Medearis, John. Lost or Obscured. How Lenin, Schumpeter and Hannah Arendt Misanderstood de Council Movement

8/9/2019 Medearis, John. Lost or Obscured. How Lenin, Schumpeter and Hannah Arendt Misanderstood de Council Movement

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/medearis-john-lost-or-obscured-how-lenin-schumpeter-and-hannah-arendt-misanderstood 1/31

Northeastern Political Science ssociation

Lost or Obscured? How V. I. Lenin, Joseph Schumpeter, and Hannah Arendt Misunderstoodthe Council MovementAuthor(s): John MedearisSource: Polity, Vol. 36, No. 3 (Apr., 2004), pp. 447-476Published by: Palgrave Macmillan Journals

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3235386 .Accessed: 08/02/2015 14:13

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Palgrave Macmillan Journals and Northeastern Political Science Association are collaborating with JSTOR to

digitize, preserve and extend access to Polity.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 168.176.5.118 on Sun, 8 Feb 2015 14:13:42 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=pal

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3235386?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp





http://www.jstor.org/stable/3235386?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=pal



Polity

Volume

XXXVI,

umber

*

April

004

Lost or Obscured?

How V.

I.

Lenin,

Joseph

Schumpeter,

and

Hannah

Arendt

Misunderstood

the

Council Movement

JohnMedearis

University

f

California,

iverside

The eriod ollowingorldWar witnessedhe lourishingf he ouncil ove-

ment,

hich

ttempted

odemocratize

olitics,

ociety

ndthe

conomy

nCentral

andEastern

urope.

hemovementeservesheoretical

ttention

s an llustrative

experiment

n democratic

gency-responsive

o historical

onditions

nd con-

straints,

nd

oppositional

ndtransformative

n ts

pproach

nd

ims.Themove-

ment's

mpact

n

thinking

bout

democracy

as been

ignificant,

ut

lso

ironic,

because ts

tory

as been ransmittedo he

resent

y

heoristshodidnot hare

the ouncils'

mbitions

nd

assumptions.

ewrecall ow hat

igures

s

disparate

as VI

.

Lenin,

oseph chumpeter,

nd HannahArendt

esponded

n

mportant

ways o themovement.ltimately,heway hese heoristsonceptualizedollec-

tive

gency

aused hem o

misjudge

he

ignificance

f

hemovementor

emo-

cratic

heory.

nd heir

esultingis-portrayals

ave ontributedo ome f he im-

itationsf

ontemporarynglo-American

emocratic

heory.

JohnMedearis s assistant

rofessor

f

political

cience t the

University

f

California,

iverside.is

writings

ttempt

n

various

ays

o

oin

the heorization

of

democracy

ith oncrete

ociological

nd

historical

tudy.

The ouncilmovementrose n hedisordernd ufferinghatmarkedhe nd

ofWorldWar towrestle ith he

iscredited

emnantsf

pre-war

tates,

rippled

armies,

nd n ndustrial

rder

hat

ad

become

more

ictatorial

s

production

as

harnessedo

total

war.This

pontaneous

ovement

f

radical emocratic

mbi-

tions

helped

chievewhatever

measure

f

democracy ermany

nd

Austria

enjoyed

etween hewars.

n

the

ontemporarynglo-American

olitical

heory

canon,

he ouncilmovementas

only

ne

great

dmirer,

annah

Arendt,

ho

referredo it as

part

f the

"revolutionary

radition

nd

its ost reasure".' ut

Arendt'sreatmentf the

councilmovementends tself

eadily

o

a

polarized

response,ccordingowhich he ouncilsmay eseen ithersa supreme oliti-

cal

achievement,

r n

impossible,erhaps

angerous,topia.

hecouncilmove-

ment hould e

regarded

s neither.twas

a movement-flawedike

ny

ther-

1. Hannah

rendt,

nRevolution

New

York:

iking,

963),

17-85.








448 LOST OR

OBSCURED?

that

ttempted

o

democratizeomeof

he

conomic,

ilitary,

olitical

nd

ocial

institutionshat ad edEuropeo disastrousar.As nattemptomobilizeem-

ocratic

gency,

t

amply

meritederious heoretical

ttention.

he

consideration

given

t,however,

as

actually

bscured

mportantspects

f

the ouncil

move-

ment.

n

the

decades ince

he

FirstWorld

War,

he

movement

as notbeen o

much

lost,"

s

Arendt

uggested,

s obscured.

An

understanding

fthe ouncilmovement'sdeas nd

practices

ight

ave

(and

ould

till)

ontribute

o an enrichmentfdemocratic

heory.

n

particular,

historical

urvey

f he ouncilmovement

oregrounds

he

roblem

f ts

ledgling

democratic

gency-its

articipants'

ttempts

o

organize

ocial ntities

apable

f

regulatingndguidinghose ostwarocialrelationsndforces hat ommonly

affected

embers,

n

way

onsistent

ith

n

evolving

emocratic

deology.

n

ts

stance owards

he

ndustrial,

ilitary

nd social

orders

hat onstitutedheold

regime,

he

movement

as

oppositional

nd transformative.atherhan

being

wedded

o

single

emocraticnstitutional

orm,

he ouncil

movement's

pproach

was a

flexible

esponse

o historicalnd

sociological

onditions.he

majority

f

movement

articipants

idnot

reject arliamentary

nstitutions,

ut

ttempted

o

achieve heir

emocratizingoals

n

tandem

ith

hem,

pparently

nvisioning

n

interplay

etween

ifferentocial entitieshatwould

bring

bout the

desired

unleashing

fdemocratic

gency.

One

purpose

fthis

ssay,

hen,

s to

recoverhese

spects

fthe

heory

nd

practice

f

he

ouncils nd the

uestions

hey

might

aise or emocratic

heory

today.

nother

urpose

s

to demonstrate

omething

hat as been

forgotten:

hat

the ouncil

movement,

ar rom

eing

n

obscure istorical

ootnote,

trongly

nflu-

enced hinkershose

xamples

till einforce

omeof

he

deep

tructureor ur

debates bout emocratic

olitics.

oseph

chumpeter,

hose lite

onception

f

democracy

s a method

s

widely

ccepted

n

social

cience,

nd

provides

he

model

gainst

hich

lmost

llothersre

measured,

ormulated

hat lite

oncep-

tion s a

response

o

the ouncil

movement

nd imilar

emocratic

endencies.

I.

Lenin's heoreticalnd

practical

edirectionf

he

ouncils

elped

rienthe

oviet

state,

n

contrasto which o

many

emocraticdeals re

mplicitly

ormulated.

Arendt,

critic f

the familiarorms f

representative

emocracy,

eveloped

theory

f

political

reedomhat as

partly

nspired

y

he

movement.

ndirectly,

he

councilmovement

as

helped hape

he

waydemocracy

s defined

nd debated

today,

n

ways

fwhich e

are

mostly

naware. ut

n

heorizing

he ouncilmove-

ment, enin,

chumpeter

ndArendtistortedt s well.The ouncil

movement's

influences

a

tortuousnd

ultimately

ronic

tory.

A third

mportanturpose,

hen,

s

to

explore

ow all three heorists

ot

he

councils

rong.

uided

yrigidonceptions

f

xpertise

ndthe

tate,

enin lti-

mately

edirectedhe

councils,

heoretically

nd

practically,

rom

emocratic

forums

ntomute

rgans

f

uthoritariandministration.

hough

e feared

hem,

Schumpeter

irst

cknowledged

he

ignificance

f he ouncils

n

erms

much ike








John

Medearls 449

their

roponents',

hen

eployed

n elite

onception

f ollective

ction hat

made

the ouncils nthinkable.rendt ade he ouncils centerpiecefher isionf

politics,

ut n

so

doing

lso

derogated

he ouncils'

ocio-economic

ims

and

methods.

n

ach

ase,

hese

heorists'

ays

f

onceiving

f

ollective

gency-its

dimensions,

nderpinnings,

nd

propererrain-prevented

hem rom

rasping

he

movement's

ttempt

o

create emocratic

gency.

hanks,

n

part,

o

them,

he

councils ave oooften eenmistreated

r

forgotten.

Of

ourse,

he eterminants

f

public

iscourses

n

subjects

uch s

democracy

are far oo

complex

o be attributed

olely

o

intellectuals

ike

chumpeter

nd

Arendt,

r even o someone ikeLenin-both

significant

istorical

ctor

nd

a

thinkernhis wn

right.

oreoverhererenow ndhave lmost

lways

een

ways

of

hinking

bout

emocracy

hat o not ollow

single

attern,

owever

ervasive.

But

Lenin,

chumpeter

nd

Arendt

elped

formulatend reinforceecurrent

assumptions

hat

merge,

n

different

ays,

ven

n

otherwise-disparate

ontem-

porary

onceptions

f

democracy.

nd

hey elped

nsure

hat

mportant

spects

of

he ouncilmovementould e

ignored.

This

ssay

onstitutessomewhat nusual xercise

n

the

history

f

political

thought.

t

does notdelve nto hehistorical ilieu f

single

hinker,

utfollows

the heoretical

nterpretation

f historicalomentver

he ourse f he

ecades

that ollowedt.2

begin

ith historical

ractice

nd

widespread

deology

nd sk

how

t

was

brought

nto

heory,

nstead f

racing

concept,

erhaps

o ts

ntry

into

opular

onsciousness.am nteresteds much

n

he

clipse

f n

nterrelated

set

f

deas nd

practices,

s in heir irth

nd

flourishing.

oreover,

hose

ew

who

considerhemselvestudentsf he ouncils

ikely

ssociate

heorizing

bout hem

with different

roup

f

thinkers:

specially

tto

Bauer,

ntonio

ramsci,

arl

Korsch

ndAntonie

annekoek.3

different

ort f

essay

ould ndeed e

written

on

these

igures'

ympatheticnderstanding

fthe

ouncils. ut heir

nterpreta-

tions renot he nes

hat ave

ontributed

o

hapingontemporarynglo-Amer-

icandemocratic

hought,

nd

o,

with

he

xception

f

ome ommentsn

Bauer,

I

have

argely

ut

hem

side.

In

the

ollowing

ection,

reviewhe ecordf

he ouncil

movement

ndwhat

it

ouldmean or

emocratic

heory.

hen

discuss he

way

Lenin,

chumpeter

nd

2. This s

probably

ost

mportant

ith

espect

oArendt.er

ntentionnd

meaning

n

writing

he

works hat

istortedhe ouncils' ecordan be

fully

ssessed

nly

n

ight

f

WorldWar

I

and heHolo-

caust. atherhan

nterpret

er

writings

n

hat

ontext,owever,

his

ssay,

n

ffect,

olds

er

esponsible

for er

nterpretation

f

differentra.

3. Gramsci,orschndPannekoekll

ssigned

ouncils

mportant

olesn heirocialistisions.ee

Serge

ricianer,

annekoek

nd

the

Workers'

ouncils,

rans.

ohn

erber

St.Louis,

MO:

Telos

Press,

1978);

Antonio

ramsci,

Soviets

n

taly,"

ewLeft

eview 1

1968):

28-58; ramsci,

electionsrom

Political

ritings,

910-1920,

rans. ohn

Matthews,

d.

Q.

Hoare

Minneapolis:

niversity

f

Minnesota

Press, 990);

Douglas

ellner,d.,

Karl

Korsch:

evolutionary

heory

Austin:

niversity

f

Texas

ress,

1974);

Karl

Korsch,

Whats

Socialization?

Program

f

Practical

ocialism,"

ew

German

ritique

,

3

(Fall,

975)

0-81.








450

LOST OR OBSCURED?

Arendt-each

ifferently

nfluential

n

democraticiscourse-mis-theorizedhe

movement.inally,look t ome f heways heirailureseaken nglo-American

discourse

n

democracyoday.

