq cauldron.

As internationalists, we argue that the only alternative to the social and environmental devastation offered by capitalism is that workers unite across borders for a common goal: a world without classes and states, where ‘the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all’. For this we need an international organisation, a party, which can effectively intervene in events such as the strike in Catalonia – to push the struggle beyond the control of unions and institutional parties, and declare independence from all strata of the ruling class, whatever their nationality.

If and when there are movements towards neighbourhood or workplace assemblies then the arguments must be made to separate them totally from factions of the state, Spanish or Catalan, and from the participation of local employers. Binding decisions must come from the mass meetings with delegates being accountable and recallable. The spreading and networking of such working-class organisations is the alternative to the bloody cul-de-sac of competing nationalisms that the bourgeoisie is preparing. In the absence of an existing effective internationalist organisation we offer our solidarity and assistance to communist nuclei and individuals struggling for this necessary proletarian response.


6 October 2017-10-07


[1] Statement on the events in Catalonia

[2] Catalonia stages general strike following Spanish police's 'brutal' response to independence referendum

[3] Ukraine - A Nationalist Dead End

[4] The Scottish Independence Referendum: The Great Diversion

[5] In Rojava: People’s War is not Class War

Saturday, October 7, 2017


In the 1950s, whilst working with an international group picking potatoes on a farm in the UK, a postal worker from Spain, responding to a question as to whether he would prefer socialism to the rule of Franco, told us that actually what he really wanted was democracy. Now there is a strong tendency in the communist left for 'democracy' to automatically be dismissed as 'bourgeois', whereas what might be thought of as 'proletarian democracy' with its workers' councils ought to be (regarded as) something altogether different. Earlier this year I happened to meet someone from Barcelona who was an anarchist, and returned there some months ago. Whilst it is true that millions of people get 'bourgeois ideology' swept into them, which tends to influence and probably dominate their attempts at political decision-making, even it they then make the 'wrong' decisions, and then learn the hard way that those were 'wrong', it seems to me that there should always be scope for the masses of people to have their say, even if that is not via all the means regarded as necessary by the communist left. There ought to be a better way for us than only if and when voting with our feet.

So the 57% who voted with their feet and did not vote in the referendum in Catalonia don't count? It seems you don't see that all talk of democracy is hypocrisy under capitalism. Only in a situation of social equality where no-one owns the means of production (including of ideas) can there be talk of democracy but not an indirect one where you elect someone for 5 years and then can do nothing about it. And you don't seem to see that this is a game between two bankrupt bourgeois factions each fighting for their own interests. The Catalan bourgeoisie is also divided (see all the firms moving their headquarters out under the threat of "independence") but that is not of interest to us. Nor are all the numances of history where we see the descendants of the Catalan nationalism of the 1930s facing up to the descendants of Castilian centralism a la Franco. Our aim here is only to give a clear proletarian perspective.

ICT rises to the occasion and clearly sets out the proletarian position of no support for any capitalist faction, no excuses for lining up the proletariat behind its class enemy.

The social organisation we seek has nothing to do with what passes for democracy under capitalism.

I did not say that workers voting with their feet don't count ! Whilst your problem is that not enough workers know of your sublime aspirations, workers today, however vast imagination as to ultimate solutions for all workers to all problems, can only tackle today the problems of today in ways available today, and that's not my fault ! It's not a question of lack of awareness on my part, as I keep reading a range of communist left stuff about all sorts of theories and historical facts, including leftcom latest and ICC and ICP (Liverpool) and non-CL sites. As I'm not convinced that many workers will be convinced that some or many of their recommendations are viable and/or likely to be adopted by workers here and abroad, I'm frequently tempted to stop surfing the web, but that is probably not just one reader's problem. It's a matter of keeping your feet on the ground rather than head in the clouds, mushroom or otherwise. Talking of that, I did mention at a local meeting organised by a 'peace' organisation, to which I don't belong, that imperialism cannot be persuaded to be peaceful, but see no sign of a formation of workers' councils to run the town, let alone the planet. I ask myself why is that ? Is it entirely my fault that I haven't done enough propaganda, or is the contents of it incredible ? For instance, how many workers would believe that workers could adminster efficiently within an undefined borderless area in which any number of other workers are likely to arrive any day soon, or as soon as nations and thus borders are abolished ? It's not just a matter of trying to get rid of capitalism, which seems unlikely, but of advancing ideas and policies which make sense to and for workers.

