National Democratic
Revolution, Part 7b
The Petty Bourgeoisie and Poujadism
Last in this section on class alliance, which has looked at
peasants and traditional leaders as well as at bourgeois and proletarians, we
now consider the petty-bourgeoisie, a large class in South Africa, and one that
includes a high proportion of the very poor. The hawkers and the “survivors”
are members of this class, as much as the small shopkeepers and small business
people (the so-called “SMMEs”).
The petty bourgeoisie are the urban equivalent of the
peasant class. They share with the peasantry the peculiar characteristic of
being what Karl Marx called (in the “18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte”)
a “sack of potatoes”. Such a class has minimal internal linkages. It exists as
an aggregate, and not as an organism. In chemical terms, it is a mixture, and
not a compound.
This is in contrast with the working proletariat, which is a
socialised, or in other words, interdependent class. For this among other
reasons, the working class is a more advanced class, capable of giving
leadership to the peasantry and to the petty-bourgeoisie.
In his address at Joe Slovo’s graveside
on the 15th anniversary of Slovo’s death, 6 January 2010, the
current General Secretary of the SACP Cde Dr Blade Nzimande said, concerning
the leadership the working-class party must give:
“We must also recruit
amongst small businesses, who continue to be suffocated by monopoly capital in
general, the capitalist malls built in the townships that are killing their
small businesses, and the ‘tenderpreneurs’ who continue to enrich themselves
often through corrupt tenders at the expense of honest small entrepreneurs who
do not have political connections in the state. We must strengthen small
entrepreneurs and defeat ‘tenderpreneurs’! We need to support skills
development for co-operatives, small and micro enterprises. We need to deepen
our struggle for the transformation of our financial sector to benefit the
workers and the poor, including co-operatives and small and micro businesses.
“As we have done over
the past 16 years and before, we need to engage and seek to influence the terms
and conditions under which a new black section of the bourgeoisie emerges and
grow. We need to fight for truly broad based empowerment and seek to direct
investment into the productive sectors of our economy that is creating jobs. We
need to continuously expose and challenge self-enrichment of a few and fight
the emergence of a highly dependent compradorial bourgeoisie! In this struggle
we must also seek to expose opportunistic use of the language and demands of
the working class in order to hide the accumulation agenda of a compradorial
bourgeoisie. This is the meaning of Slovo’s life, struggles and observations
today!”
The above-quoted speech was all the more valuable for the
fact that the Marxist literature devoted to the petty bourgeoisie in our time
is pitifully small, worldwide. We now go to a recollection of
France in the 1950s (but written later) for an account of the phenomenon
of “Poujadism”. This was a petty-bourgeois uprising that allied itself, in its
beginning and at local level, with the communists, until it degenerated towards
near-fascism. See above for a picture of Pierre
Poujade (1920-2003), the leader of this movement.
In their relations with the intermediate classes, history shows
that the communists must proceed with great care, and must not lose focus. But
it also shows that these classes are real, and can potentially have a
self-conscious and beneficial development, especially if aided by the always-better-organised
working class. But if petty-bourgeois populism gets out of hand, which it can
do, then the distance between it and fascism can be covered in a short time.
Foster’s account is written from a somewhat sectarian point
of view. It disparages the efforts of the French communist party, but it does
not say that the vanguard party should not give leadership to the petty
bourgeoisie. On the contrary, Foster confirms this necessity. All he can manage
to say against the communists is that if the Trotskyists had been in charge
they would have done better. This is a hollow claim.
More on the nature and the problems of the petty bourgeoisie
can be found in Engels’ (e.g. “The Housing Question”), Rosa
Luxemburg’s (e.g. “Reform or
Revolution?”), and Lenin’s (e.g. “The Tax in Kind”)
writings.
- The above is to introduce the original reading-text: The case-history of Poujadisme,
Foster.
- To download any of the CU courses in PDF files please click here.
No comments:
Post a Comment