Affinités révolutionnaires : Nos étoiles rouges et noires (Les Petits Libres)

by Michael Löwy, Olivier Besancenot

L’histoire du mouvement ouvrier raconte en détail les désaccords, les conflits et les affrontements entre marxistes et anarchistes, jamais les véritables alliances et des solidarités agissantes entre ces deux mouvements. Olivier Besancenot et Michael Löwy ont choisi d’éclairer ce versant ignoré, souvent délibérément, qui révèle la fraternité de leurs combats depuis la Commune de Paris jusqu’à nos jours – sans toutefois omettre leurs sanglants affrontements. Solidarités, convergences, et oppositions politiques sont passées au tamis de l’histoire par le portrait de grandes figures (Louise Michel, le Sous-commandant Marcos, Walter Benjamin, André Breton, Daniel Guérin) et la discussion autour des sujets qui divisent (la « prise du pouvoir », l’écosocialisme, la planification, le fédéralisme, la démocratie directe, le rapport syndicat/parti). À l’occasion du 150e anniversaire de la fondation de la Première Internationale – cette Association révolutionnaire pluraliste qui a connu, au moins pendant ses premières années, des convergences significatives entre les deux courants de la gauche radicale –, l’objectif est de montrer que l’avenir sera rouge et noir : l’anti-capitalisme, le socialisme ou le communisme du XXIe siècle devront puiser à ces deux sources de radicalité.

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, History

200 pages, Kindle Edition

First published August 20, 2014

About the author

French-Brazilian Marxist sociologist and philosopher. He is presently the emerited research director in social sciences at the CNRS (French National Center of Scientific Research) and lectures at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales (EHESS; Paris, France). Author of books on Karl Marx, Che Guevara, Liberation Theology, György Lukács, Walter Benjamin and Franz Kafka, he received the Silver Medal of the CNRS in 1994.

Reviews

[Zéro Janvier · Rating 4 out of 5]

Affinités révolutionnaires - Nos étoiles rouges et noires est un essai politique co-écrit par Olivier Besancenot et Michael Löwy et publié en 2014 aux Editions Mille et une Nuits (Fayard). J’en ai entendu parler dans un autre essai lu récemment, j’avais été séduit par une citation de cet ouvrage et le résumé consulté par ailleurs m’a convaincu :

L’histoire du mouvement ouvrier raconte en détail les désaccords, les conflits et les affrontements entre marxistes et anarchistes, jamais les véritables alliances et des solidarités agissantes entre ces deux mouvements.

Olivier Besancenot et Michael Löwy ont choisi d’éclairer ce versant ignoré, souvent délibérément, qui révèle la fraternité de leurs combats depuis la Commune de Paris jusqu’à nos jours – sans toutefois omettre leurs sanglants affrontements. Solidarités, convergences, et oppositions politiques sont passées au tamis de l’histoire par le portrait de grandes figures (Louise Michel, le Sous-commandant Marcos, Walter Benjamin, André Breton, Daniel Guérin) et la discussion autour des sujets qui divisent (la « prise du pouvoir », l’écosocialisme, la planification, le fédéralisme, la démocratie directe, le rapport syndicat/parti).

À l’occasion du 150e anniversaire de la fondation de la Première Internationale – cette Association révolutionnaire pluraliste qui a connu, au moins pendant ses premières années, des convergences significatives entre les deux courants de la gauche radicale –, l’objectif est de montrer que l’avenir sera rouge et noir : l’anti-capitalisme, le socialisme ou le communisme du XXIe siècle devront puiser à ces deux sources de radicalité.

Oscillant moi-même entre marxisme et anarchisme, sans savoir jamais où me situer entre ces deux courants mi-frères mi-antagonistes, j’étais intéressé par le projet affiché par ce livre.

Les deux co-auteurs déclinent leur propos en 4 grandes parties dont voici un bref aperçu :

Convergences solidaires
- La Ière Internationale et la Commune de Paris
- Le 1er Mai et les martyrs de de Chicago
- Le syndicalisme révolutionnaire et la charte d'Amiens
- La révolution espagnole
- Mai 68
- De l'altermondialisme aux Indignés
- Quelques portraits

Convergences et conflits
- La révolution russe
- Retour sur la tragédie de Kronstadt
- Makhno : rouges et noirs en Ukraine

Quelques penseurs marxistes libertaires
- Walter Benjamin
- André Breton
- Daniel Guérin

Questions politiques
- Individu et collectif
- Faire la révolution sans prendre le pouvoir ?
- Autonomie et fédéralisme
- Planification démocratique et autogestion
- Démocratie directe et démocratie représentative
- Syndicat et parti
- Ecosocialisme et écologie libertaire

Les deux auteurs commencent par repartir des convergences, réelles, et des divergences, souvent tragiques, entre les "rouges" et les "noirs" depuis le XIXe siècle puis entrent dans le fond des débats, en se positionnant chaque fois clairement. Tout au long du livre, il appellent à un dépassement des désaccords passés et présents pour construire de nouvelles solidarités idéologiques et militantes entre les "frères ennemis" du mouvement révolutionnaire.

