System of presses, associations, and circles

Posting mode: Reply [Return]
Name
Options
Subject	Spoiler Image
Comment
Verification
Flag
File
Embed
Password	(For file deletion.)

File: 1749068870585-0.jpeg (107.83 KB, 1017x767, myq3gqa2tnwd1.jpeg)

File: 1749068870585-1.jpeg (230.13 KB, 1024x700, jqpr4usokmud1.jpeg)

System of presses, associations, and circles Anonymous 04-06-25 20:27:51 No.2297754

Engels emphasizes that revolutionaries must avoid all “official appointments” and headquarters within existing parties, since this would deprive them of independence and draw them into a whirlpool of compromises. Only in this way can they preserve the ability to offer uncompromising criticism of all sides and remain genuinely revolutionary, rather than mere rhetorical cheerleaders.

Marx, on the other hand, advises German communists to finally free themselves from “isolation” by establishing local reading circles, distributing cheap pamphlets, and setting up a regular system of correspondence and funding. Such work allows comrades to clarify their ideas, coordinate strategy, and more effectively oppose bourgeois interests - without risking that an early or failed public petition will expose their weakness and exhaust their limited resources.

Lenin’s correspondence with Russian Social-Democrats, following the same logic, recommends founding an all-Russian political newspaper (to be understood as a unified media and communication apparatus) before even considering a mass uprising. In his view, the newspaper is simultaneously a "collective propagandist," a "collective agitator," and a "collective organizer": not merely a physical product on paper, but an organ of collective communication that, through regular printing and distribution, forces the creation of a network of local agents. These agents remain in constant contact with the editorial line, monitor political developments, and exchange information. This network becomes the core of the party - capable of planned agitation, training new cadres, and adapting tactics for everything from student demonstrations to supporting peasant uprisings.

The essence of all three approaches is maintaining the independence of individuals and establishing lasting, connected channels of communication: an independent press (as an organ of collective communication), reading circles, and correspondence. Only once these foundations are laid can a mass movement become effective. Only when political workers are first organized in an autonomous environment, equipped with reliable channels for exchanging ideas, coordinating tactics, and education - in other words, organized into a system of the press, associations, and circles - can the movement avoid being caught unprepared by events and transcend the anxiety of spontaneous, dispersed action.

[1] Marx
https://marxists.architexturez.net/archive/marx/works/1846/06/15.htm
[2] Engels
https://marxists.architexturez.net/archive/marx/works/1851/letters/51 02 13.htm
[3] Lenin
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1901/may/04.htm

Anonymous 04-06-25 20:33:32 No.2297764

>>2297754
and I won't be lazy and will give the relevant passages
<that's a lot of text
I don't care. read
Marx
>We are in full agreement with your view that the German Communists must emerge from the isolation in which they have hitherto existed and establish durable mutual contacts with one another; similarly, that associations for the purpose of reading and discussion are necessary. For Communists must first of all clear things up among themselves, and this cannot be done satisfactorily without regular meetings to discuss questions concerning communism. We therefore also agree with you completely that cheap, easily understandable books and pamphlets with a communist content must be widely circulated. Both of these things, the former as well as the latter, should be taken up soon and energetically. You recognise the necessity of establishing regular money contributions; but your suggestion to support the authors by means of these contributions, to provide a comfortable life for them we must for our part reject. In our view the contributions should be used only for the printing of cheap communist leaflets and pamphlets and to cover the costs of correspondence, including that from here abroad. It will be necessary to fix a minimum sum for the monthly contributions, so that the amount of money that can be used for common purposes can be accurately determined at any moment. It is furthermore necessary that you should communicate to us the names of the members of your communist association — since we have to know, as you know of us, who it is we are dealing with. Finally, we await your statement of the size of the monthly contributions earmarked for common purposes, since the printing of several popular pamphlets ought to be proceeded with as soon as possible. That these pamphlets cannot be published in Germany is evident and needs no proof.

>We do not consider the time to be appropriate yet for a communist congress. Only when communist associations have been formed in the whole of Germany and means for action have been collected will delegates from the individual associations be able to gather for a congress with any prospect of success. And this will not be likely to occur before next yea

here's the correct link forgot the underscores https://marxists.architexturez.net/archive/marx/works/1851/letters/51_02_13.htm
Engels
>At long last we again have the opportunity — the first time in ages — to show that we need neither popularity, nor the support of any party in any country, and that our position is completely independent of such ludicrous trifles. From now on we are only answerable for ourselves and, come the time when these gentry need us, we shall be in a position to dictate our own terms. Until then we shall at least have some peace and quiet. A measure of loneliness, too, of course How can people like us, who shun official appointments like the plague, fit into a ‘party’? And what have we, who spit on popularity, who don’t know what to make of ourselves if we show signs of growing popular, to do with a ‘party’, i.e. a herd of jackasses who swear by us because they think we're of the same kidney as they? Truly, it is no loss if we are no longer held to be the ‘right and adequate expression’ of the ignorant curs with whom we have been thrown together over the past few years.