There are several strands to your thinking that I will try to reduce to manageable concepts.

  1. Present and growing threat of global war/local wars.
  2. Lack of adherence to revolutionary politics by significant numbers now.
  3. No confidence in a future explosion of class consciousness.
  4. Leaving you with the mechanisms of present day society...
  5. Using these to create a social formation which whilst within the framework of capitalism, avoids the threatened large scale social collapse/barbarism/possible destruction of humanity.

We of the marxist camp share certain elements of the above schema (1 and 2). However the latter aspects (3 4 5) we reject. Certainly there is no guarantee of a successful outcome or a generalisation of class consciousness, but it would be rash to rule that development out. Given the trajectory of capitalism for which we have empirical data, we can trace the key factors like profitability, growth, inequality and the like and see this is creating an unsustainable situation which will put pressure on the working class to struggle to defend itself. It is within this struggle that we hope to gain traction.

It is through the abandonment of capitalism's safety mechanisms, its welfare, pensions, guarantees of survival that we predict the intensification of class struggle and the material pressure to abandon the pro capitalist perspective currently held by the vast majority (even if they would not call it as such).

These same perspectives also mean that capitalism is unable to prevent the sharpening of imperialist confrontastion which arises out of the economic pressures.

Imperialist blocs faced with rising proletarian anger and tendentially declining profit rates (which the imperialists seek to maintain at the expense of the working class and thier rivals) are unable to prevent the rising tide of confrontation and the threat of all out war, or a series of lesser clashes.

There is no means for the system to mitigate the proletarian condition. Despite this or that reformist initiative, somewhat akin to special offers in a supermarket, the overall trajectory for the working class is the loss of previous gains won under better conditions for capital and a descent into pauperisation.

Bewfore the sharp end phase of the capitalist crisis plays out, the minority will see it coming. The majority will continue to be held captivated by capitalist propaganda, possibilities of brighter days, national progress, electoral change and the like until the eve of revolution. Or the worst case scenarios will play out.

But between these alternatives, the revolutionary path, the road to ruin, there is no third way.

I think that is essentially what you are looking for, a third way. That is what we do not offer.

Thank you, stevein7, for your comments of 2017-10-09 09:48. Questions seeking clarification are what I have for you now. Taking note of all that you have just said, let's ask whether or not you view your workers' councils type of communism as seeking to plan, set up and run one or more workers' owned economies. If so, then we are normally told that it is too early to have a plan or plans for that, in other words it isn't a 'cut and dried' situation so far. ' Cut and dried' would be as from fruit derived seeds then from plants from suitable soil made ready for when needed. Now politically there should be no blame apportioned to small groups of pioneering thinkers attempting to tackle the workers' world problems, starting with theory, and indeed the example of Christianity developing from the notions of one man to to multiple denominations world-wide might spur you on, as well as the daunting world situations. But alongside all the arguments against any further support for capitalist politics and economics, if workers are going to be drawn as 'seeds' to support ICT views and organisation, surely there needs to be far more clarification of what needs to be envisageed by supporting you than imaginative general hopes. Unless workers can be able to see how an economy can actually be run in a totally different way from present ways, we are likely to stick with, be stuck with, the status quo, rather than organise and plan to overthrow it. The mixture of attempts and disasters to run economies said, mistakenly, to be beyond the rule of capital, are cautiionary examples of so much that wasn't and/or couldn't be prepared in time to produce a fully positive situation by and for workers of the world. Opposition to all that is wrong with capitalism is not the same as presenting a viable alternative.