Le texte est clair, engagé et plaisant à lire. Je me suis reconnu dans plusieurs propos tenus par les deux co-auteurs, tout en m’en démarquant à plusieurs reprises. C’est toujours intéressant de toute façon, et je serais bien malheureux de lire un essai qui me dise ce que je pense déjà sans enrichir ma propre réflexion.

Si je devais émettre un bémol, c’est sur le choix des points de vue proposés dans cet ouvrage. Les deux auteurs se revendiquent marxistes, ce n'est pas un problème en soi car nous savons d'où ils parlent, ils ne s'en cachent pas : le lecteur connait leur « point de vue » (au sens propre et figuré). Par contre, je ne peux pas m'empêcher de penser que le projet du livre aurait été mieux servi par un dialogue entre un marxiste et un libertaire, pour confronter deux visions et enrichir la réflexion de chacun. Ainsi, la quatrième partie éclairant les débats entre marxistes et libertaires aurait gagné à confronter (pacifiquement et intellectuellement) les arguments marxistes et libertaires, y compris pour constater parfois des accords sincères ou de profonds désaccords. A la place, nous avons finalement une unique point de vue, ou deux très proches, clairement d’inspiration trotskiste. Le lecteur est prévenu, il n’est pas pris en traitre et ne peut pas vraiment s’en plaindre, mais je me dis que l’éditeur est peut-être passé à côté d’une occasion de faire dialoguer deux points de vue un peu plus éloignés.

La conclusion est un appel à se réapproprier ou à réinventer un marxisme libertaire à travers des luttes communes et une société à imaginer et à construire ensemble. Je ne peux évidemment qu’y souscrire.

[Rory · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very important topic, which I don’t think this book fully does justice to. Definitely interesting and insightful bits, but really lacking in lots of ways, it’s very much an introduction. A more in depth study can be found online in this PhD thesis: Towards a libertarian communism: a conceptual history of the intersections between anarchisms and Marxisms https://repository.lboro.ac.uk/articl...

[luisa · Rating 4 out of 5]

“hierarquia é como prateleiras, quanto mais altas, menos servem”

[Brad · Rating 2 out of 5]

A worthwhile lightning-round outline of the backgrounds and perspectives of some lesser-known "libertarian socialist" and anarchist thinkers of various sub-tendencies. Beyond that, this book's overemphasis on some schools of thought palatable to the "New Left" and its corollary reductive caricatures (even omissions) of others leave it falling short of the title's promise. Imagine using the phrase "workers' self-management" several times over multiple chapters and not once touching on Yugoslavia.

The authors' idea of pan-Leftism is a theory-driven synthesis of 'classical' schools of Marxist and anarchist thought drawing heavily from the Bolshevik and Spanish Revolutions. Aside from obscuring the variety of experiments in 20th-century "Actually Existing Socialism", this analysis really suffers from a lack of contemporary analysis that could have been useful (in our time, indispensable). Recognizing that this short book can't do everything, there's a glaring absence of in-depth analysis of anti-fascist collaboration as a crucible of "pan-Leftist" activity and history. That the authors acknowledge this in the conclusion doesn't leave me inclined to give them a pass. Even in doing so they excuse themselves with 'At least we mentioned it in the historical section' which amounted to brief footnotes about those damn Stalinists ruining everything. Finally, they pay lip-service to a notion of balance between local autonomy and central coordination, but in a clinical textbook fashion that fails to acknowledge how any such balance will be affected by historical/material baggage (Western Marxism: How it was Born, How it Died, How it can be Reborn).

I'm all for "Revolutionary Affinities" in this late-capitalist hellscape, but that's going to require a less superficial attempt.

[Alane Luzia · Rating 3 out of 5]

O livro não segue uma narrativa reta, mas abosrda questões, situações. Faz críticas tanto ao marxismo, e principalmente ao Stalinismo, quando ao anarquismo em algumas situações que parecem se apegar uma utopia(como a da autogestão) e não analisam sobre as possibilidade concretas. Eu como marxista discordei sobre algumas afirmações sobre o marxismo que fizeram, mas ainda assim considero que é impostante fazer a leitura. Gostei muito das abordagens sobre a Rosa Luxemburgo, principalmente. Demonstra como, tanto marxismo como anarquismo, são realmente muito maiores do alguns costumam apontar(de forma extremamente rasa) e que por vezes as tantas "correntes" os torna mais convergentes do que costumam admitir.
Vale a leitura, se tiverem uma mente sufucuentemente aberta para ouvir críticas e muitas vezes concordar, quando aquela corrente a que mais nos aproximamos não é a mais correta em todos os momentos.