>A revolution is a purely natural phenomenon which is subject to physical laws rather than to the rules that determine the development of society in ordinary times. Or rather, in revolution these rules assume a much more physical character, the material force of necessity makes itself more strongly felt. And as soon as one steps forward as the representative of a party, one is dragged into this whirlpool of irresistible natural necessity. By the mere fact of keeping oneself independent, being in the nature of things more revolutionary than the others, one is able at least for a time to maintain one’s independence from this whirlpool, although one does, of course, end up by being dragged into it.

>This is the position we can and must adopt on the next occasion. Not only no official government appointments but also, and for as long as possible, no official party appointments, no seat on committees, etc., no responsibility for jackasses, merciless criticism of everyone, and, besides, that serenity of which all the conspiracies of blockheads cannot deprive us. And this much we are able to do. We can always, in the nature of things, be more revolutionary than the phrase-mongers because we have learnt our lesson and they have not, because we know what we want and they do not, and because, after what we have seen for at least three years, we shall take it a great deal more coolly than anyone who has an interest in the business.

>The main thing at the moment is to find some way of getting our things published; either in a quarterly in which we make a frontal attack and consolidate our position so far as persons are concerned, or in fat books where we do the same without being under the necessity of mentioning any one of these vipers.

Lenin
>…the starting-point of our activities, the first step towards creating the desired organisation, or, let us say, the main thread which, if followed, would enable us steadily to develop, deepen, and extend that organisation, should be the founding of an All-Russian political newspaper. A newspaper is what we most of all need; without it we cannot conduct that systematic, all-round propaganda and agitation, consistent in principle, which is the chief and permanent task of Social-Democracy in general and, in particular, the pressing task of the moment, when interest in politics and in questions of socialism has been aroused among the broadest strata of the population. Never has the need been felt so acutely as today for reinforcing dispersed agitation in the form of individual action, local leaflets, pamphlets, etc., by means of generalised and systematic agitation that can only be conducted with the aid of the periodical press. It may be said without exaggeration that the frequency and regularity with which a newspaper is printed (and distributed) can serve as a precise criterion of how well this cardinal and most essential sector of our militant activities is built up. Furthermore, our newspaper must be All-Russian. If we fail, and as long as we fail, to combine our efforts to influence the people and the government by means of the printed word, it will be utopian to think of combining other means, more complex, more difficult, but also more decisive, for exerting influence. Our movement suffers in the first place, ideologically, as well as in practical and organisational respects, from its state of fragmentation, from the almost complete immersion of the overwhelming majority of Social-Democrats in local work, which narrows their outlook, the scope of their activities, and their skill in the maintenance of secrecy and their preparedness.

>The role of a newspaper, however, is not limited solely to the dissemination of ideas, to political education, and to the enlistment of political allies. A newspaper is not only a collective propagandist and a collective agitator, it is also a collective organiser. In this last respect it may be likened to the scaffolding round a building under construction, which marks the contours of the structure and facilitates communication between the builders, enabling them to distribute the work and to view the common results achieved by their organised labour. With the aid of the newspaper, and through it, a permanent organisation will naturally take shape that will engage, not only in local activities, but in regular general work, and will train its members to follow political events carefully, appraise their significance and their effect on the various strata of the population, and develop effective means for the revolutionary party to influence these events. The mere technical task of regularly supplying the newspaper with copy and of promoting regular distribution will necessitate a network of local agents of the united party, who will maintain constant contact with one another, know the general state of affairs, get accustomed to performing regularly their detailed functions in the All-Russian work, and test their strength in the organisation of various revolutionary actions. This network of agents will form the skeleton of precisely the kind of organisation we need—one that is sufficiently large to embrace the whole country; sufficiently broad and many-sided to effect a strict and detailed division of labour; sufficiently well tempered to be able to conduct steadily its own work under any circumstances, at all “sudden turns”, and in face of all contingencies

>…a few words to avoid possible misunderstanding. We have spoken continuously of systematic, planned preparation, yet it is by no means our intention to imply that the autocracy can be overthrown only by a regular siege or by organised assault. Such a view would be absurd and doctrinaire. On the contrary, it is quite possible, and historically much more probable, that the autocracy will collapse under the impact of one of the spontaneous outbursts or unforeseen political complications which constantly threaten it from all sides. But no political party that wishes to avoid adventurous gambles can base its activities on the anticipation of such outbursts and complications. We must go our own way, and we must steadfastly carry on our regular work, and the less our reliance on the unexpected, the less the chance of our being caught unawares by any “historic turns”.