Revolutionary Intercommunalism?

www [dot] itsabouttimebpp [dot] com/Huey_P_Newton/pdf/Huey.pdf

Has anyone else encountered Huey Newtons concept of intercommunalism? Newton seems to be one of the first people on the left to recognize globalization and the capitalist movement toward the breakdown of the nation state, but I think he went too far in saying the nation state had already ceased to exist.

I have nerver seen people talking about Huey Newtons as a theorist, I'm curious about his other stuff now.

You should check out the Huey Newton Reader then; www[dot]prisoncensorship[dot]info/archive/books/hueypnewtonreader.pdf

Also his autobiography Revolutionary Suicide aint bad either.

I would be hesitant to bestow unto Huey Newton the honor of being among the first to prohesize the development of globalization under capitalism. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, for instance, had predicted the phenomenon a century prior to Newton's revelation. Marx also noted that capitalism would serve as a homogenizing force internationally, and Engels was under the impression that this tendency would progressively diminish national peculiarities. Time has not vindicated the latter forecast.

The trouble with intercommunalism, in my opinion, is it's based upon a number of false premises. Foremost among them is the idea that the lumpenproletariat possess the potential to be agents of revolution in the global north. The Black Panther Party obviously had an interest in this view being theoretically sound, but it simply doesn't conform with reality. The lumpenproletariat may not always be a reactionary force, but attempting to instill in them a socialist consciousness is an exercise in futility. They respond most enthusiastically to identity politics and will continue to for the foreseeable future.

I agree with your view of the lumpen-proletarian celtiberian. I think Newton and the BPP's position on the lumpen-proletarian originated from two lines of thought; one the decline of industrial jobs and loss in real wages and buying power in the late 60's and early 70's caused Newton to predict that at some point that the Lumpenproletarian will eventually be the majority of sociaty, ignoring the fact that capitalism cannot exist without a proletarian. The second line of thought is more problematic, I feel like Newton fell into the same mindset that Thirdworldists and most modern leftists use when they act as if poverty or oppression equal revolutionary potential.

I meant that Newton was one of the first american left to recognize what we call globalization today, but my apologies that wasn't clear.

Hillbilly wrote:You should check out the Huey Newton Reader then;  www[dot]prisoncensorship[dot]info/archive/books/hueypnewtonreader.pdf

Also his autobiography Revolutionary Suicide aint bad either.

Interesting but I'm unsure if I have the time to read that.
Thank you anyway.

Hillbilly wrote:I agree with your view of the lumpen-proletarian celtiberian. I think Newton and the BPP's position on the lumpen-proletarian originated from two lines of thought; one the decline of industrial jobs and loss in real wages and buying power in the late 60's and early 70's caused Newton to predict that at some point that the Lumpenproletarian will eventually be the majority of sociaty, ignoring the fact that capitalism cannot exist without a proletarian.

Correct. Capitalism would cease to exist absent a sizable proletariat for the simple reason surplus value could not be produced without it. Not only has the proletariat expanded internationally since the '70s, but contrary to the working class becoming pauperized in the global north, its share of national income has slightly increased in recent decades—although intra- and inter-class inequality has increased simultaneously.

The second line of thought is more problematic, I feel like Newton fell into the same mindset that Thirdworldists and most modern leftists use when they act as if poverty or oppression equal revolutionary potential.

Indeed.

I meant that Newton was one of the first american left to recognize what we call globalization today, but my apologies that wasn't clear.

It's quite all right, comrade. Thank you for clarifying.