[Michael Faber · Rating 4 out of 5]

This text is extremely useful as an introductory guide into the synthesise of Marxism and anarchism, towards a libertarian Marxism (as I believeMarx arguably intended with his anti statism) . This is a basic text Howether, and requires a more in depth analysis of both disagreements and agreements across Marxist thought to answer the question of how to reconcile both schools of thought into a wider revolutionary front. I particularly enjoy the analysis of the Kronstadt uprising through the lens of victor serge, providing an accurate Marxist and materialist analysis of Kronstadt, with its Marxist and understandable desire for increased decentral Soviet power, and its political impossibility in the material context of a nation facing the aftermath of a brutal civil and world war.

[Gabriel · Rating 3 out of 5]

O livro alcança o que se propõe a fazer: argumentar que marxistas e anarquistas tem mais pelo que se unir do que se afastar.

Mas achei alguns argumentos muito fracos e algumas vezes nem há argumentos, apenas estamentos sobre certos modos de fazer política.

Além do mais, me incomoda que esse livro seja sobre fazer alianças, e os autores fazem questão de pintar Stalin e a união soviética como as piores coisas que ja aconteceram, e criar rivalidade com essa linha de pensamento marxista, ao invés fazer uma crítica justa.

[Smacky Jack · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good little intro to the various affinities and struggles that commies and anarchists have shared over the years. It does a good job of showing just how much these ideologies have changed in response to their situations and how they have defined themselves in opposition to each other. The authors make the point that at the end of the day, if you define your politics by any one organizational form, you're going to fail. Circumstances are dynamic, things are always changing, and our class will demand different things at different times.

[Igor Mello · Rating 3 out of 5]

Um livro bem médio, advoga pela unidade entre anarquistas e marxistas, é recomendável que se estude (e se posicione) sobre essas ideologias, e seus papéis históricos, antes de ler o livro.

[Jeff Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book should be on a short list of required reading for all Anarchists and Marxist, truly an astounding breakdown of the wall that exists between these two revolutionary currents.

What I appreciate most about this book is that it doesn't simply say that anarchists and Marxist need to simply put aside our differences and work together because we have a common enemy. While that sentiment makes sense, I think it falls short of being convincing for many Marxist and Anarchists alike. Recognizing this, this book goes beyond this argument by offering a compelling synthesis of these two ideologies. This synthesis names the weaknesses of both lines of thinking and offers concrete examples for where those shortcomings can be mitigated by adopting principles from the other school of thought.

An example can be found in the authors discussing direct vs representative democracy. The authors are clearly skeptical of the representative democracy and line up closely with anarchists who advocate for direct democracy in all sphere of political and economic life. At the same time, they also recognize that there are instances where this isn't feasible. Rather than following many anarchists who hold to their principled opposition to all representative democracy, the authors pull from marxists who hold that councils of representatives can still offer true democratic input on economic and political processes, provided the right safeguards are in place. The result is a blended approach to the economy and politics that seems to prioritize direct democracy in all places where it is feasible, but which recognizes the need for a level of global planning that will require representatives to function.

In my opinion, this is what a meaningful union of the red and black revolutionary currents results in. If we can pull away from ideological purity on both sides, we can develop systems that live in the ideal space of holding closely to our values, while also being feasible to implement and therefore advocate for.

My final thoughts is that, after reading this book, I no longer feel pressure to 'pick a side' between the anarchists and the marxists that I organize with. While I think I will always lean more towards anarchism than various threads of marxism, I feel confident in saying that we need both schools of thought to get us where we want to go. Another world is possible comrades, we must simply come together and fight for it. 🏴🚩

[Harry · Rating 2 out of 5]

A collection of various essays on historical moments, figures, and thinkers which have been at the borders of Marxism and Anarchism. Ultimately, a frustrating text that attempts to merely, in my view, fudge or get around real political differences by creating an eclectic checklist 'third thing' libertarian Marxism.

Solidarity is not made easier by avoiding real disagreements. For anyone who does trade union or community organising work, you will by necessity have to work across traditions - in a way that is more complex, honest, and difficult than this book equips us to tackle.

[Bulent · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kitap biri Troçkist, diğeri Liberter gelenekten gelen iki ismin, marksizm ile anarşizmin aynı safta mücadele ettikleri örneklerin ardından iki geleneğinde birbirine yakın düşünce ve eylem adamlarının yaşamöykülerinden kısaca bahsediyor ve iki akımın karşı karşıya geldiği, çatıştığı anlara değinip Liberter marksizmin çeşitli sorunlara getirdiği çözüm önerilerini aktarıyor.

[Echo · Rating 2 out of 5]

Great book, quick read and very accessible. Reads like a series of pamphlets, covers a lot of topics in a way that is helpful to people relatively unfamiliar with the history covered without sacrificing too much complexity. Cogent and coherent insights and a great vision for 21st century revolutionary struggle