Top of my head, I could sketch an alternative, as could many others. Would it be viable? I tend to think that the only way to answer such questions is to make the attempt. Reminds me of say, beginning to teach. I put some ideas into practice, some were OK, others were awful, and thirty years later I look back and think that if I could have done it all differently I would, but that is not how the process works, you have to go through the errors to get to the success. It is always a work in progress.

I think a great case could be made for simplifying and detoxifying, a sort of minimalism.

This might not appeal to the well off and sophisticated, but democracy does not appeal to the special. It is about the masses. Not the UK masses but the global masses.

The basis I would say is a sustainable agricultural model. The current model is not sustainable.

Then we have to have a massive programme of building decent dwellings, with access to water, electicity.

We can then think about the other essentials like clothing.

Health care and Education would make good areas to concentrate upon.

All of this would be dependent on sustainable environmentally compatible sources of energy.

Communist man would in the main be a vegan farmer who reads a lot...but that is just a base. As we get our act together, the real point would be to develop people to the full. Music, athletics, academics, playgrounds, parks, drama, love...but I think we have to get a base which emphasises our common humanity and includes all of us.

Told you it was top of my head...

Each worker believes all sorts of things, then gets faced with questions to himself and by others as to whether or not those beliefs are compatible with the doctrines of organisations which claim and argue and assume that they know best what would be best for the world. It's no good for anyone to feel that they ought to stop believing something just because they might be required to do so. We each have to keep our own counsel, although of course that is not quite the same as agreeing to make some compromises in order to support a mass movement against an agreed enemy of the working class. It is quite easy to hold seemingly contradictory beliefs, but we have to juggle with all sorts of factors and arguments. And then, what is true ? For whom? For which class ? True in which sense ? Lenin once commented that every word is a generalisation, according to brain specialist Luria. Meanwhile we need to keep alert to what is going on locally and worldwide, whether or not we can really make any difference to those by holding, harbouring, propagating sets of views. Cheers !


We have translated this post to Spanish. Here you have:

El conflicto entre las facciones que defienden el actual estado español y las que buscan separar un estado catalán sigue acelerándose. Cualquiera sea el resultado o los giros y quiebros, resulta claro que los trabajadores con conciencia de clase necesita ser independientes por igual de los que pelean por un estado catalán segregado o por la preservación de la organización estatal existente - ambos representan la fachada bajo la que la clase dirigente ejercita su control. Maniobras nacionalistas La última fase del engranaje de los proyectos nacionalistas rivales comenzó en septiembre, cuando el Parlamento catalán aprobó una moción convocando un referendum de independencia el 1 de octubre. El gobierno español declaró la decisión inconstitucional basándose en la Constitución española de 1978 que afirma «la indisoluble unidad de la nación española» - una resolución que anunciaba un control firme de cualquier eco de las tendencias separatistas locales aparecidas durante la guerra civil en los 30. En cualquier caso el gobierno catalán decidió mantener su propuesta con la esperanza de sacar partido de los años alimentando el separatismo catalán. El 20 de septiembre, el estado español lanzó la «Operación Anubis» -un intento de prevenir que el referendum tuviera lugar que el incluía el registro de oficinas del gobierno catalán, el arresto de responsables políticos y la confiscación de papeletas de voto. Esto culminó con el ejercicio abierto de la violencia estatal por las fuerzas de seguridad del estado español el día en el que se celebró el referendum. Se celebraron protestas contra esta violencia en Cataluña pero hasta el momento no tenemos información de protestas en otros lugares del país. En su lugar hemos visto manifestaciones masivas del nacionalismo español en Madrid y en otros lugares -una ilustración obvia del nacionalismo rompiendo la unidad de la clase trabajadora. Los hechos del 1 de octubre galvanizaron las tendencias nacionalistas en ambos lados. De acuerdo con las autoridades autonómicas catalanas el 91,96% votó si a una república catalana independiente, pero la participación total fue baja, un 42.58%. El día de las votaciones se empañó por la confusión y el lío dado que la Policía Nacional y la Guardia Civil intentaron cerrar los colegios electorales. 893 civiles heridos revelan la violencia inherente al estado democrático -algunos comentaristas, entre ellos, irónicamente, Nicolás Maduro, compararon la actuación del gobierno de Mariano Rajoy y la España franquista. Seguidamente, la Comisión Europea declaró que «bajo la Constitución española, la votación del 1 de octubre en Cataluña no fue legal» y que confiaban en «el liderazgo del primer ministro Mariano Rajoy para gestionar este difícil proceso» [1]. Tras la mano dura del estado español, la CGT, seguida de la CNT y otros sindicatos pequeños, vieron la oportunidad de convocar una huelga general el 3 de octubre. Tras los hechos del día 1, los grandes sindicatos españoles, UGT y CCOO, así como la Assamblea Nacional Catalana (ANC) anunciaron en su lugar lo que debería describirse como un «paseo ciudadano» - en su llamamiento podía leerse: «Llamamos al conjunto de la sociedad, a las organizaciones empresariales, a los empresarios, sindicatos, trabajadores, autónomos, a las instituciones y todos los ciudadanos de Cataluña a un «paro país» el martes 3 de octubre» La huelga del 3 de octubre afectó al transporte público, a dos grandes puertos y al sector agrario [2]. Fuera como parte de una protesta ciudadana o como respuesta a un llamamiento a la huelga general, fuera motivada por el nacionalismo o por la rabia contra la policía, los trabajadores reaccionaron a los hechos. Sigue sin quedar claro hasta qué punto las noticias de asambleas locales reflejan chispas de auto-organización obrera o fueron creación de la dirección de la burguesía local para que actuaran como subalternos para impulsar la agenda separatista. Desde el comienzo de Octubre, ambas maquinarias estatales, la de Madrid y la de Barcelona han justificado sus propias posiciones reinvindicando que sus respectivas posiciones constitucionales superaban a la de la otra. Sería un error fatal si los trabajadores en Cataluña o en el resto de España son arrastrados por cualquiera de los argumentarios en conflicto. Tras los debates legales bizantinos se esconde la realidad de las facciones de la clase dominante buscando extender su propia capacidad para explotar a la clase trabajadora -totalmente indiferente a cosas accidentales como el nacimiento, la nacionalidad o la herencia cultural. La respuesta internacionalista Los sucesos en Cataluña tienen que entenderse en el contexto de la crisis económica de largo recorrido del capitalismo que culminó con el crash financiero de 2007, desde el que no ha habido una recuperación real. Esto ha llevado, de manera creciente, a secciones de la clase capitalista a pensar que pueden gestionar la economía mejor que el estado central. Lo que a su vez ha generado un cambio global hacia el nacionalismo y el populismo. En una economía que todavía no se ha recuperado diez años después de que estallara la burbuja especulativa, la clase dirigente se está quedando sin ideas y se divide sobre como salir del paso. El intento del gobierno catalán de echar la culpa al gobierno central español para arrastrar obreros tras el programa separatista, se supone que tapará el hecho de que ciertas secciones de la clase dirigente catalana (que también está dividida sobre esta cuestión) haya sido tan responsable de poner en marcha las medidas de austeridad como el gobierno de Madrid. Como hemos dicho muchas veces, la liberación nacional no hace sino dividir a la clase trabajadora y deja a los trabajadores a merced de su propia burguesía nacional. Allá donde las distintas facciones nacionales han difundido delirios nacionalistas, sostemenos que la clase obrera local debe enfrentar a los dos bandos del debate sobre tales proyectos. Los ejemplos son innumerables (incluyendo algunos recientes como Ucrania [3], Escocia [4] o Kurdistan [5]). Incluso, mientras escribimos, el referendum en el Kurdistán iraquí está siendo usado para preparar el siguiente capítulo de muerto y sufrimiento alrededor de la lucha por los recursos del caldero turco/sirio/iraquí. Como internacionalistas, defendemos que la única alternativa a la devastación social y ambiental ofrecida por el capitalismo es que los trabajadores se unan por encima de las fronteras con una meta común: un mundo sin clases ni estados donde «el libre desarrollo de cada uno sea la condición para el libre desarrollo de todos». Para esto necesidamos una organización internacional, un partido, que pueda intervenir de modo efectivo en sucesos como la huelga en Cataluña -para empujar la lucha más allá del control de los sindicatos y los partidos institucionales, y declarar la independencia respecto a todos los estratos de la clase dominante sea cual sea su nacionalidad. Si hay, donde alla, movimientos que crean asambleas barriales o de centro de trabajo, entonces hay que dar batalla para separarlas totalmente de las facciones del estado, español o catalán, y de la participación de empresarios locales. Las decisiones vinculantes deben venir de mítines masivos con delegados fiscalizables y revocables. La extensión y reticularización de tales organizaciones de la clase trabajadora es la alternativa al sangriento callejón sin salida de los nacionalismo rivales que la burguesía está preparando. En ausencia de una organización internacionalista efectiva ofrecemos nuestra solidaridad y ayuda a los núcleos comunistas y a los individuos que luchan por esa necesaria respuesta proletaria.

