CONICET | Buscador de Institutos y Recursos Humanos

Some contemporary authors have resorted to Rosa Luxemburgs though to analyze the political experiences they have blended under the notion of XXIst century socialism. In our view this operation implies a simplification of Rosa Luxemburgs political conceptions along with an acritical and apologetic perspective of Latin-American bourgeois nationalist governments of the last decade.From our perspective Rosa Luxemburgs writings have much to offer contemporary thinkers who wish to understand present political process. Much of this legacy is condensed in Luxemburgss contributions to de mass strikes debate. In first place in developing her stand on this matter Rosa Luxemburg dared to question the orthodox standpoint of the Social democracy which claimed slow partial parliamentary advances as the best tactic to reach socialism. This dogma was misleadingly attributed lo Engels, thus Rosa Luxemburg had to claimed that even Engels stance should be questioned. We consider this attitude fundamentally right: revolutionaries should study their time, analyze the development of capitalism and class struggle in the concrete period and place where they develop their political action rather than simple repeat political dogmas or recipes from previous revolutionary process that toke place in other historical contexts. At the beginning of the twentieth Century the mass strike debate implied a discussion regarding strikes with political goals as a mean of the working class tactic. After 1905 Russian frustrated revolution it also enrolled an assessment about the possibility of reproducing the Russian experience in occidental countries. Yet, in deeper terms the debate involved an evaluation of what the relation between parties, trade unions and mass movement should be; in other words, it encompassed the problem of the role of spontaneity and organization in a revolutionary process. The mass strike debate was invigorated during 1905-1906 as political life in Germany was simultaneously rocked by the impact of Russian revolution and by the local upheaval of class struggle manifested in a multiplication of economic strikes which tended to incorporate political demands too. In this context a left wing of the social democratic party emerged with Luxemburg, Mhering and Karl Liebknecht as its leaders. They battled not only against the revisionist current expressed by Bernstein but also against trade unions leaders who were the more decisive opponents of mass strikes, as the syndical Congress of Colonia in 1905 shown. Rosa Luxemburg writes The mass strike. Her main contributions are the links she builds between economic and political fights and the statement that it was not indispensable to have a perfect and complete organization before launching a mass class strike, and that instead the mass action could help to forge new working class institutions. This was especially true regarding the most precarious occupations like the ones where female work or home-work prevailed. This perspective is specially worth recovered in the present time when we witness a worldwide rebellion of the relative surplus population (expressions of this rebellion can be seen in the yellow vests protests in France, the Occupy movement in the US or the unemployed movement in Argentina). Dogmatic left parties and bureaucratic unions turn their back to these political expressions of the working class. This mistake is particularly dangerous in Latin America where relative surplus population is larger than in other countries and has shown a more radical political behavior.In our view the so called XXIst socialism are bourgeois nationalist governments that have expropriated previous mass movements and stablished bonapartist regimes with a personalist and authoritarian nature. The measures they have taken are reformist ones thus under their rule capitalist crisis have only grown which explains the elections defeats and mass contest they have faced. Here, once more, Rosa Luxemburgs approach to the problems of spontaneity, democracy, mass action, reform and revolution are a very valuable asset to sharpen our political analysis.

enviar mensaje