April 2011 - Centre for Civil Society - University of KwaZulu-Natal

"‘If you look up the last chapter of my Eighteenth Brumaire, you will find
that I declare that the next attempt of the French Revolution will be no
longer, as before, to transfer the bureaucratic-military machine from one
hand to another, but to smash it [Marx's italics--the original is
zerbrechen], and this is the precondition for every real people's revolution
on the Continent. And this is what our heroic Party comrades in Paris are
attempting." (NeueZeit, Vol.XX, 1, 1901-02, p. 709.)[2] (The letters of
Marx to Kugelmann have appeared in Russian in no less than two editions,
one of which I edited and supplied with a preface.)
“The words, ‘to smash the bureaucratic-military machine’, briefly express
the principal lesson of Marxism regarding the tasks of the proletariat
during a revolution in relation to the state. And this is the lesson that has
been not only completely ignored, but positively distorted by the
prevailing, Kautskyite, ‘interpretation’ of Marxism!”
In these lines it is clear to all that neither Lenin nor Marx had any illusions
in the possibility of achieving working class “hegemony”over the bourgeois
state. Lenin also further explained:
“On the other hand, the ‘Kautskyite’ distortion of Marxism is far more
subtle. ‘Theoretically’, it is not denied that the state is an organ of class
rule, or that class antagonisms are irreconcilable. But what is overlooked
or glossed over is this: if the state is the product of the irreconcilability
of class antagonisms, if it is a power standing above society and
“alienating itself more and more from it", it is clear that the liberation of
the oppressed class is impossible not only without a violent revolution,
but also without the destruction of the apparatus of state power which
was created by the ruling class and which is the embodiment of this
“alienation”.” (Lenin – State and the Revolution).
For Marxists, the state is essentially an organ of class oppression. An organ
formed of armed bodies of men, i.e. the police, military, prisons, etc. Its
roots lie in the irreconcilable division of society into classes. Far from
being under the control of the masses, who every 4-5 years may be granted
the right to elect a few representatives connected to it, it is loyal and
connected through a thousand ways to the capitalist class and finance
capital, that is in no manner under the influence of anyone but its owners.
As soon as the rule of capital seems in any way threatened the whole
weight of the bureaucratic state apparatus will unite and try to
undermine, sabotage and finally crush the movement threatening it.
Again the Venezuelan revolution provides us with many recent examples
and experiences. While Hugo Chavez, pushed and supported by the
movement of the masses, has been taking steps towards nationalizations
and the raising of the living standards of the masses, the state bureaucracy
is proving to be a massive pillar in support of the counter-revolution. We
can see this in the nationalized companies which are experiencing
sabotage in the form of delays, lack of coordination, lack of response from
state officials, etc. It is also clear during workers’ struggles, such as the
Mitsubishi strike about a year ago, how the whole regional state apparatus
placed its weight behind the multinational company that was trying to oust
the striking workers from the factory and in the act killing a union militant
as well. Widespread corruption and sabotage within the state is now
becoming a serious threat to the Venezuelan revolution, where the
working class has perhaps attained the highest degree of “hegemony”
possible within a capitalist state. This fully confirms the conclusions
reached by Marx and Engels during the Paris Commune, and later on by
Lenin.