Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
recall James P. Cannon ever favoring this practice, despite being committed to the sort of
democratic centralism that evolved under Zinoviev's authority.
Not that Luxemburg is opposed to centralism itself. She is not a Foucauldian. When it takes
shape from the self-activity of the working class, it is a good thing. "Centralism in the
socialist sense is not an absolute thing applicable to any phase whatsoever of the labor
movement. It is a tendency, which becomes real in proportion to the development and
political training acquired by the working masses in the course of their struggle."
Of course, the democratic centralism that defines "Leninist" organizations today had little to
do with Lenin's call for "freedom to criticize, but unity in action". Somewhere along the line
it became a formula for ideological homogeneity. It states that the "freedom to criticize" is
permissible during preconvention discussion, a period that tolerates atypical behavior every
couple of years or so, more or less like Spock undergoing "Pon farr", the Vulcan version of
mating season.
Those who have experienced this version of "freedom to criticize" understand that it is no
such thing. Instead it is mainly an opportunity for the secondary leadership of the party to
salute the central leadership for the brilliance of the line resolutions presented to the
convention. Those who reach the conclusion that the line resolutions are full of baloney are
ultimately viewed as scratches that are in danger of turning into gangrene. In such
organizations, however, the main danger from the standpoint of medical analogies is
hardening of the arteries.