I. The

Historical henomenon f

Councils

and Its

Significance

or

Democratic

Theory

It

s

possible

ofind

ough

recursors

f he

ouncilmovement

n

uch

vents

s

theParis ommunef

1871,

ut here

s

ittlevidencehat he

workers,oldiers,

politicalctivistsndrevolutionarieshofoundedouncils etween 905 nd1919

were

nspired

y

uch

examples.4

he

first

eal

tirring

f

he ouncilmovement

was in

theRussian evolution

f

1905,

n

whichworkers

n

factories

hroughout

Russia lected

epresentatives

o local

councils,

alled soviets"-the irst

reely-

elected

mass

rganizations

n

hat

ountry.5

twas tothis

model

hat

evolutionary

workers

urnedn

the

arliest

hases

f heRussian

evolution

f

1917.Not

ong

after strike

n

Petrograd

pread

o

become

general

trike

n

February

f hat

ear,

an

ad

hoc

revolutionaryroup

alled or orkers

n

factorieso lect

epresentatives

to

Petrograd

oviet.6

heworkers'

oviet

oon ncludedoldiers'

epresentatives

s

well.7 acedwithworevolutionaryrganizations-theetrogradoviet nd pro-

visional

ommitteef

dumamembers-Nicholasbdicated.

he councilmove-

ment

apidly

pread

hroughout

ussia

gain.

herewere 00 ovietsnRussia

y

the

nd

of

March.8

y

June,

more

han

37,000

orkers

n

Petrograd

ere

repre-

sented

y actory

ommittees.9

Just

fewmonths

ater,

uring

hewartime ass trike ovement

n

Germany,

Austriand

Hungary,articipantsuickly

ormed orkers'ouncils o coordinate

their

fforts.'0

ot

ong

fter

hat,

hen aced

with

n order

o

eave

port

or sui-

cidal

final

ampaign

t

sea,

Germanailors

t

Kiel

mutinied.

n

short

rder,

he

sailors lectedouncils;meanwhile,ocaldockworkerslectedheirwn, ndthe

Baltic

ort

as

soon n

their

ands. he ouncil

movement

pread

apidlyhrough

4. Oskar

nweiler,

he oviets: he

Russian

Workers,easants,

ndSoldiers

ouncils,

905-1921,

trans. uth

ein New

York:

antheon,

974), 1.

The

only

ntecedent-in

his ase for

actory

ommit-

tees-was theRussianradition

f

lectinghop

tewards

o

represent

orkersefore

anagement.

ee

S.A.

mith,

ed

Petrograd:

evolutionn he actories

Cambridge:ambridgeniversity

ress,

983),

7.

5.

Anweiler,

he

oviets,

2.

6.

Anweiler,

he

oviets,

04.

7. Anweiler,he oviets,06.

8. Nikolai .

mirnov,

The

oviets,"

n

Critical

ompanion

o

he ussian

evolution,

914-1921,

d.

E.

Acton,

.

.

Cherniaev,

nd

W

G.

RosenbergBloomington:

ndiana

niversity

ress,

997),

29.

9.

Gennady

hkliarevsky,

abor ntheRussian evolution:

actory

ommitteesnd Trade

nions,

1917-1918

New

York:

t.

Martin's

ress),

.

10.

F

L.

Carsten,

evolution

nCentral

urope,

918-1919

Berkeley

ndLos

Angeles:

niversity

fCal-

ifornia

ress, 972),

2-13.








JohnMedearls

451

northern

ermany

nd

quickly

ecame

hemodel or

evolutionary

odies

n

1918.

Workersnd oldiersreatedouncilsn nearlyveryity"nGermany.II

Several

ifferent

ypes

f ouncils-not

ntirely

istinct

rom

ach

other-arose

in

the

revolutionary

eriod

fterhe nd

of

the

FirstWorldWar.

irst,

here ere

workers'

ouncils,

sually

ocal

bodies,

lected

ccording

o

varying

epresentative

ratios,

y

workers

n

the actories.

here

were,

econd,

oldiers'

ouncils,

lected

similarlyy

ank-and-fileoldiersnd

ailors.

n

Russia nd

n

Germany,

oldiersnd

workersften lected

epresentatives

o the ame ocal ouncils.

oon,

he ocal

councils

n

Russia

nd

Germany-and

omewhat

ater

n

Austria-elected

epre-

sentativeso

national

ongresses.

nd

inally,

orkers

n

ndividual

nterprises

ften

elected

actory

ommitteesr ouncils.

Councils

layed xtremely

mportantevolutionary

oles-

in

Russia,

eforehe

Bolshevikeizure

f

power,

nd

n

Germany

nd

Austria,

n thefirstew

months

afterhe

mpiresollapsed

t the ndof he

war.The

Petrograd

oviet,

epresent-

ing

what

ocialists

alled

revolutionary

emocracy,"

xercised

practical

heck n

actions

y

he

argely

ourgeois

rovisionalovernment.his

ystem

fdual

power

lasted

rom

ebruary

hrough

pril,

917.

n

Germany,

pontaneous

lectionsrom

barracks

ndfactories

n

Berlinent

epresentatives

o

mass

meeting

n Novem-

ber

10,

1918. his d-hoc ouncil onfirmedheCouncil

f

People's

Representa-

tives,

provisional

overnment

hat adbeenformed

y

greement

etweenead-

ers

of

the ocialdemocratic

nd

ndependent

ocialdemocratic

arties.

n

effect,

under

his

rrangement,

ower

was

recognized

obe in he

hands

f

workers'nd

soldiers'

ouncils,

emporarily,

ith heCouncil f

People's epresentatives

erving

as

the xecutivehosen

y

hem.12

hese

rrangements

ecognizing

he evolution-

ary

ower

f

he

ouncils,

f

ourse,

idnot

ast orever-nor

id

heworkersnd

soldiers

n

he ouncils

ecessarily

ant hem

o.

The ims

nd

deological

rientations

f

he ouncils

aried,

ut here

ere lear

common hemes. he

broadest,

ndmost

mportant

ne to

note,

s that he

oun-

cils

ypically

iewed

hemselves,

heir

ctions,

nd

he

hallengeshey

aced

n

dem-

ocratic erms.

ore

pecifically,

oth he

heory

nd

the

practice

f the

ouncils

seem o

have

enteredn

transforming

ppressive

nstitutionalealms nd

aming

dangerous

ocial

orces

hrough

he ntroductionf

democratic

ractices

nddeci-

sion-making

n

key

ettings.

specially

n

Germany

nd

Austria,

he

program

f

he

councilsombined

arliamentary

r

representative

emocracy

ith

'democratiza-

tion' f he

rmy,

he ivil ervicendthe

conomy."'3

erhaps

most

bviously,

he

11.Elizabeth.Tobin,RevolutionndAlienation:heFoundationsfWeimar,"nTowardheHolo-

caust:

The ocial nd Economic

ollapse

f

heWeimar

epublic,

d.

M.

Dobkowski

nd

.

Wallimann

(Westport,

onnecticut:

reenwood

ress),

56.

12.

Carsten,

evolution

nCentral

urope,

9-40, 29-30,

23-24.

13. Eberhard

olb,

heWeimar

epublic,

London:

llen

Unwin,988),

5.And ee:Dick

eary,

Rad-

icalismnd heWorker:

etalworkers

nd

Revolution,914-23,"

n

ociety

nd

Politics

n

Wilhelmine

er-

many,

d.

R.

J.

vans

London:

room

elm,

td.),

67, 70;Tobin,

Revolutionnd

Alienation,"

56,

58.








452

LOST OR OBSCURED?

councilmovement

tood

or

military

nd

economic

emocratization;

or he

very

formationf he ouncilsended o verturnroverhaulower elationsn he ar-

racks nd

the actories.

Complete

emocratization,

bolitionf

militarism,"

ere

the

mbitious

oals

f he

ocal ouncil

n

Diez,

near

rankfurt.14

imilarly,

con-

ference

f

ouncils

n

Russian

rtillery

lants

alled

or full

emocracy

nd

colle-

giality"

n

production."1

n

Germany

nd

Austria,

ouncils ere

widely egarded

s

impatient

o chieve

democratic

ormf

ocialization

f

he

economy.16

he

ame

was true n

Russia.

here,

he

unequal

istributionf

power

n

production"

ad

been

f

great

oncerno

workers

n

Petrograd,

o when he

irst

actory

ommittees

formedn the

tate-owned

lants,

hey

rticulated

"vision

f a

democratized

systemf ndustrialelations"."he German ongressfWorkers'ndSoldiers'

Councils

amously

dopted

he

Hamburg

oints,

hich alled

or

he ree lection

of

fficers

y

ank-and-file

oldiers,

he bolitionf

fficers'

nsignia;

ontrol

f

gar-

risons

y

ocal

ouncils;

nd

making

oldiers'ouncils

esponsible

or

iscipline.'8

The

Congress

lsocalled

or

uick

ocialization

f

industries.19

It s

especiallymportant

o

explore

he

ttitudefthe

ouncils oward

arlia-

mentary,

epresentative

emocracy

ecause fthe

ise o

power

f

Bolshevism

n

this

eriod,

nd he

Bolsheviks'

doption

f

he

erm

soviet"or heiruthoritarian

rule.

he

Russian

oviets hat

ormed

n

1905had

quickly

eclared

hemselves

n

favor f democratic

epublic,

s we have een.And he

Petrograd

ovietf1917

likewisealled

mmediately

fter

t

formed

for

he nnihilationf

he ld

regime

andthe

onvocation

f

constituent

ational

ssembly,

o be elected

y

universal,

impartial,

irect,

nd

ecret

allot".20

imilarly,

n

Germany

nd

Austria,

he ouncils

stood or he

ormation

f

democratic

epublics--though

heirision f

democracy

clearly

ent

eyond

arliaments.erhaps

ore o

he

oint,

n

he ftermathf

he

Bolshevik

evolution,

othGermannd

Austrianouncils

ut

hemselvesn record

opposing

ole

power

or

ouncils,

hich,

iven

heir ase of

upport,

ould

have

amountedo

proletarian

ictatorship.21

t

s true hatn

Russia,

n

1917,

he

oviets

and

factory

ouncils

rew

more

upportive

ftheBolshevik

olicy

f ole soviet

power.

n

the

oviets,

hiswas

largely

ue to

rapid

urnover

nd

dramatically

increasing

olshevik

epresentation.22

he

Bolsheviks

anaged

lsoto

win

ver he

factory

ommittees,

n

which

hey riginally

ad ittle

epresentation,

y

favoring

14.

Tobin,

Revolution

nd

Alienation,"

58.

15. Steve

mith,

Factory

ommittees,"

n

Critical

ompanion

o heRussian

evolution,

47.

16.

Geary,

Radicalismnd he

Worker,"

70;

Tobin,

Revolution

nd

Alienation,"

56,

58-59.

17.

Smith,

ed

Petrograd,

;

Steve

mith,

Factory

ommittees,"

47.

18.Carsten,evolutionnCentralurope,2-73; olger erweg,The irst ermanongressf ol-

diers' ouncilsnd

he roblemf

Military

eforms,"

entral

uropean

istory

,

2

(1968):

59,

60.

19.

Geary,

Radicalismnd he

Worker,"

70;

Kolb,

heWeimar

epublic,

5.

20.

Anweiler,

he

oviets,

05.

21.

Carsten,

evolution

n

Central

urope,

10,134;

Gordon

raig, ermany,

866-1945

Oxford:

Oxford

niversity

ress, 978), 05;Kolb,

heWeimar

epublic,

5.

22.

Anweiler,

he

oviets,

77-81.










454

LOST OR

OBSCURED?

cilswere

uite

road,

o too

were

he

pproaches

hey

ook nd he

ategories

f

activitieshey ngagedn.Usuallyhosenbybroad-basedlections,hey ormu-

lated

tatements,

ngaged

n

debate nd

petitioning,

ent

elegations,

oordinated

protest,

articipated

n

revolution,

issolvedld bodies nd

constituted

ew

ones,

and

even

rganized

ulturalctivities.

How

could democratic

heory

eriously

eflect

n the

council

xperience?

How

might

enin,

chumpeter

ndArendt

avedone o?

t

s neither

matter

f

simplyxplaining

mute

mpiricalhenomenon,

or,

n

the

ther

and,

f et-

ting

he ouncils

peak

for

hemselves. hat s needed

s

to

askwhat heres

n

the

ouncils'

oals,

anguage,

nd

practice

hat an be theorized

ruitfully

rom

democraticerspective.r, oput tdifferently:articipantsn the ouncils aw

both heir eans nd

ends s democratic.heorists

ight

skwhat

nsights,

hat

directionsemocratic

heory

ould ake rom

dopting

similar

but ritical)

er-

spective

oward he

ouncils,

heir

ctions,

nd

their

esponses

o thedifficulties

they

aced.

It

s

best o

begin yputting

side

generalizations

hat annot e

supported

n

light

f

the

diversity

nd

complexity

f

the ouncil

henomenon-impositions

that an

get

n

the

way

f

more

lementarynderstanding

f he ouncil

he-

nomenon.Most

mportantly,

he ctual ouncils

f

history-some

f

theirnter-

preters

otwithstanding-never

onstitutedsort f

eparate

nd

homogenous

political

ystem,

r a

distinct

orm f

tate.

Ultimately,

he

reation

f

the oviet

state

ecessitated

crushing

f he ouncils

soviets),

ot heir

eplication.

nd

while

he

ouncils ften oordinatedheir

ctivities ith ach

other,

hey

lso

interacted

eadily

ith

many

ther

ypes

f

political

nd social

ntities,

howing

little

nclinationo

abolish r

replace

hemwholesale.

ertainly

his

s

the

mport

of

heresistancef

the ouncils

hemselves,

specially

n

Germany

nd

Austria,

to

the

dea of

forming

council tate.

