Against Sleep And Nightmare 
Notes On Communist Dialogue
- In the present era, it has become too commonplace for groups to base themselves on tactics which they hope will be guaranteed to set off revolt. While we communists certainly should consider tactics, we also don’t want to claim “unique genius” in this regard. Acting on every level against the current order is good but claims for originality are over-rated. The originally any given revolutionary can only decisive when it flows out of an understanding of the era – What must distinguishes communists then can’t be tactic but rather putting forward the overall communist analysis and position.
- From Egyptian police impersonating protesters to “Internet Trolls” to the capitalist lunatics who shoot capitalist congresswomen to defend capitalism, today the system defends itself with a violent pseudo-dialog. Consciously or unconsciously, this pseudo-dialog aims to destroy the real dialog which could lead beyond the current social regime.
– It is important to maintain our communication at the level of respectful dialog, whoever we main be addressing, whether they those among us or those outside the group, those we agree with or those we disagree with.
- It is important to be explicit about the principles that we believe are important. Revolutionaries should come together aiming for agreement on some core-principles. Naturally, it is useful for those core principles to flexible enough to encompass a variety practical activity as well as practical and theoretical disagreements. What exactly is a core principle should be a topic for ongoing discussion. At the same time, at the point those involved feel that agreement on core principles cannot be reached in a foreseeable time-line, we should respectfully consider ourselves seperate tendencies. Decisions about non-core questions can be taken by democratic vote or whatever method is convenient and appropriate.
- We need to also cultivate comradely dialogue. A revolutionary process is not going to be the product of any single group realizing its program. The ability to learn from each revolutionary upsurge will be more important than the ability to simply present program (which isn’t saying we shouldn’t present our approach and ideas without apologies – dialogue is a two way street. In this sense, it is the opposite of a Socrates who asks leading questions whose answers he expects. Revolutionaries must instead clearly put forward what we believe to be right while being aware we could still be wrong).
- The “critique of the Left of capital” is crucial for communists because capitalist relations today form a kind of deceptive spectrum. Through a self-serving “sloppiness”, those on the “revolutionary left” socially bond with the “moderate left” and implicitly accept the assumption this group “may accept capitalism but it better than the alternatives”.
- At the same time, our discussion needs to be comradely with everyone specifically because of the incredible integration of the system. A world where we are recruited as mutual jail keepers for each other is a world in which it is counter-productive to point fingers concerning who is the worst collaborator. Certainly, refusing to collaborate is a different story.
- Certainly, we oppose unions, national “liberation” struggles, racism, nations and nationalism, self-management of capitalist relations, the fixation on banks or paper money as the problem and so-forth. This rejection can explained subjectively as a refusal to compromise the integrity of relations or historically given the unfolding trajectory of modern capitalism encompasses and expands these relations.
- This opposition isn’t a moral opposition, one which condemns the people who believe an idea. Otherwise, we would be condemning most of the world. It is an opposition of ideas. Once the proletarian action begins, there will also opposition of action too, of course.