Insurrections or Revolutions?
The Role of the Political Instrument
[Editor's Note: If you find some agreement with this, check out our 'Where To Begin' document. Click in the upper left corner.]
By Marta Harnecker
Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal
[First in a Series]
1. The recent popular uprisings at the turn of the 21st century that have rocked numerous countries such as Argentina and Bolivia -- and, more generally, the history of the multiple social explosions that have occurred in Latin America and the rest of the world -- have undoubtedly demonstrated that the initiative of the masses, in and of itself, is not enough to defeat ruling regimes.
2. Impoverished urban and country masses, lacking a well-defined plan, have risen up, seized highways, towns and neighbourhoods, ransacked stores and stormed parliaments, but despite achieving the mobilisation of hundreds of thousands of people, neither the size nor their combativeness have been enough to develop from popular insurrection into revolution. They have overthrown presidents, but they haven’t been able to conquer power and initiate a process of deep social transformations.
3. On the other hand, the history of triumphant revolutions clearly demonstrates what can be achieved when there is a political instrument capable of raising an alternative national program that unifies the struggles of diverse social actors behind a common goal; that helps to cohere them and elaborate a path forward for these actors based on an analysis of the existent balance of forces. Only in this manner can actions be carried out at the right place and right time, always seeking out the weakest link in the enemy’s chain.
4. This political instrument is like a piston that compresses steam at the decisive moment and -- without wasting any energy -- converts it into a powerful force.
5. In order for political action to be effective, so that protests, resistance and struggles are really able to change things, to convert insurrections into revolutions, a political instrument capable of overcoming the dispersion and fragmentation of the exploited and the oppressed is required, one that can create spaces to bring together those who, in spite of their differences, have a common enemy; that is able to strengthen existing struggles and promote others by orientating their actions according to a thorough analysis of the political situation; that can act as an instrument for cohering the many expressions of resistance and struggle.
6. We are aware that there are a number of apprehensions towards such ideas. There are many who are not even willing to discuss them. Such positions are adopted because they associate this idea with the anti-democratic, authoritarian, bureaucratic and manipulating political practices that have characterised many left parties.
7. I believe it is fundamental that we overcome this subjective barrier and understand that when we refer to a political instrument, we are not thinking of just any political instrument, we are dealing with political instrument adjusted to the new times, an instrument that we must built together.
8. However, in order to create or remodel this new political instrument, the left has to change its political culture and its vision of politics. This cannot be reduced to institutional political disputes for control over parliament or local governments; to approving laws or winning elections. In this conception of politics, the popular sectors and their struggles are completely ignored. Neither can politics be limited to the art of what is possible.
9. For the left, politics must be the art of making possible the impossible. And we are not talking about a voluntarist declaration. We are talking about understanding politics as the art of constructing a social and political force capable of changing the balance of force in favour of the popular movement, so as to make possible in the future that which today appears impossible.
10. We have to think of politics as the art of constructing forces. We have to overcome the old and deeply-rooted mistake of trying to build a political force without building a social force.
11. Unfortunately, there is still a lot of revolutionary phase-mongering among our militants; too much radicalism in their statements. I am convinced that the only way to radicalise a given situation is through the construction of forces. Those whose words are filled with demands for radicalisation must answer the following question: What are you doing to construct the political and social force necessary to push the process forward?
12. But this construction of forces cannot occur spontaneously, only popular uprisings happen spontaneously. It needs a protagonist.
13. And I envisage this political instrument as an organisation capable of raising a national project that can unify and act as a compass for all those sectors that oppose neoliberalism. As a space that directs itself towards the rest of society, that respects the autonomy of the social movements instead of manipulating them, and whose militants and leaders are true popular pedagogues, capable of stimulating the knowledge that exists within the people -- derived from their cultural traditions, as well as acquired in their daily struggles for survival -- through the fusion of this knowledge with the most all-encompassing knowledge that the political organisation can offer. An orientating and cohering instrument at the service of the social movements.
Posted May 21, 2009.
Marta Harnecker’s bibliography
?La izquierda después de Seattle, Siglo XXI España, 2002.
La izquierda en el umbral del Siglo XXI. Haciendo posible lo imposible, Publicado en: México, Siglo XXI Editores, 1999; España, Siglo XXI Editores, 1ª ed., 1999, 2ª ed., 2000 y 3ª ed., 2000; Cuba, Editorial de Ciencias Sociales, 2000; Portugal, Campo das Letras Editores, 2000; Brasil, Paz e Terra, 2000; Italia, Sperling and Küpfer Editori, 2001; Canadá (francés), Lantôt Éditeur, 2001; El Salvador, Instituto de Ciencias Políticas y Administrativas Farabundo Martí, 2001.
Hacia el Siglo XXI, La izquierda se renueva, Quito, Ecuador, CEESAL, 1991
Vanguardia y crisis actual o Izquierda y crisis actual, Siglo XXI España, 1990. Publicado en: Argentina, Ediciones de Gente Sur, 1990; Uruguay, TAE Editorial, 1990; Chile, Brecha, 1990; Nicaragua, Barricada, 1990. Con el título Izquierda y crisis actual: México, Siglo XXI Editores, 1990; Perú, Ediciones Amauta, 1990; Venezuela, Abre Brecha, 1990; Dinamarca, Solidaritet, 1992.
[Marta Harnecker is originally from Chile where she participated in the revolutionary process of 1970-1973. She has written extensively on the Cuba Revolution, and on the nature of socialist democracy. She now lives in Caracas and is a participant in the Venezuelan revolution.]
email2friend

Marta Harnecker (MH) says in point #10: “We have to think of politics as the art of constructing forces.”
Yes! No more use of protest as the way we make ourselves FEEL righteous and powerful.
MH says in #11: “What are you doing to construct the political and social force necessary to push the process forward?”
Bingo! Precisely the right question. But it can be answered in so many ways.
MH gives her vision broadly in #13.
This is where it gets sticky. I am assuming that there is some clumsy translating happening here. (For example, ‘political instrument’.) I am also assuming #13, a very broad and almost utterly vague statement, is a lead into the next piece in her series. Still, I am not excited in the least with ‘whose militants and leaders are true popular pedagogues’. In my opinion, what we need is a popular life-long pedagogy that can enable people to empower themselves and cooperate deeply with each other. I don’t know where else a powerful democratic force can come from. It is very important that we not only recognize this, but also recognize that we do not have such a pedagogy. That’s okay. Because if we see that we need it but don’t have it, we can then start figuring out how to develop it.
michael johnson