And,

more

generally,

he ouncils

imply

never rrived

t

any

determinatend

explicit

nswer o the

questions

f

how

they

hemselveshouldbe

internallyrganized,

r

how

they

houldrelate o

other ntities.n the

whole, hen,

t

s

probably

ettero

understand

he oun-

cils

in

terms

f what

they

were

trying

o

accomplish,

nd

the

characteristic

methods

hey

ere

mploying

o

accomplish

t,

ather

han n

terms f

ny

kind

of

fixed

nstitutional

ormula.

While

t s

misleading,

hen,

ocall he

ctual,

istoricalouncils

"system,"

t

is

quite

lear

hat

hey

ere

part

f

collective

hallenge

o established

uthority

in

industry,

he

military,

nd

the

tate,

broad-based

ttempty

working-class

people

to

use democratic

ractices

o

wrest

t

least

ome control rom hose

authorities.

hecouncils

ere,

n

this

ense,

art

f

social

movement-in

act,

themovement'sharacteristicethod.

mphasizing

he ouncils'

movementri-

gins

alls ttentionotwo

f he

most asic

hallenges

hat

hey

aced:

rganizing

themselves

ffectively,

nd

then

egulating,uiding

r

ltering

ostwar

ocial

ela-

tions ndforces. nd t lso calls ttentionothe deas

nd

elf-understandings

f








JohnMedearls

455

the

ouncils'

articipants

s

they

ndertookhese

hallenges.29

ocial

movements

arecollectivitieseekingobecome ffectivectors. heyeek, hats, odevelop

their

gency,

heir

bility

o

ntervene

n

ongoing

ocial

processes

nd

to

re-consti-

tute ocial elations.

n

ight

f he ouncils'

pecifically

emocratic

deology,

hen,

we

might

ee

the

ouncils

most

imply

s a

key

lement

f

popular ttempt

o

develop

pecifically

emocratic

gency.

But

what

haracterized

his

ttempt

t democratic

gency?

irst,

he ffort

o

transform

elected,

emocracy-refractory

ealms f he ocial

world.

hecouncil

movementet ts

ights

n

particular

nstitutionsnd

structures-industry,

he

armed

orces,

nd

the

bureaucratic

ld-regime

tates-that ere

ppressive

nd

hierarchical,

ndthat

ere,

elatedly,

perating

othe etrimentf he

majority

f

people

ffected

y

hem. hecouncils

ere, hen,

historically

pecific

esponse

to

problems osed

by

he

ocial

tructuresnd tendencieshat

merged

efore

and

during

heFirstWorldWar. hus

t

matters

uite

bit

where

he ouncils

were

established-that

s,

not

ust nywhere,

ut

n

particularppressive

nd

hierarchicalealms. he

movement, oreover,

ttempted

o transform

nd

to

gain

ome control ver

particular

nstitutionsnd

forces

y ntroducing

emo-

cratic

ractices.

n

any

heterogeneous

ocial

world,

n

which

ome sectors re

more

nd some ess

egalitarian,ree,

nd

open

to

popularnfluence,

emocratic

practices

lways

ave he

potential

o

transform.ouncil

articipantsttempted

to harness his

otential

y

establishing

ouncils

n

factories

nd barracks. nd

the

particular

hoice f nstitutional

argets,

t

hould e

noted,

lso

reflected

view

hat conomic ife hould e

brought

nder

emocratic

ontrol,

recisely

because industrial

roduction,

s it

existed,

ostered

ominationnd

socially

destructiveorces.

As

have

lready

ointed

ut,

t s

also

quite

mportant

hat he

ouncils

ener-

ally

ejected

he ormationf

pure

ounciltate.

Many

riticismsf ouncils ocus

ontheirupposed endencyo stifler bolish hebeneficialspects fparliamen-

tary olitics.

t s

to

his--or

ore

pecifically

o he

ollapsing

f

parliamentary

ol-

itics ntomere

dministration-that

. J.

Polan

efers hen

he contendshat

he

council ormtselfontains

certain

nadequacies

hich

will ubvert

ny

articular

[benign]

ntent."30

ut

hiss a criticismettereveled

t ome

f

he ouncils'nter-

preters

han

t

the

historicalouncils hemselves.

effrey

.

Isaac and Nicos

Poulantzasre learerhan olan hat he

roblem

s

not

necessarily

ome

ntrinsic

29.

The

preceding

entenceseferothe

evelopment

f

ocialmovement

heory

oward

synthetic

approach

xamining

esource

obilization,

olitical

pportunities,

nd

deological

rames.nthis evel-

opment,

ee

Doug

McAdam,

ohn .

McCarthy

nd

Mayer

.

Zald,

Introduction:

pportunities,

obilizing

Structures,

nd

Framing

rocesses-Toward

Synthetic,

omparative

erspective

n

Social

Movements",

in

Comparativeerspectives

nSocial

Movements:

olitical

pportunities,

obilizing

tructures,

ndCul-

tural

ramings,

d.

D.

McAdam,

.

.

McCarthy

ndM.N.Zald

Cambridge,ngland:

ambridge

niversity

Press,

996).

30.

A.

J.

olan,

enin nd he nd f olitics

London:

ethuen,984), 9,

65.








456 LOST OR

OBSCURED?

destructive

eature

f

councils

hemselves,

ut

ttempts

o abolish

arliamentary

bodies nd he oliticalightsheyrefoundedn.3'

The

councils'

cceptance

f

parliamentaryemocracy

s

arguably

ied oth o

the

oppositional

nd

for

ack

f

a

better

erm)

oliticalspects

f

the

ouncils'

practice.

aking

hese n

turn: hecouncilswere

oppositional.

hatever

opes

some heorists

ay

have

had

for

ull ouncil

overeignty--and

hatever

ouncils

might

ave

one,

had

they

prouted

n a

socialworldwith o

pre-existing

ower

relations-whathe

historicalouncils

ctually

idwas

set hemselves

p

n

oppo-

sitiono

dominationnd o

xisting

ocial endencies

un

mok.

or

he

movement,

councils ere

ignificant

n

themselves-for

he

particular

ractices

onstituting

themnternally-butlsofor heirlace n nd ffectn a broader etworkf nsti-

tutionsf

which

hey

ere

part.

n

Austria,

he

ouncils

eveloped

politics

f

opposition

nd

nterplay

etween

ifferently

onstituted

nstitutions,

ncluding

ar-

liament.32

n

Russia,

he

factory

ouncils

oexisted nd

competed

ith

rades

unions ndeven

ontinued

rivate

anagement,

n

many

ases.33

Relatedly,

he ouncils ere

n

certain

ense

olitical

rgans.

ow,

political"

s

a

dangerous

ord

o

use

n

an

essay

ealing

ith

rendt-butt

s,

qually,

very

important

netouse

n

ne

dealing

ith enin.usethe

word erewithout

ny

re-

tension

f

apturing

he essence" f

politics,

r

any

mplication

hatwhat s eco-

nomic r ocial annot lso be

political.

n factoriess much s in

neighborhoods,

councilscted

olitically

hen

hey

ook

ctive

art

n

onflictver ourses

f

ction,

engaged

n

debate,

rafted

tatements,

etitioned,

nd

riticized,

oth

nternally

nd

in

relationoother

roups.

hat

hey

id hiswe

know,

n

part,

rom enin

imself,

who ccused he ctual istorical

ouncils

f

becomingtalking

hops,"

n

which,

s

he

put

t

lsewhere

more

ympathetically),

public

eeting

emocracy"'

as

exhib-

ited,

turbulent"nd

surging."34

lthough,

ollowing

he

ollapse

f ld

regime

nsti-

tutions,

he ouncilsook

p

tasks hat adbeen

arried

ut

by

bureaucracies,

here

is ittle

vidence

hat

hey

aw themselves

s

simplyarrying

utfixed

ules.

n

this

sense,

rendt'snsistence

hat he ouncils oth reated

space

for

ebate s well s

a

mechanism

or

eveloping

nd

xercising

ollective

ower

eems

ight.

ut s John

F.

Sitton

oints

ut,

he ouncilsonsideredconomic

nd

ocial

uestions

o

be as

ripe

or

uch reatments those hat rendt

esignated

political."35

31.

Jeffrey

.

saac,

Arendt,

amus,

nd Modern ebellion

New

Haven ndLondon:

ale

University

Press,

992),

45.

Nicos

oulantzas,

The

tate nd theTransitiono

Socialism,"

ocialist eview

,

2

(March-April

978):

0.

32.

Bauer,

ustrian

evolution,

70-71.

33. Carmenirianni, orkersontrolnd Socialist emocracy:heSoviet xperienceLondon:

Verso, 982), 5, 6, 4,

3-62.

34.

Lenin,

Can he olsheviksetaintate ower?"

n

VI.

Lenin,

elected

Works,

ne-Volume

dition

(New

York:

nternational

ublishers,1917] 971),

00.

Lenin,

The

mmediate

asks f

he

oviet

overn-

ment,"

n

VI.

Lenin,

elected

Works,

27.

35.

John

Sitton,

Hannah rendt's

rgument

or ouncil

emocracy,"

n

Hannah

rendt:ritical

Essays,

d.,

Lewis

.

Hinchmannd andra

.

Hinchman

Albany:

UNY

ress,

994)

21-24. f

ourse,








JohnMedearls

457

II. Lenin

Itwould eem here

ould e littleo

ay

bout

enin nddemocratic

hought.

But he

arly

evelopment

f he oviettate nvolveddrastic

econfiguring

f he

democratic

mpulses

f he

Russianouncils

soviets).

nd

lthough

t s

tempting

o

view enin's

teering

f his

rocess

s

merely

xpedient

nd actical-even

nprin-

cipled-in

act

treflectedenin's

elatively

onsistent

nderlying

eliefsbout ow

collective

gency

ould

e

promoted

nd

directed.36he onversionf

heRussian

sovietsf1917

nto

ccessories

f uthoritariantate

ower

as

nno mall

art

ue

to

key

eatures

fLenin's

hought:specially

is

onceptions

f

heory

nd

cience,

the ole f he arty,nd, elatedly,is estrictiveiew f he tate.

Prioro

1914,

enin ad hownittleheoreticalnterest

n

oviets,37

lthoughey

elements

f

his

hinking

lready

ndicated

ow he

might

reat hem.

n

1905,

e

regarded

he ouncils s

revolutionaryighting

rganizations,

utnot

s

perma-

nently

seful. e attended

eetings

f

he

Petrograd

oviet hat

ear,

ut

seldom

spoke," ccording

oRobertervice.38

y

1917 nd

1918,

owever,

he oviets

ere

integral

o his

hought.

nd

n

this

eriod,

enin's

hinking

bout he

oviets ent

through

everal

hases.

arly

n

1917,

s

the oviet

movement

pread

hroughout

Russia

nthewakeof heTsar's

bdication,

enin

nd

the

Bolsheviks

opularized

the amous

logan,

All

ower

othe oviets"-even

hough

he ovietshemselves

originally

ade

no

such

demand. he reasonwas

fairly

imple:

he

oviets,

ith

their

redominantly

orking-class

embership,

ouldbecome vehicle

or

lass

dictatorship,

f

nly

heBolsheviksould

gain

ontrol

f

hem.39

All

ower

o the

soviets" as atfirstittle ore

han

response

o he

evolutionarytruggle

or

osi-

tion

among

different

ocialist nd non-socialist

arties.

ut Lenin

developed

throughout

917 he

ruly

ovel

dea

hat

ovietsould

orm

he asis

f

newkind

of

tate

ower.

e

abandonedhis

ew

formula

nly

riefly

uring

he

ummer

f

1917,

n

response

o

a setback

or

heBolsheviks.40ut

s

the ituation

hanged

again,

he

logan

f All

ower

othe oviets"oon

reappeared.

The

new

position

s

best

aptured

n

The

State nd

Revolution:

heMarxist

Theory

f he tate ndtheTasks f he roletariatn

he

Revolution,

ritten

hile

Lenin as

n

hiding

n

he ate ummernd

arly

all f

1917,

nd

Can

heBolshe-

one should

e

wary

f

eeming

o

ttributeothe ouncils

consciousness

f

Arendtian

erminology

nd

distinctions.

36.

Polan ndNeil

Harding

rgue imilarly,hough

n

different

rounds,

hat he

ltimate

ormf

he

Soviet

tate

an

be traced ot

merely

o

expediency

r

to

misappropriation

f

Leninist

deas,

ut ocore

conceptionsnLenin'swnwritings,speciallyhe tate ndRevolution.ee:Polan,nd fPolitics,7-

88, 129;

Neil

Harding,

eninism

Durham:

uke

University

ress,

996),

50-51.