Muchas gracias!

The article refers to the actions on October 3rd - 'It remains unclear how far the reports of local assemblies reflect sparks of working class self-organisation or whether they were creations of the local bourgeois establishment to act as a “stage army” favouring the separatists’ agenda.'

Since then there have been rumours of assemblies/committees independent of the leftists and nationalists in parts of Barcelona. Do you know anything about that?


Creo que su pregunta esta para los companeros de Nuevo Curso? Esperemos que puedan responder.

We did not find them. What we found was a really big resistance to the «paro país» organized by the unions on october 3. Only atomized parts of the class (who work alone) and a group in the transport system heared the call of nationalism. In the big assamblies in the industrial belt organized by the unionist, they were rejected. The demonstrations of day 3 were clearly full of petit bourgesy: students, catalonian state aparatus and peasants (middle bourguesy), but to find workers was, affortunately, very difficult.

But this wasnt the main danger. Working class, specially industrial working class is ethnificated in Catalonia. They are descendants of Meridional migrants arrived after the war. Their language is Spanish, not Catalan and they suffered an strong cultural opression during the last 30 years. In example, you have to study only in Catalan since the basic school (I did) and saturated of nationalistic shit making guilty your parents of «francoist invasion». The social contract between the catalan government in hands of nationalists during those decades with their own masses (the pb and peasantry of the rural areas) was to enjoy the «priviledges» of cultural and public positions preminence and being authorized to publicly denigrate (TV is a fascinating role model maker) the big majority of the working class as «invaders», «retarded migrants», etc.

So the real danger was not to find the working masses under the flags of independentism... but under the flags of unionism. And it is true there was a bigger proportion of workers in the unionist demonstration of day 8... but its impact was not massive at all. The demonstration itself had some thousands, a part of them old workers. But, as in the independentist demonstrations, you couldnt find thousands of workers in it. Workers were the big absent in both sides of the nationalistic show.

So, the good thing: the class is not broke in two nationalistic sides. The bad thing: the answer of the class was a passive one, its voice was absent. It resisted, but it not stood up with its own voice.

On the other side of the nationalist divide, the b organized a «hang the flag in you apartment» campaign in the rest of Spain. It is very graphic: in workers suburbs in Madrid you find an Spanish flag every 10 or 12 apartments (very few, great news) but in pb neibourghood concentrations everything is full of flags. The impact of the Spanish flag campaign was, again, concentrated in rural areas of small private property in the North and the Center, affecting cities only in their «middle class» suburbs. Again, working class was mainly absent.

