Tuesday, April 11, 2006

Probs Pt 2- More rudeness, I tell you!

The second sort of rudeness is that of the Revolutionary.

In my expereince in DC I came accross many politicians and political types (no, really!). One thing which I noticed accross the spectrum was that, after a certain level of hierarchy had been reached, a certain amount of politeness fell away. The result was that the person would become unapproachable. It also worked in the ostensibly less-heirerchical groups- once someone had published or organized a certain number of artcles or actions, they became likewise unapproachable and, dare I say, a bit vain and dismissive in their attitude.

The matter of unapproachability is important in that, to create a revolution, we cannot act as exhalted individuals- there is not a monoply, as they say, on good ideas. There is also a great deal which can be learned from unexpected- and previously untapped- sources. If you shut yourself off from people- to say nothing of The People- how can you fight for and with them?

As for actual rudeness or dismissiveness toward people- to act in such a manner is to disrespect the work and value of the people. This is not way for a participant- never mind a leader!- to behave.

We are workers. No matter what we have published, what we have done, how many signs we might have carried, above all, we are workers. To discount the experiences of fellow workers, their insights into the ills of society and their willingness to participate in the revolution, is counter-revolutionary at its core. To treat any fellow worker- no matter how seemingly unenlightened- with anything other than respect begs the question of our fitness as revolutionaries.

Yes, we'd prefer that all workers were advanced. That would make our jobs easier- but this is not the case. Those who can be reached will not be persuaded by condescension- this is what they can expect at the hands of the elites- this is never what should be received from a revolutionary.

I am not saying to pretend to be nice- no. If someone attacks, you are right to defend yourself. But if someone approaches with what seems, perhaps, to be a "stupid question", to treat them as if they should already know what they now wish to have explained will never win them to the side of revolution. It will, though, reinforce the elite's claim of leftists as being elitists. Again with the irony. Again, too, with the self-defeating behaviour. If, on the other hand, you treat the question with the same weight with which it is asked, you will open the way to learning- both for you and for the person with the question.

If, after the revolution, leaders are seen as condescending, the problem of counter-revolutionary actions will grow. The workers who will fight for the revolution will as soon give it up if they see their concerns brushed aside by the future leaders of revolution in the same dismissive manner as that of the elites of today.

2 comments:

Gunfighter said...

"If, after the revolution, leaders are seen as condescending, the problem of counter-revolutionary actions will grow."

But isn't this always the way, gentle Clare? Revolutionaries are only revolutionaries until the revolution is complete. When that happens, they become the establishment... until the next revolution when THEY are being sttod against the wall.

Clare is Reading! said...

No, the act of revolution extends beyond the overthrow- which is often confused for The Revolution itself. Overthrowing a gov't is a begining, the revolution continues in the rebuilding of a society. If it's just the disposition of an administration you are after, it's easy enough. The hard part (as Trotsky said) is what comes next. Any fool can seize power through force. What they do with it to make life better is what actually counts.