37.

Polan,

nd f

olitics,

51-52.

38.

This eticence

ay

n

part

ave eendue

to

partyressures.

ee

Robert

ervice,

enin: Political

Life,

ol.

,

The

trengths

f

Contradiction

Bloomington:

ndiana

niversity

ress,

985).

39.

Anweiler,

he

oviets,

12-13.

40.

Anweiler,

he

oviets,

69.








458

LOST

OR

OBSCURED?

viks

etaintate

ower?"

ritten

n

he

all

f

he ame

year.

While

t

times enin's

languagencorporatedadical-democratichraseology,nreality,e envisionedhe

councils

ere ot

s free emocratic

orums,

ut

s mechanisms

or

nvolving

he

entire

orking

lass

n

the oercive

ork f

he tate-in

ffect,

hemeans

f

re-

ating

kind

f

universaldministration.41he

background

o this

iew

f

he ovi-

etswas the

heory

f

tate

ower

enin

ormulated,

ased

n

a

reading

f

Marx

nd

Engels.42

enin

rgued

amously

hat

tates rose ut

f

rreconcilablelass onflict.

A

state as

nothing

ut

mechanism

f

orce sed

by

neclass

gainst

nother,

e

said,

ts eal

meaning

o

be foundn ts

rgans

f

orce

nd

ommand,

specially

ts

bureaucracy,olice,

nd

army.

arliaments,

y

contrast,

ere mere

"talking

shops"-distractionsromhe eal ctivitiesf he tate.43iven hese ealities,he

proletariat

ouldhave o use state

ower gainst

he

ourgeoisie

ust

s

the

our-

geoisie

ad

used

t

gainst

hem.44

ut

he

roletariat

ould

not

imply

ake ver he

state reated

y

he

bourgeoisie.

atherhe

proletariat

adto "smash" hat

tate,

andmake

ts wn.45

his

s

the

ask enin

onceived

or

he oviets.

To

understandetter hat

ind

frole

or

he ovietshis

eally

as,however,

t

isworth

tepping

ack

nd

xamining

he lementsf

theory

f

ollective

gency

that

merged

n

Lenin's

writings,

nd

which lashed

ignificantly

ith

he

elf-

understanding

nd

practice

f

he

oviets. s

far

ack s What s to be

Done?,

he

kind f ollective

gency

hat eninnvisionedasthatf class ed

by

theoret-

ically

r

cientifically

nformed

anguard.

or

enin

osited

n

unusually

harp

is-

tinctionetweenhekind

f

theory"ecessary

o

guide

successfulevolution-

which ould

nly

e

developed

y

consciously-organizedanguard-and

he

ype

of

onsciousnessf

problems

ndtacticshat ouldbe achieved

hrough

he

elf-

educationnd

organization

f the masses.The

role

of the

party anguard,

e

argued,

as ike hat

f

ngineers

r rchitects

uidingbricklayers"

ho

lay

ricks

in

various

arts

f

n

enormous,

nprecedentedlyarge

tructure":

hey

use line

to

help

hem ind he orrect

lace

for

he

bricklaying;

o

ndicate

o

them he lti-

mate

oal

of he ommon

ork;

o

enable

hem o

use,

not

nly

very

rick,

ut

even

very

iece

f

brick."46

nsofar

s this ision

mbracedhe

aboring

asses,

t

embracedhem s

carrying

ut

plan

devised

argely

y

others. hus

ollective

agency,

s Lenin nvisioned

t,

n no

way

nvolved

heformulationf

goals

nd

strategies

y

hemass

ollectivity

hose ctions ere obe

organized.

hedivision

41.

Polan,

rawing

n

Weber,

domo

nd

Marcuse,

ritesf

totaldministration."ee End f

Poli-

tics,

17.

42.

That

t

wasa tendentious

eading

s

ertainly

rue,

ut hissnot he

lace

or

critiquelong

hese

lines.

43.

Lenin,

The

tate

ndRevolution:he

Marxist

heory

f he tate nd he

asks

f he

roletariat

in

he

Revolution,"

n

VI.

Lenin,

elected

Works,

96.

44.

Lenin,

Statend

Revolution,"

81.

45.

Lenin,

State

nd

Revolution,"

82,

89.

46.

Lenin,

Whats to be

Done?

Burning

uestions

fOur

Movement"

n The enin

nthology,

d.

Robert.

Tucker

New

York:

orton,

975),

01.








JohnMedearls 459

of

the

ollectivity

nto

participatory,

ut

ntellectually

assive

roup,

nd a van-

guard,enin efendedntermsf heory,xpertise,nd a kind f nstrumentalist

vision

f ocial

cience.

He

could

not

magine revolutionary

ractice

asedon

anything

ess

han the

most

dvanced

heory,"47

practiceuided y

clear ense

of

he

elationship

f hemost ocal

f

rganizing

ssues o nternational

rade nd

nationalariff

olicy48-and

specially

the

bility

o estimate

orrectly

he

general

political

ituation

nd,

onsequently,

he

bility

o elect he

roper

momentor n

uprising."49

uch

knowledge,

uch bilities erenot o

be

sought

n hemasses-

but

nly

n

"few

ersons."50

This s not o

ay

hat

enin

nvisioned

completely

assive,

r

upine,

orking

class.Hedidnot.Moreover,e often ent ut fhis

way

odescribehe ollective

agency

f he

roletarian

asses

nd

vanguardogether

n

benign

erms

hatnno

way

hintedt

compulsion.

ut hesemodels

r

metaphors

f

ollective

gency

re

telling

or he

waythey

epresent,

n

different

ays, collectivity

hat cted

n

a

highly

oordinated

ay,

utmost

fwhose

members

idnot hink

or

hemselves.

Lenin ould

magine

n

alternative

othe irst

ricklayer

cenario

n

What s

to

Be

Done?,

ut

t nvolvedot ommon

ecision-makingy

he

workersr

group

on-

siderationf heir

oals,

ut athersituation

n

which

hey

ad

imply

nternalized

enoughredetermined

kill

o

ay

ricks

exactly

s

required"

ithout

sing

line.51

Years

ater,

nState nd

Revolution,

eninmbraced

ouncils,

utforesawn

them otmechanisms

or

eveloping

lans

f ction

r

rules

f

onduct

hrough

wide-open

iscussion

nd

debate,

ut

atherhe

asis

or

society

o inculcated

n

certain alues

nd

forms

f

behaviorhat twould eal

with

tsmain

roblems-

"the

violationf the rules f social ntercourse"-"as

eadily

s

any

crowd f

civilised

eople,

ven

n

modern

ociety,

nterferes

o

put stop

oa scuffle

r to

prevent

woman rom

eing

ssaulted."52

hen enin

egan

more

penly

owrite

of"subordination"

s a

part

fhis

onception

f

ollective

gency,

e

still

rgued

that nder ideal

iscipline

nd

lass-consciousness,"

he

kind f ubordinatione

meant would e

something

ike hemild

eadership

f conductorf n

orches-

tra."53

he

mage

s a mild ne

ndeed, ut,

iewed

romhe

tandpoint

fdemoc-

racy,

enin voided

mportant

uestions.

ho,

we

might

sk,

wrote ndwho hose

the

music?Who

rganized

he

rchestra,

nd

decided

hen twould

lay

nd

prac-

tice?

nder hat

uress

id t

cquire

ts ideal

iscipline?"

Lenin hus

nvisioned

he

working

lass

participatingctively,

oordinating

ts

actions

armoniously,

nd,

n a

sense,

rowing

n

power-but

oing

hese

hings

47.

Lenin,

Whats tobe Done?" 0.

48.

Lenin,

Whats

to

be Done?"

0.

49.

Lenin,

Whats tobe

Done?"

11.

50.

Lenin,

Whats tobe Done?"

0.

51

Lenin,

Whats tobe Done?" 02.

52.

Lenin,

State

nd

Revolution,"

57.

53.

Lenin,

The

mmediateasks

f he

oviet

overnment,"

25.








460 LOST OR OBSCURED?

according

orules nd

goals

hat

ere

ot

eally

f

ts

wn

making.

ut mass

ody

engagednhighlyoordinateddministrativeork--carryingutroutineroce-

dures,

ulfilling

irectives,

ssuing

anctions,

ccording

orules ecided

y

thers-

would eem

o

be

nothing

ther

han

universaldministration.enin nvisioned

the

rmy

nd

police easing

o be

comprised

f

pecial

odies,

ureaucratic

unc-

tions

f

tate

nd

ndustryeing

aken

n

by

he

eople

s

a whole:

then orkers'

controlan become he

ountry-wide,

ll-embracing,mnipresent,

ost

recise

and

most onscientious

ccounting

f

he

roduction

nddistribution

f

goods."-4

Neil

Harding

inks

enin's

ll-encompassing

ision f

soviettate o

his

con-

tempt"

or

olitics,

nd

Polan,

imilarly,

oLenin's

esire

o

eradicate"

olitics.55

s

earlys 1904, enin ad rguedhat evolutionaryracticeadto bebasedon a

precise

heoretical

nowledge

hat ould

nly

e

marred

y

nterference

romrdi-

nary

members

f he

working

lass.

With he

oming

f

revolution,

enin

rgued,

again,

hat

here ere

ndisputable

cientific

nswers-answersrom

engineers

and

agronomists"-to

uestions

f resource

llocation,

conomic

lanning,

nd

the ike.56s

Rosa

Luxemburg

stutely

oted

n

1919,

The acit

ssumption

nder-

lying

he

enin-Trotskyheory

f

dictatorship

sthis: hat

he

ocialistransformation

is

something

orwhich

ready-made

ormulaies

ompleted

n the

pocket

f he

revolutionaryarty,

hich

eeds

nly

obe

carriedut

nergetically

n

practice."57

Leninould

nly

nderstand

oliticalisagreement

bout uchmatterssresultsf

ignorance

r

"bourgeois

lass

remnants,"

ccording

oPolan.58

But

his ision f Soviettate ad ittleodo with

ow

he

oviets,

t east

rigi-

nally,

aw

themselves.enin's

metaphors

nd

plans

or

hatwas

really

o be a uni-

versaldministrative

ody

onvey

ew

f he

mportant

lementsf he ouncilmove-

ment's

ttempt

t

creating

emocratic

gency.

hat

enin as uninterested

n

how

the oviets

rose nd

rganized

hemselvess lear. For sthe oviets ave

o

mpor-

tance s a

form,"

e

wrote

n

letter;

what e care bout

s

which lasses he ovi-

ets

represent."59

enin ouldwrite

ismissively

onths

ater f he

esire o "trans-

formhemembersf he ovietsnto

parliamentarians'."60

hiswas not he

goal.

"Our

im stodraw hewhole

f he

oor

nto he

ractical

ork f

dministration."'6

The

underlying

onceptions

f ollective

gency,

f

cience

nd

heory,

nd f he

state ould emain

s Lenin

aced he

ost-1917

ra,

nwhich

e

promoted

he

up-

54.

Lenin,

Can he

olsheviksetain

tate

ower?"

n

VL

Lenin,

elected

Works,

75.And ee:

Lenin,

"Statend

Revolution,"

29.

55.

Harding,

eninism,

53;

olan,

nd

f

Politics,

7,

175.

56. Harding,eninism,68.

57.

Rosa

Luxemburg,

The

Russian

evolution,"

n

Rosa

Luxemburg

peaks,

d.

Mary-Alice

aters

(New

York:

athfinder,970),

90.

58.

Polan,

nd

f

olitics,

7.

59.

Quoted

n

Anweiler,

he

oviets,

65.

60.

Lenin,

Immediate

asks,"

28.

61.

Lenin,

Immediate

asks,"

28.








JohnMedearls 461

pression

f he

ouncilsnd

their

ncorporation

nto he

tate tructure.s

he

faced

dire conomic roblemss chairmanftheCouncil fPeople's ommissars,e

simply

ecamemore onvincedf

he

need

for

ndividualictatorial

eadership-a

view

hat

merged

ully

n

The

mmediate

asks

f

he oviet overnment."There

is

...

absolutely

o contradiction

n

principle

etween oviet

that

s, socialist)

democracy

nd the

exercise

f

dictatorial

owers y

ndividuals,"

enin

rgued

there.62

he

oviet

tate'smain

roblems

ow,

fterhe

reaty

f

Brest-Litovsk,

ere

not xternalut

eeply

nternal:

mprovingccounting,aining

he

upport

f

ngi-

neers,

aisingroductivity,

estoring

abor

iscipline.