And yes, of course none of us was impressed by the violence of the police the day 3, nor thought about making a solidarity demonstration in support of the suffering Catalonian petit bourguesy. We use to suffer police brutality in every strike and with bigger proportions. I think few people, different from pb students, have ilusions about the democratic police anywhere. Almost every striker, even rich peasants, has been in the hospital thanks to the democratic police some time in its life.

In example, during the days of independentist high, we had big mobilizations in Murcia and León. They were caused by government plans to cut the city with a wall in order to build the high velocity train. It is not a conscient class mobilization, but it has an strong class element: affected suburbs are working neibourhoods and mobilizations (massive > 50% of the total population of Murcia) happened after work time and during the night. Of course they were brutaly attacked day after day by the police. And in real terms no meausured as «people who was attended» but as people really hospitalized (broken arms, injured eyes, broken ribs, etc.). Brutality and repression is part of the language of the ruling class. Of course Spanish TV, Catalonian TV or international media did not show them. Their signification are not useful in the imperialistic game.

So. Of course we, as a class, have been damaged by this big nationalistic show. But the damage is, at the moment mainly contained to the peripheral parts of the class (some old workers in retirement, self employed workers who work alone, some workers of state offices, groups previously influenced by stalinists, populist and trotskists, etc.). And there is an extra good new: new groups of young people, usually workers on precariety, are becoming active and defending an intuitive internationalist position. Unfortunately many of them are being captured by the ultra-stalinist shit. That is why we started to publish basic marxism courses and faqs in and a blog for following the news in

Please be critic with our sites and posts and help us to be useful for our class and specially for this new generation. (Google translate works pretty well from Spanish to English)


Thank you for your forensic class analysis which is not only informative but politically sound. Italian comrades say you have made a fraternal critique of our material and we will certainly try to respond in the same way. We hope to have more exchanges with you.

Thank you! We hope it too. To us the important thing it is not the forensic one because we, you and everybody, have their information so mediatized by the overwhelming totalitarianism of the b media that sometimes becomes very difficult to contrast the info we have (own experience, family, friends, etc) with the public information on tv and media and the synthesis could be easily wrong. The important thing is the class position: real internationalism, as Munis said once, is the only measure and solution for positioning. Because of it, it was not really important the details of your post, but the result of it, and we completely agree with it: it is the message we have to send and spread.


Thanks again. We agree entirely with you that the fundamental issue is to present a clear class position but we have few weapons at the moment and accurate information is essential to us to ensure our credibility in front of the international working class. Thus we thank you for providing us with the corrective to those who tell us that there are independent class organisations somehow surviving amidst this nationalist avalanche on both sides.

I am going to say this tentatively, understanding the complexity and the lack of absolutes when it comes to the process of generalising class consciousness. The greatest weapon that the ruling class has is the working class' own adherence to indentities which militate against class unity. This goes beyond nationalism. It can manifest itself in many ways, all of which are ultimately subservient, all of which replace the purposeful effort of actual understanding of real conditions. Religion, even if informal and partially digested, localism (customs, identity, dialect), educational attainment (a dividing wall between those perceived as highly educated and those who are not), physical and ethnic characteristics, gender differences and stereotypes...all becomes a toxic blend which creates a false community for the in truth isolated, a false comfort for the in truth miserable and a pride for the dispossessed.

Every turn of the capitalist process meets the same set of responses. The immigrants are to blame. People not like us. Them, the undeserving, the usurpers, the alien.

The question is can this hypnotic conditioning be broken down, can a revolutionary perspective take its place, can the root of the maladies which lies in the capitalist mode of production be identified by its victims who are encouraged to wallow in the opiate of self delusion?

That question can only be answered by the attempt.