Large-scale

achine

ndustry,"

he now

rgued,

calls or bsolute

nity

f

will,

which

irects

he

oint

abours f

hundreds,housands,ndtens f housandsf

people...But

ow anstrict

nity

f

will

e ensured?

y

housands

ubordinating

heir ill othewill f

ne."63

Given

his

iew f

he ole f

ouncils,

t

was

necessary

or enin o

ctuallyup-

press

heir

riginal

nclinations.

nd,

ndirectly,

e

acknowledged

his

ension.The

airing

f

questions

t

publicmeetings

s

the

genuine

emocracy

f

the

working

people,

heir

ay

f

unbending

heir

acks,

heir

wakening

o new

ife,

heirirst

steps long

he oad

which

hey

hemselvesave leared f

vipers

.. andwhich

they

ant

o earn o build

hemselves,

n

their wn

way,

or

hemselves,

n the

principles

f

heir

wn

oviet"

enin

rote."

ut

arringly,

e

added hat his

hasewas

necessary,

in

order o

make

ossible

he urableransition

o

uperior

orms

f abour is-

cipline,

othe

onscious

ppreciation

f he

necessity

or he

ictatorship

f he

proletariat,

o

unquestioning

bedienceo he

rdersf ndividual

epresentatives

of

he oviet

overnment

uring

he

work...We ust

earn o

ombine

he

public

meeting'

emocracy

f he

workingeople-turbulent,

urging,

verflowing

ts

banks ike

spring

lood-with

ron

iscipline

t

work,

ith

nquestioning

be-

dience othe

will

f

single erson,

he

ovieteader, hiletwork.65

This

rocess

f

combining"

he

riginal

ethodsnd

nclinationsf he

oviets

with

artyictatorship

ould e

a harsh ne.

Luxemburg

ould

ee the

heoretical

tensions

uilding

oward

pen

battle:

Lenin

nd

Trotsky

ave

aiddown

he ovietss the

nly

rue

epresentation

f

the

aboring

asses.Butwith

he

repression

f

political

ife

n

the and s a

whole,

ife

n

the oviets

must lso

become

more

nd

more

rippled.

ithout

generallections,ithoutnrestrictedreedomfpress nd ssembly,ithout

62.

Lenin,

Immediate

asks,"

24.

63.

Lenin,

Immediate

asks,"

24.

64.

Lenin,

Immediate

asks,"

26.

65.

Lenin,

Immediate

asks,"

26-27.








462 LOST OR

OBSCURED?

a free

truggle

f

opinion,

ife iesout

n

every ublic

nstitution,

ecomes

mereemblancef ife,nwhichnlyhe ureaucracyemainss the ctive le-

ment.

...

[S]uch

onditions ust

nevitably

ause

a

brutalization

f

public

ife:

attempted

ssassinations,

hooting

f

hostages,

tc.66

Practically,

he ulmination

f

he

fforto

uppress

he

ouncils as

reached

n

he

crushing

f the

Kronstadt

nsurrection

n

1921.

Widespread

issatisfaction

ith

bureaucratization

nd

party

ictatorship

ormed

he

asis

f he

movement,

hich

began

with

trikes,

emanding

hat ontrolver

roduction

e

wrested romhe

state nd be

given

o

democraticallyrganized

orkers.

ut

he

rebellionoon

spread o themilitary,ndsimultaneouslyecamemore oliticized,rendsum-

marized

n

he ailorstKronstadt

ssuing

heir

emand or ree ew lectionso he

soviets.67

n he

nsuing ilitary

esponse y

he

Bolsheviks,

undredsf heKron-

stadters ere hot.68enin's

istorted

eading

f

he ouncils

ecame,

ventually,

the

asisfor

campaign

o

uppress

hem.

III.

Schumpeter

Given henature f

Schumpeter's

nfluencen

democratic

hought

nd the

extent fhisassociation ithmainstreamheoriesfliberal

emocracy,69

t s

remarkableo

realize

ow

much

he was

influenced

y

the

debate ver ouncil

democracy

t the

end

of the

FirstWorld

War. t s

quite

lear hat

chumpeter

responded

o his

ebate,

specially

he ontributions

f

Bauer,

long-time

cquain-

tance

nd

briefly

fellow

abinet-member,

nd

Lenin,

ome

ofwhose

writings

Schumpeter

ad

clearly

ead

n

the ate 1910s nd

early

920s.

chumpeter

as

deeply

nvolvedtthe nd f he irst orldWar

n

hekinds

f

uestions

hat ni-

mated

he

debate

ver ouncils. s

young

ustrian

conomics

rofessor,

e had

begun

o

emerge

rom

cademiceclusionate

n

hewar

n

orderowrite series

of

memos nd etters

irculated

mong

membersf he

igh

ristocracy,

ounseling

them

n

political

atters.

arly

n

1919,

e was invitedo

oin

heGermanocial-

ization

ommission,

hich,

nderhe

ressure

f

he ouncil

movement,

as con-

sideringays

f

ocializing

he oal

ndustry.

oon,

e

was

nvitedack

oAustriao

serve

s

finance inister

n

coalition

overnment

n

which

he

DP had

slight

advantage

n

strength.

auer

was

foreign

inister

n

that abinet.

uring

chum-

66.

Luxemburg,

Russian

evolution,"

91.

67.Anweiler,he oviets,47, 48, 50.

68.

Anweiler,

he

oviets,

48.

69.

By

liberal

emocracy"

mean

ere

epresentativeemocracy

xtended

nly

s

far

s

may

e

con-

sistent

ith

ontemporary

orporate-centeredapitalism.

have ome

misgivings

bout he

erm-first,

because f he

ossibility

f

coherent

iberal

ritique

f

apitalism,

nd

econd,

ecause iberal

emoc-

racy

ould

lso

imply

ean

emocracy

hats

based ncrucial

olitical

nd

ivil

ights.

ut believeam

using

he erms

many

thersse t.










464 LOST OR

OBSCURED?

he discussed

broad

rray

f

problems

t the ntersection

f

nationalism

nd

eco-

nomic olicy,ut he ariousopics ereheld ogethery hreeentralhemes.he

first as

the

need

o

protect

he

multi-national

absburg

mpire-the

econd,

he

role

hat

n

aristocratic

arty

ould

play

n

this ask.

he

hird,

verarching,

heme

was

the

ossibility

hat

uch

party

ould

work

within

ormally

emocratic

nstitu-

tions,

ut ounter

hemore

angerous

emocratic

rends

twork

n

Austria-Hun-

gary.

hese

writings

ontain

he

arliest

ersionf

Schumpeter's

ell-known

lite

theory

f

democracy.

In

ome

ways,

he

precise

ature

f he

hreathat

chumpetererceived

rom

democracy

as

not

ully

rticulated

n hese

ery arly

ritings.

t

tands ut

learly,

however,n chumpeter's920-21ssay,The ocialistossibilitiesfToday""Die

sozialistische

6glichkeiten

on

Heute"],

hich urned

quarely

o

onfronthe

his-

torical

roblem

f

he

ouncils.

hemain heme f he

ssay,

oncerning

ocialism

and the ole

f

the

ouncils-as

well s

the

ssay's

eliberateocus

n the

prob-

lems fdemocratic

ocialism-seem

artly

erived

rom auer's nfluence.

chum-

peter

rgued,

ike

auer,

hat he ransition

o socialism-conceived

s a

political

and

possibly

evolutionary

ct--could

ot be

achieved ntil

thorough

ocial

restructuring,

ith he

ouncilmovement

s

its

hief

lement,

ad

already

aken

place.

The ouncil

ystem

nd socialization

elong ogether,

nd

tend o realize

themselves

eciprocally

nd

roughly

t the ametime," e

said.73

f he ouncil

movement

as

"sufficiently

ide,"

e

rgued,

then

t,

nd

t

lone,

an

ccomplish

full ocialization

n a

single

ct

througheneral

trike."74

nd ikeBauer

gain,

Schumpeter

learly

aw

the

ouncil

movements

an

attempt

o democratize

he

economy.

hus

chumpeter

rgued

hat here as

an

analogy

etween

hehistori-

cal

process

f

political

emocratization

nd

he

rocess

y

which he ouncil

move-

ment

ould ndhaddone

ts

work.75

oreover,

n n

apparent

cknowledgment

f

the

self-understanding

f Bauer

nd

the

Austrian

ocial

Democratic

arty

s

a

whole, chumpeter

nsisted

n

focusing

n democratic

ocialism-setting

side he

possibility

f uthoritarian

ocialisttates.

[H]ere

we want

nly

o

peak

fdemo-

cratic

ocialism,

he ocialism

f

workers'

arty,"

chumpeter

rote;

only

tmeans

a

newform f

ociety."76

n

contrast

o democratic

ocialism,

chumpeterlearly

sawthe

olshevik

ath,

s dictated

y

he nwise

ttempt

orealizeocialism

nder

conditions

hat

erenot

ipe.77

nd

his,oo,

was a

theme

e

shared

ith

auer.

Of

ourse,

one

f his ndicates

hat

chumpeter

as

a socialist

r

ympathetic

to

the ouncils.

chumpetererely

elieved,

egretfully,

hat auer's ssessment

f

73.Josephchumpeter,DieSozialistische6glichkeitenonHeute,"rchivuirozialwissenschaft

und

ozialpolitik

8

1920-1): 24;

my

ranslation.

74.

Schumpeter,

Miglichkeiten,"

38;

my

ranslation.

75.

Schumpeter,

Miglichkeiten,"

37.

76.

Schumpeter,

M6glichkeiten,"

10;

my

ranslation.

77.

Schumpeter,

Miglichkeiten,"

26-27,

38;

chumpeter,

The

risis

f

he ax

tate,"

n

The

conom-

ics

nd

ociology

f

Capitalism,

d.

R.

wedberg

Princeton:

rinceton

niversity

ress,19181

991),

30.








John

Medearls465

thenaturend ransformative

ignificance

f

he

ouncil

movement

ascorrect.et

evennthis ssay,chumpeter'siew fdemocracyas characterizedy bvious

tensions.

or here ere

lso

elementsfLenin's

houghtervading

is

rgument.

Themost

mportant

arkersf his nfluenceere

pointed

laims

bout he

need

for trict orker

iscipline

n

ocialist

ocieties.

hese

ommentsre omewhatif-

ficultoreconcile ith he

anguage

eused o

describe

conomic

emocracy

s the

councils

nvisionedt.But

he ource

f

he

dea s

clear.

arly

n

he

ssay,

chum-

peter rgued:

In

order

o

have uccesswith

ocialization,

n

iron

iscipline

nd

never-before-experienced

oughness

ouldhave o be

imposed

n the

working

masses."78

ater,

e

referred

gain

o this

iew,

ontending

hat

n

socialism,

the

unopposed

ubordinationf he f hemasses othewill f he eadern hework

process"

ould e

absolutely

ecessary-and

ere

ecited s his

uthority

enin's

essay,

The

mmediateasks

f

he oviet overnment."t eems

uite ikely

hatt

was

Lenin's ame

1918

ssay

hat

chumpeter

ad

n

mind n

contending

hat he

Bolshevik

eader nderstood

orrectly

ne of

yndicalism's

aults:he ailureo rec-

ognize

he

mportance

f he ivisionf abor nd

omplex

orkmethods."

Schumpeter

lso

hared

ith enin

n

his

ssay

radical

kepticism

oward

ar-

liamentaryemocracy,

nd

a

tendency

o

cast

parliamentaryemocracy

nd

the

council

ystem

s

mutually

xclusive

ptions.

he

council

ystem,

n

his

view,

would

completelyisplace

arliamentaryemocracy.

f

course,

chumpeter's

explanation

or hemoribundtate

f

parliamentary

nstitutionsn

contemporary

liberalocieties as his wn.80 ut

chumpeter's

iting

hetoric

bout he ham f

parliamentary

ebate

icked p

on

Lenin's

wn

referenceso

"talking

hops," er-

haps

even

ntensifying

t.

Actually

he ndividual ember as

nothing

o

say

but

whathas been

prescribed

o

him,

ecause he

parliament

ound

mposed

pon

t

certain

asks

long

with

heir olutions-so

hat he

verage

member

ery

oon

came

o

the

oint

hat

he

peeches

n

bills--or

ven

heir

eports-were

uperflu-

ous

bother

nd

that ne

only

would isteno

speeches,

f

pplause

r

ndignation

had

been

commanded."8'

arliamentas

a mere

ppendage

f

the tate nstitu-

tions hat

ctually

ielded

ower,

e

argued.

his

anguage

mirroredenin's iew

of

parliamentaryemocracy-andgain, chumpeter

pprovingly

itedLenin's

cynicism

bout

arliamentary

emocracy

n

upport

fhis

wn.82

The

outline f

Schumpeter's

lite

onception

f

democracy,

s

it

emerged

decades ater

n

Capitalism,

ocialism nd

Democracy,

s so well known hat

t

needs

nly

briefestatement

ere.

emocracy,

chumpeter

ow

ontended,

as

just

"method"r n

"institutional

rrangement

or

rriving

t

political

ecisions

n

78.

Schumpeter,

dglichkeiten,

08;

my

ranslation.

79.

Schumpeter,

MOglichkeiten,"

42.

80.

Schumpeter,

M6glichkeiten,"

24-27.

81.

Schumpeter,

M6glichkeiten,"

28;

my

ranslation.

82.

Schumpeter,

Miglichkeiten,"

27-28.








466 LOST OR OBSCURED?

which ndividuals

cquire

he

power

o

decide

y

means

f

competitivetruggle

for he eople's ote."3Thisroceduralefinitionfdemocracyasmeant,mong

other

hings,

o exclude oth

ubstantive

nd normative

onceptualizations

f

democracy.

urther,

twas

meant

o

put mphasis

n

the

truggle

f lites. he

driv-

ing

orce

n

democracy,

ccording

o this

iew,

as

not

he

people,

heir

deas r

their

ower;

t

was

elite

ompetition.

In

rder ounderstand

ow

democratic

ol-

itics erve his ocial

nd

legislation],

e

must

tart

romhe

ompetitivetruggle

for

ower

ndofficend

realize hat

he

ocial unction

of

emocracy]

s

fulfilled,

as

it

were,

ncidentally.""84

he

primaryustification

or hismodelwas

Schumpeter's

contention

hat

hemasseswerenot

up

to

any reater

ole

n

directingolitics-

they ere incapablef ction therhan stampede."85nthisonception,hen,

democracy

as not he ule f he

people

ut the ule f he

olitician."86

This

ater lite

onception

f

democracy

as

founded

pon

newly

rticulated

elite

heory

f ollective

gency-and

new

trategy

or

ealing

ith he hreate

perceived

rom

emocratizing

ocial endencies.t s this lite

heory

fcollective

agency

hat levated

chumpeter's

laims

bout

emocracy

n

his1942

ook

nto

general

heory

f

democracy.

his

heory

as

mainly

dvanced

egatively,

s

an

attack

n

what

chumpeter

alled he classical octrine

f

democracy"--or

he

"classical octrine

f ollective

ction."87

thad

three

nterrelated

arts,

onnected

polemicsgainst

he

onceptions

f he ommon

ood,

common ill,nd ndi-

vidual

ill.

chumpeter

eld hat he classical"

onception

f

democracy

r ollec-

tive ction as

premised

nthe dea hat here as

a

unique,

etaphysical

ommon

good

hat as

not

ependent

pon

ndnot ffected

y

mpirical

ebate

rdiffer-

ences

f

pinion.88imilarly

econtendedhato-calledlassical

onceptions

f ol-

lective

gency

ested

pon

he dea hat he ommon r

general

ill,

kind f semi-

mystic

ntity"

ould

naturally

e drawn o this

ommon

ood.89 gainst

hese

claims,

chumpeter

ontendedhat

herexisted

n

he

olitical

ealm

othing

ore

than chaotic

lux f

differingpinions

ndvalues

hat cannot e reconciled

yrational

rgument"

r

"logic,"

nd that

compromise

ould

only

maimand

degrade";

ny

echnique

or

umming

hese

p

would ack

not

nly

ational

nity

but lso rational

anction."90

chumpeter

lso contended

hat lassical heoriesf

collectivection ested

pon

nvalid

ssumptions

bout ndividualction-the

dea

that

he will f he ndividual"as

characterized

y independence

nd

rational

83.

Schumpeter,

apitalism,

ocialismnd

Democracy,

rd d.

New

ork:

arper

orchbooks

1942]

1976),

69.

84. Schumpeter,apitalism,82.

85.

Schumpeter,

apitalism,

83.

86.

Schumpeter,apitalism,

85.

87.


65.

88.


50-52.

89.

Schumpeter,

apitalism,

52,

50-52.

90.


51,

53.










468 LOST

OR

OBSCURED?

Lenin nd

Schumpeter

efore

er,

as

blindedo

omeof he

ouncils'most

ig-

nificanteaturesythephilosophicalrameworkheconstructed.ndeed,he

must

urely

ake omeof he

blame

for hefact hatwhen

ontemporaryoliti-

cal theoristsrite bout he

ouncils-which

hey

o almost

xclusively

n

the

course f

writing

boutArendt

erself-they

reathem s rather

eager

istor-

ical allusions

nsufficient

o

support

hat s

often haracterized

s her

utopian

vision

f

itizenship.97

Arendt,

n

tark

ontrasto

Lenin,

iewed he

ouncilss

an

attempt

o

develop

some sort

f

autonomous,

ollective,

olitical

gency-to

reate ree

paces

for

argument

nd he

ormulationf

plans

f ction. he

famously

onceptualized

his

phenomenons the ouncils'trivingorpublicreedom,"hichmeantharingn

public

usiness.98

reedom,

rendt

rgued,

could xist

nly

n

public."99

nd

becauseArendt

aw

thecouncils s

providing

forum

n

which

eople

ould

engage

n

uch

public

ction,

he

praised

hem. he

councils,

he

aid,

were an

entirely

ewformf

government,

ith

new

public

pace

for reedom hich

as

constituted

nd

organizeduring

he ourse f he evolution

tself."'10

et er

ro-

clivity

or

harp

onceptual

ichotomies-well

nown

o studentsfherwork-

prevented

er rom

aving truly

ruitful

ngagement

ith he

ouncils'

egacy.

Twoof

themost

ignificant

fthese

ppositions

re inked:

political"

ersus

"social,"nd freedom"ersusnecessity."

he'kind

ffreedomhat rendtalued,

the

bility

o take

art

n

public

ffairs

n

a

space

n

which

gents

isclose hem-

selves

n

speech

nd

action,

ould

nly

e

a featurefwhat he

consideredhe

political

ealm,

hat

ealm

evoted

o

action,

he

pecific

ctivity

that

oes

on

directly

etween

menwithouthe

ntermediary

f

hings

r

matter."'1'

y

ontrast

with his

olitical

ealm

f

reedom,

he ocial

ealm

as

generally

neof

necessity,

she

ontended.102here ould e no freedom

n

he

istinctly

odernocial

ealm,

that

rendt

an

still

ruitfully

e

interpreted

s a democratic

heorist,

ee:

Jeffrey

.

Isaac,

Oases

nthe

Desert:

annah rendtn Democratic

olitics,"

merican

olitical

cience

eview,

8,

1

(March,

994):

156-68.

97. Councilsre one

f he

ew

opics

n

Arendt's]

ork hat

s

not

aken

eriouslyy

ritics."ee

Sitton,

Council

emocracy,"

07.

98.

Arendt,

n

Revolution,

14-15.

99.

Arendt,

n

Revolution,

21.

100.

Arendt,

n

Revolution,53;

nd ee

Arendt,

he

Origins

f

Totalitarianism,

econd

nlarged

d.

(New

York: eridian

ooks,

19511

958),

01.

101.

Arendt,

heHuman ondition:

Study

n heCentralilemmas

acing

odern an

New

ork:

Doubleday

nchor,

1958]

959),

,

155-61.

102.More recisely,rendtonsideredhe rivateealmydefinitionobe one ofnecessitynd he

public

ne

offreedom

Human ondition,

5).

The ocial ealm as neither

ublic

or

rivate,

utwas

created

y

modern

orceshat

ntroduced

he

reviously

rivate

ctivity

f

abor nto he

ublic

Human

Condition,

5-45).

ut t

eems

retty

lear,

oth rom rendt'sxclusivessociationf he

olitical

ith

freedom,

ndfrom er reatment

f

he

ocial

uestion,

hathe

regarded

he ocial

ealm

s one

n

which

freedom

as

impossible.

or

urther

vidence f

this

nterpretation,

inking

he ocial o

necessity,

ee

Arendt'siscussionf

actoryanagement

On

Revolution,

78).








John

Medearis

469

in

which

eople

ttempted

o make heir

urvival

r

that

f he

pecies,

public

matter.'03ndeed, rendtontended,odangerousas "the ocial" ofreedomhat

"every

ttempt

o

solve he

ocial

uestion

ith

olitical

eans eads nto

error,

and

..

it s terror

hich

ends evolutions

o

their oom."'"

This

ontention

lone

hinderedrendtrom

nderstandinggreat

eal bout emocratic

olitics

n

gen-

eral,

s

Wolin

uggests.'05

ut s

we will

ee,

t

lsocaused

uite

pecificroblems

concerning

he ouncils

nd

heir

onception

f

democracy.

Anotherelated

ndrelevantistinction

n

Arendt'sork-this ne threefold-

is that etween ctivitiesr

components

f

thevita ctiva:

labor,"

work"

nd

"action."'06

aborreferredo

"biological rocesses

f the

human

body"

nd

attemptsofoster uman urvival;ork eferredo theproductionfartificial

things,

humanrtifacts"hat estowed

permanence

nd

durability

pon

he util-

ity

fmortal

ife";

ction as

founded

pon

he human

ondition

f

plurality,"

nd

was

inter-personal

ctivity

hat ouldfound

political

odies" nd makeremem-

brance nd hus

istory

ossible.'07

What s

key

or he

urposes

f

his

ssay

sthat

Arendtid

not reathese s differentimensionsf ll

ctivities,

ut s

distinctly

if-

ferentctivitiesn

hemselves,

hose

esults

ould

imilarly

e

sharplyistinguished

fromachother.

And

inally,early

s

important

n

explaining

he

ifficultieshe encounteredn

understanding

he

ouncils,

sArendt's

onception

f hemass-a

nightmare

ision

ofwhat uman

eings

ouldbecome. hemass onsistedf

people

who

"cannot

be

integrated

nto

ny

rganization

ased

on

commonnterest"

ecause

hey

ack

an

ability

or uch

public,

olitical

ctivities.'08

Mass

ociety"

as

an undifferenti-

ated

oup

of

tomized,

neffectual

ndividuals.

n

Hanna

enichel

itkin's

iew,

he

"mass"

was

neffectn

early

ame

Arendt

ave

othe

ocial,

which

itkinefines

suggestively

s "a

collectivity

f

people

who,

hough

hey

re

nterdependent

nd

active

.. behave

ndividually

n

ways

hat

reclude

oordinated

ction,

o that

hey

cannot

or

t

any

ate o

not)

ake

harge

f

what

hey

re

doing

n

he

world."'09

Thefirst

roblem

hat

hese

onceptions

nd

oppositions

aused

Arendt

n

heo-

rizing

he ouncilsoncernsheirirm

oots

n

ocial nd conomicnstitutions.

heir

creatorsormedouncils

o

democratize

articular

ierarchies,

o take ver

nstitu-

tions nd

re-shape

hem-quitendiscriminately,

romhe

tandpoint

f

Arendtian

103.

Arendt,

he

Human

ondition,-10, 5-45; rendt,

n

Revolution,

78.Hanna

enichelitkin

notes

his

efinitionf the

ocial,"

ut onsiderst

nsufficient

o

apture

he

ongstandingmportance

f

the

onception

n

Arendt's

hought.

ee:

Pitkin,

he

Attack

f

heBlob:Hannah

rendt's

oncept

f he

Social ChicagondLondon: niversityfChicagoress,998), 1.

104.

Arendt,

n

Revolution,

08.

105.

Wolin,

Democracy

nd

he

olitical,"

89.

106.

Arendt,

uman

ondition,

-10.

107.

Arendt,

uman

ondition,

-10.

108.

Arendt,

otalitarianism,

11.

109.

Pitkin,lob,

96.








470 LOST OR

OBSCURED?

distinctions

etweenocial nd

political."0

oldiers'ouncils

imed

o

democratize

andrestructurehemilitary,ndfactoryommitteeshe conomy.his heyawboth

as valuable

n

tself,

nd means f

ecuring

dequate

ay,

table

mployment,

etter

working

onditions,

n end

to

humiliations

nd

mistreatment,nd,

more

roadly,

socialismnd

peace.

But or

rendt,

he xistencef

uch ims

was

awkward,

iven

her

enigration

f

social" ndeconomic

uestions.

hus

Arendt

y

urns

gnored,

denied

r

ondemnedhe ouncils'lear ocus

nwhat

hewould

ave

ermedon-

political

atters.o serious

iscussion

f

hese

ims

ver

merged

nher

writings.

Indeed,

n

noting

he

many

nstitutional

ites

nwhich

ouncils

rose,

rendt

rgued

misleadingly

hat

hey

id o because

f

merelyaphazardogetherness"

r "more

or less ccidentalroximity.""'his vasion llowedArendtomake he ouncils

appear

ar

loser n

pirit

han

hey eally

ere oThomas

efferson's

ards,

hich

actually

ould

have

been

territorially

ased."12 or

he

ame

reasons,

rendt

is-

characterizedhe ims f he

ouncils,

ontending

hat

hey

have

lways

een

pri-

marilyolitical,

ith

ocial nd conomiclaims

layingvery

inor

ole.""3

Her

endency

o misreadhe

xperience

f he ouncils as

reinforced

y

he

occasional

ppearance

f a rather aive

ociology,

resistance

o

analyzing

he

social and economic

power

relationsnd structureso which

the councils

responded.

he

onception

f he

mass,"

hateverirtues

t

may

ave n

xpress-

ing

normativeommitmento

politicalntegration

nd

belonging,

ended

lso,

n

Arendt's

ritings,

o

obscure hefact hat

eople

do not

ctually

ive s

isolated

monads,

ut s

participants

n

structuredocial

world."14

he

ouncils'methods

and

problems

imply

ould

not be

adequately rasped

rom he

tandpoint

f

Arendt's

mass"

ociology.

Arendt's ain

esponse

o

he

act

hat

he

ouncils

ad ocial

nd conomic

ims,

then,

as

to

gnore

r

uppress

t."5I

ut ttimeshe witched

ears

nd

dmitted

t,

and

roundly

ondemned

he ouncils:The atal

mistake

f he ouncils as

lways

been hat

hey

hemselvesidnot

istinguishlearly

etween

articipation

n

public

affairsnd dministration

r

management

f

hings

n

he

ublic

nterest.""6

110.

Dana

R. Villa

rgues

hat rendt as

chiefly

oncernedbout he

normalizingower

f

the

social."

ee

Villa,

Postmodernism

nd he

ublic

phere,"

merican

olitical

cience

eview

6,

3

(Sep-

tember

992):

18.He

may

e

right,

ut

hen,

hy

idArendtot

ecognize

nd

upport

he ouncils'

effortso

overcomehat

ormalizing

ower

ithinhe ealm f he ocial tself?

111.

Arendt,

otalitarianism,00;Arendt,

n

Revolution,

71.

112.

Arendt,

n

Revolution,

52-59. itton

rgues

hat rendt'sconcentration

n

territorially-based

councilssthe

rimary

ause

f

her

misinterpretation

f

he ouncilradition."ee

Sitton,

Council emoc-

racy,"

13.

113.Arendt,nRevolution,78.

114.

Pitkinees

he

isionf hemass

n

Origins

ndermining

rendt's

wn

roaderntentionss

a

the-

orist:

"[lit

s rucialo

recognize

hat,

n

Arendt'swn

ccount,

hese renot

articles

ut

eople,

hat

hey

arenot

n

fact

solated ut

tructurally

nterrelated,

nd

that

hey

re

not nert ut

ery

usy."

ee

Pitkin,

Blob,

94.

115.

See

Sitton,

Council

emocracy,"

21.

116.

Arendt,

n

Revolution,

77-78.








John

Medearls 471

A

second

problem

n

Arendt's

nterpretation

fthe

ouncilsies

t a

junction

between erunderstandingfthe social" nd her riplet,abor-work-action.or

Arendt

ould

not

ccept

hat he ouncils

ought

more han

ulfilling

olitical

ctiv-

ity

or heirmembers.

hey

imed

to use

"action"-in his

ase,

democratic

action-to ransform

he

conomy

nd

ociety,

ncluding

he ealm f abor.

rendt

couldnot

ay

much

bout

his

ecause

f he

idigity

f he

onceptual

riplet

nd

her iew f he

ocial,

which

eld hat

t

was a realm

f

necessity

hat

ouldnot

e

experienced

nd transformed

n

the

way

that

many

fthe ouncils

esired.

he

attempt

o ct

politically

n

he ocial nd

conomic ealmsouldmakeno sense

o

her.

urdened,oo,

y

he iew hat ocial

reedom

as an

oxymoron,

rendt as

unresponsive

o thedominationnfactoriesnd elsewherehat he ouncils o

clearly

anted

o

overcome.

onversely,

ccording

o he

ssumptions

f

her abor-

work-action

riplet,

here ouldbe

no

room or n

interest

n urvival

r

ndeed

pursuit

f

nds n he

public, olitical

ealm

f

ction.

Mary

. Dietz s

surelyight,

then,

o riticize

rendt

or

ailing

o

dmit he

ossibility

f

breaking

own

he

is-

tinctions

etween

abor,

ork

nd

ction,

r o

recognize

politics

f

purposeful

activity."17

his attererm

aptures

oth omeof

he

ariety

f

ctivitieshe oun-

cils

ngaged

n

during

he

evolutionaryeriod-from

lanning

trikesndmarches

to

drafting

tatements

nd

petitioning

o

holding

ectures-and

heir nfulfilled

ambitionsorhe ransformationf

production,

s

well."8

Anotherelated

eakness

f

Arendt'sheorizationf

he ouncils as her reat-

ing

hem

at times)

s an

alternative

o

representative

r

parliamentary

emoc-

racy."9

ne ource f he

problem

ay

e

that,

s

Isaac

points

ut,

Arendtad n

insufficiently

uanced iewof

the

tate,

weakness he

ironically

haredwith

Lenin.'20

swe have

een,

he ouncilshemselves

idnot nclineo

his

rror,

spe-

cially

n

Germany

nd

Austria.he

participants

ncouncils

enerallypposed

he

abolition

f

parliamentaryemocracy.

hey

were

oncerned ith

emocratizing

social ndeconomicelationsfvarious inds,oth or he ake f ocial ndeco-

nomic

ransformation,

nd omake

arliamentary

overnment

ore

early

chieve

its

deals.

Neither

oncern as

intelligible

oArendt. er

harp hilosophical

ivi-

sions

made

her

nlikely

o ee

reciprocity

etween

ifferentctivitiesr

the

ealms

117.

Mary

.

Dietz,

'TheSlow

Boring

fHard

oards': ethodical

hinking

nd heWork f

Politics,"

American

olitical

cience

eview

8,

(December994):

73.

118.

t

eems

ikely

hat rendt's

ailureounderstandhe

ocial nd conomic

urposes

f

he oun-

cils he

praised

as

inkedo a

related

roblem

ietz

etects:withoutdimensionf

ubstantive

ur-

posefulness

hat

inds

ositivexpression

n

the

ocabulary

f

problem,'solution,'means,'nd,'

nd

'method,'rendt's

olitics

annot mbrace

erformance

s the

arrying

ut r ctive

ursuit

f

purposes

in

he

ery

orld

t

trives

o

vitalize"

"Slow

oring,"

79).

119.

saac

rgues

ersuasively

hat

rendtever ent

o

far

s to

propose

bolishingarliamentary

institutionsomake

way

or council

ystem.

utArendt

an be faultedor

iving

eadersittleeason or

thinking

hefavoredome

meaningfulay

f

ombining

ouncil ith

arliamentary

nstitutions.ee

saac,

"Oases."

120.

saac,

rendt,amus, 43,

45.








472

LOST

OR

OBSCURED?

in which

hey

ook

place.

This

made

tdifficult

o

understand

ow the

ouncils

mightmprovehe ualityfparliamentaryemocracytselfy ransformingco-

nomic

nd ocial elations.

n

any

ase,

her

ritique

f

parliamentaryovernment

generallyut

he lame n ts

uiding

deas,

ot n

ocial nd

conomiconditions.

Furthermore,

ecause

he

ouncils'

roponents,

or

hemost

art,

avored oth

councils

nd

parliamentaryovernment,

hemovement

rovided

ertile

round

or

theorizing

he

ways

n which

emocratizednd undemocratizedocial

pheres

might utually

onditionnd nteractith ach

other--and,

elatedly,

or heoriz-

ing

he

ppositional

imensionfdemocraticction. uch

nquiries

ere

unlikely

for

nyone

dopting

rendt's

tandpoint.

Thuswe returno he entralronyfArendtnd he ouncils.hewasthe oun-

cils'

greatesthampion

mong

heoristsf he

present

nglo-American

anon. ut

her reatment

f

hem istorted

he ouncilsnd

failedocometo

terms

ith

he

range

f

ssues

nd

problems

heir

xistenceaised. his

iscrepancy

etween er

praise

or he

ouncilsndher

bility

o heorizehem

ed o omenotable isconti-

nuitiesnd

discrepancies.

rendt

cknowledged

he

ignificance

f

working

lass

movements

n

reating

he

kind

f

ction ndfreedomhe

held

obe

mportant,'21

but

he

ould

not

xplain

t; ndeed,

t eems

uite aradoxical,

n her

erms.'22

he

was

convincedoth hat he ouncils

epresented

movementhat ould edeem

politics,

nd hathe ocial

uestion

which

he ouncils

learly

ntendedo

ddress)

necessarily

estroyed

evolutionsnd ntroduced

error.

hus

he

very gency

hat

seemed

o

nitiate

olitical

reedom,

n her

iew,

imultaneouslyestroyed

t.

Or,

more

keptically

nd ess

paradoxically:

he ouncils'

ery

xistence

casts oubt

n

her ntirehesis

oncerning

he

orrupting

ffectsf he ocial

uestion,"

s Wolin

argues.'23)

inally,

er

igid hilosophicalategories

edArendt

o

ondemn

any

f

the

ctions--democratizing

he

conomy,

earing

own

ppressive

ocial ierarchi-

cal

remnantsf he

ld

regime--taken

y

he ouncils

n

pursuit

nd

enjoyment

f

a kind ffreedom

nd

politicalgency

he

might

ave

raised.

V. The

CouncilMovement nd

Democratic

Theory

Today

Lenin's,

chumpeter's

nd

Arendt's

ngagements

ith

he ouncilmovement

havehad

two

ypes

f

ffects

n

theorizing

bout

emocracy.

hefirst

ype

as

to

do

with he continued

rominence

f

assumptions

nderscored

y

each.

The

second

ype

oncernshe

pproaches

o

democratic

hinking

idden

y

he

way

he

three

ealt

with he ouncils.

121.

Arendt,

he

Human

ondition,

90-96.

122.

As saac

notes,

In

book bout

he

istinctionetweenabor

nd

politics,

he

provides

ut ne

example

f

genuine

modern

oliticalraxis-the

abor

movement-butssertshat he

spring'

f

this

praxis

ad

nothing

odo withabor " ee:

saac, rendt,amus,

60.

123.

Wolin,

Democracy

nd

he

olitical,"

99.








John

Medearis 473

Theoretical

ustifications

nd studies f iberal

emocracy

ould

ssuredly

e

prominentodayven f chumpeteradnever ritten.ut in way hat as not

precisely

is

ntention)

chumpeter

ontributedo the

trength

f iberal emoc-

racy's

ntellectual

rmor. nceone

assumes,

ith

chumpeter,

hat he imitations

ofcurrent

olitical

nstitutionsre

directly

ooted

n

trictly

imited atural

apaci-

ties,

he

niversality

f iberal

emocracy

ppears

elf-evident.

chumpeter

ent

is

considerablentellectual

owers

o

displacingistorically

nd

sociologically

ensi-

tive

eflection

n the

possibilities

fdemocratic

gency

ith

ssertionsbout ni-

versal uman

in-)abilities.

e

provided

idely

dmired

rguments

or

iewing

he

action f

professional

oliticians,

ot

itizens,

s the

driving

orce f

politics.

ad

Schumpeter's

rguments

omedown o us-as

they ught

o

have-properly

on-

textualizeds a

response

othe ouncilmovement

and

other emocraticenden-

cies),

hey

ould ot eem o

impermeable

nd

nvulnerable.

ut nhis ater

ork,

Schumpeter

as

remarkably

uccessful

n

overing

ishistoricalracks.

enin,

s a

theoretician

nd

practitioner,elped

make t

possible

hat

ouncils,

istorically

n

expression

f ne of he

most

owerful

emocratic

ritiques

f

iberal

emocracy,

should e identifiedith

ureaucratic

ppression.

nd

ndeed,

nce one

accepts

that

xpertise

n

revolution-making,

ngineering,

nd economics an be

replace-

ments

or

olitical

ontestation-andnce

one follows enin n

viewing

orce s

the ssence f he tate-the

articipatory

nd ransformative

mpulses

f he oun-

cilsdo

seem o ead oward niversal

dministration.he

tory

fLenin's

heoreti-

cal

co-optation

nd

direct

uppression

f he

oviets,

ere t

reference-point

or

democratic

heorizing,

ight

roblematize

any asy ontemporaryssumptions,

but n

factt

s

an

episode

hat

s familiarlmost

xclusively

o

professional

istori-

ans

and

a few riticsf Lenin

n the eft.

rendt,

y

mparting

n

inspiring

ut

deeply

lawed ision f he

ouncils o

contemporary

cademic

ebate,

as made

it ll

too

asy

o

idestep

erious

ngagement

ith

hem.

y bscuring

he

ossibil-

ity

f

democratic

gency

nwhole

realms f ocial

ife,ndrenderingheurgent

practical

roblems

hat he ouncilset

ut o olve

nintelligible,

healso ssured

that er wndemand

or richer

olitics

ould trike

any

s

simply

topian.

A

more areful

nalysis

f he

movement,

ndof he

way

t

has

been

distorted

by

some of ts

best-known

nterpreters,

ould

help

re-establishhe

centrality

f

some

mportant

uestions

or emocratic

heory.

hefirstf

hese

oncerns em-

ocratic

gency.

hefact

hat he ouncils

ere ied o a

social nd

political

ove-

ment,

movementhat

as

trying

ot

merely

o obtain

his

r

that

mprovement,

but,

n

thefaceof

military

estruction,

conomic

ailure,

nd

multiple

orms

f

oppression,ocreate ortselfheconditionsfdemocracy-thisistoricalact

uniquely

ighlights

he

ssue fdemocratic

gency.

ut

s soonas one

recognizes

the

problem

f

democratic

gency,

ne can

see that t

provides

perspective

or

democratic

heory

enerally.

o raise he ssue f

democratic

gency

s not o

posit

an

essential,

nchanging

uman

haracteristic,

ut

on

the

ontrary)

o ask

under

what

conditionst s

possible

or

ollectivities

o

become effective

emocratic








474

LOST OR OBSCURED?

actors,

nd to

criticallynalyze

he

xisting

ocial

world o as to

understand

ow

andwheret esistsemocraticntervention.t stoviewocial,conomicndpolit-

ical nstitutionsuch s

the ouncilshemselvesid-as

containing

ndemocratic

structures

ndforceshat esist

ollective,

galitarian

ontrol.nd

t sto

view em-

ocratic

olitical

ractice

uch s the

ouncils

id,

s

centering

n

the

ossibility

f

organizing

nd

cting

o

change,

r t east

o

counteract,

hose

emocracy-refrac-

tory

ocales.

No one could

hinkhat

ontemporary

ocieties

ave olved

he

prob-

lem f

regulating

nd

guiding

uman-made

tructures

ndforces

nthis

way.

And

yet,

espite

he act

hat

hese

roblemsrguably

nterpenetrate

nd

underliether

democratic

uestions,

he

roblems

f

democratic

gency

renot

widely

iscussed

as such n cholarlyiteratureoday.

If he

roblem

f

democratic

gency

asnot een

olved-if,

n

fact,

t sa

prob-

lem hat as to be

posed

ver nd

over,

ndifferent

istorical

ontexts,

nd

nthe

face

f

different

hallenges,

hen

he

problem

f ransformation

ust e

perenni-

ally mportant,

oo.

The

problem

f

democratic

ransformation,

s

I

have

iscussed

it,

s the

roblem

f

hanging

hose ocial

ealms

hat

articularly

ndermine,

esist

orfrustrateemocratic

gency.

have

uggested

hat emocratic

ractices

nd

nsti-

tutions

re

always otentially

ransformative,

s

long

s

humansive

n n incom-

pletely

emocratized

orld.

But transformative

mbitions,

urely

recurrent

(though

multiform)

spiration

f

political

heory,

ften eemtobe in llrepute

today,

t

east

mong nglo-American

cholars.

It

s

quite

lear

hat he ouncils

merged

n hemidstf

particular,

xisting

et

of historical

endencies-including

eclining

ld

regime

nstitutions,

ising

orld

capitalism,

nd

military

ower

un mok.

he ouncils

pposed

what

hey

ook o

be thedestructive

nd

oppressive

eatures

f his ocial

world.

hat s to

say,

he

councils

rose nd

cted

s

oppositional

ntities.

nd onsistent

ith heir

deology,

democratic

ractices

ere he ouncils'

haracteristic

ethod

f

pposition.

hile

such

ppositional

emocratic

ractice

s

especially

bvious

nthe

ontextf

post-

WorldWar

Europe,

t s almost

ertainly

fbroader

ignificance.

heview hat

opposition

as

only

derivative"

alue

ndemocratic

olitics ight

eem

plausible

"in world

f deal

political

nstitutions,"

otes

an

Shapiro;

[b]ut

n the ctual

world,

here ocial

rdersome

obe

what

hey

re n

morally

rbitraryays,

nd

where

ll

procedures

f

government

urn ut

on

close

nspection

o be

flawed,

opposition

ust

njoy

more

ndependent

nd exalted

tatus

n a

persuasive

account f

ust

emocratic

olitics."'24

or

s

long

s

people

ind hemselves

on-

fronting

nstitutions

nd

forces hat

ppress

hem r

escape

heir

ollective,

gali-

tarian

ontrol,

emocratic

pposition

ill

e

of

ignificance.Deliberativeheoriesavedominated

nglo-American

cholarly

ebatesbout

democracy

or ome

years

ow.

A

substantial

ffort

asbeendevoted

o

exploring

124.

an

hapiro,

emocratic

ustice

New

Haven: ale

University

ress,

999),

0-31.








John

Medearls

475

their

ases,

nd

deploying

hem s

part

f mild

ritique

f

xisting

iberal emo-

cratic ractices.eliberativeheoriesosit specializednd uncoercedorm f

public

iscourse

s themain

equirement

fdemocratic

egitimacy.

nd

elibera-

tive heorists

re

especially

utspoken

bout he

requirements

f

democraticis-

course,

iewed

s

a

cooperative

ractice.

here s no needhere o ask

whether

deliberative

heory

s

primarily

n internal

evelopment

n

academic

oliticalhi-

losophy,

r

whether

t s

best nderstood

n

relation

o

uchhistoricalendenciess

the

ollapse

f

ommunism,

he

eeming-failure

fnew

ocial

movementso

arise

that

might

ival he

mportance

f

those

hat

lourished

n theWest

rom 955 o

1975,

nd

he

xtraordinary

orldwide

ise

f

neoliberalism.ut

t

s clear hat

n

scholarlyiscoursetructuredround eliberativeractices-viewedrimarilyn

relationo iberal

emocracy--the

ssues aised

y

he ouncilmovement

annot

be central.

n

a discourse ocused

n

the

egitimacy

f

decisions-implicitly,

he

decisions

fmoderniberal-democratic

tates-there

asnot

beenmuch oom

o

askaboutnondemocraticocial orces

nd

tructureshat

scape

ven

he

ontrol

of uch tates. nd s

a

result,

here as been ittleoom o

raise

uestions

bout

howsuch

xisting

tructures

nd

relations

esistnd

frustrateemocratic

gency

more

roadly--especially

f

hat

gency

s not iewed

s

reducible

o

the

bility

o

intervene

n

discourse.

n

scholarly

ebate ocusedn the

erms

f

ngoingoop-

eration,

uestions

bout

democracy

s an

oppositionalractice

learly

ecome

marginal

s well.

ndeed,

hehistoricalecord

f

democratic ovements

isingp

to

oppose

domination,

nd to

exercise

ower

gainst

he

dominant,

ecomes

almost

nintelligible

n

ight

fthe

xpectation

hat emocrats

ust eek

ccord

with therocial

roups

ndforces. nd

n

discoursehat

as--as

ome

f

ts

ro-

ponents

dmit-chosenomake

ts

eace

with

iberal

emocracy,

he mbition

or

democratic

ransformationust eem

merely

uaint.'25

t

s no

surprise

hat

ames

Bohman,

n

ommentingavorably

n

Habermas,

umps

ogether

communitarian,

participatory

r

council"'

emocracy,

nd

dismisseshem

ll,

without

iscussion,

as

attempts

o

pply

democratic

rinciples

..

everywhere

n

he

ame

way."'26

By

now t hould e

sufficiently

lear hat

n

uggesting

emocratic

heory

ould

learn

romhe

ouncil

movement,

do

notmean o

uggest

hat

e

directly

pply

an

eighty-year-old

nstitutional

ormula

houghtlessly

o

contemporary

roblems.

have

rgued,

n

ny

ase,

hat he

historicalouncilmovement

adno

simple

nsti-

tutionalormulao

offer.

aking

nspiration

romhe ouncil

movement-in

he rit-

ical

nd

theoretical,

ot he

hortatory

ense--would

nvolve

xploring

he

present

125.

Emily

auptmann,

CanLessBe

More? eftisteliberative

emocrats'

ritique

f

Participatory

Democracy,"

olity

3,

3

(Spring

001):

397-421;

ames

ohman,

The

Coming

f

Age

of

Deliberative

Democracy,"

heJournalf

Political

hilosophy

,

4

(1998):

00-25.

126.James

ohman,

ublic eliberation:

luralism,

omplexity,

nd

DemocracyCambridge:

IT

Press,

996),

2.And ee

Seyla

Benhabib,

Review f

Juergen

abermas,

etween acts

nd

Norms,"

American

olitical

cience

eview

1,

(September

997):

25-26.








476

LOST OR OBSCURED?

possibilities

nd imitsfdemocratic

gency,ocusing

ttention

n

the

key

ocial

locations here nterventionouldmake he ocialworldmoredemocratically

open,

nd

reconnecting

emocracy

o

opposition

nd

transformation.

f

ourse,

suchreflectionould

ikelyupport

ouncil-like

ttempts

o

ntroduceemocratic

practices

here

hey

o notnow

exist,

nd

to

oppose

or weaken

he

existing

sources

f

undemocratic

ower.

The fforto earn romhehistoricalouncils eed

not

e hindered

y

heir

ev-

olutionaryrigins

nd

context-although

his

might

e the

ase

if

he

point

was

simply

o

copy

preconceived

ormula.

ny

emocratic

ovement,

ny

ttempt

o

build

emocratic

gency,

aces

particular

etof

ocial

orcesnd

tructures

hat

constituteonstraintsnd enablementsor ction. he briefollapse fmilitary,

economic

nd

politicalower

n

centralnd eastern

urope

t the

ndofWorld

War

representslimiting

ase

for

emocratic

ractice,relatively

are

pecimen

of the kind f

political pportunity

emocratic

ovements ust

ften

eize

upon.'27

ut

ocial

forces

nd relationsre

constantlyndergoinghange,

nd

those

hanges

ffer

p

changing

pportunities,

arge

nd

small,

hat

emocratic

agency

an

exploit.

ven

ow,

here

re

undoubtedlyroups ollowing

he ouncils'

example,

roperly

nderstood.

Theymay

ndeed e

forming

ouncil-like

odies,

or

xample,

o

representeg-

lected

eighborhoods

r nfluenceocal conomic

evelopment.

ut

hey

may

ust

as

wellbe

focusing

n

transforming

nternationalconomic

odies,

odiminishhe

influencefmultinational

orporations,

ndto

nstitutionalize

democratic

phere

for

eveloping-world

armers

nd

workers.

heymay

e

attempting

o chieve

ork-

place

democracy,

s

did

ome

f he

actory

ommittees

n

postwar

urope.

r

hey

may

imply

e

trying

o

build nions

o

sustain

ffective

pposition

o

employer

domination,

n he

many

ountries

here

uch

movementsre

frequently

rushed,

often

iolently.

heymay

e

buildingpon xisting

ocial

ies,

n

hurches,

chools

and

factories-developing

heir

apacities,

nd

planning

heir

ctions,ace-to-face,

in

night-time

eetings.

ut

heymay

lsobe

combining

uchmethodsithnternet-

based

ommunicationnd

coordination,

n mannerhat

as

the

potential

as

we

have

ecently

earned)

omobilize illions

f

people

n

near-simultaneous

arches

against

egemonic

ilitary

ower,

n

ities

round heworld. he

point

ill

not e

for emocratic

heory

imply

o transcribe

heir

ctions,

ut

ather

o

try

o under-

stand nd

larify

heir

ttempts

o

build emocratic

gency,ppose

nondemocratic

social

orces,

nd

ransform

ecalcitrantnstitutions

nd

power

elations.

127. "Revolutions"

re

imply

tthe extreme

nd f

he

pectrum"

f

ntense

eriods

f

ocialmove-

ment

ctivity,

r

what

idney

arrowerms

cycles

f ontention."ee

Tarrow,

ower

nMovement:ocial

Movements

nd

Contentious

olitics,

econd dition

Cambridge:ambridgeniversity

ress, 998),

4.

Documents

Medearis, John. Lost or Obscured. How Lenin, Schumpeter and Hannah Arendt Misanderstood de Council Movement