Transnational networks of radical labour research and (h)activism: A global working class in the making



It will take a Revolution to them back!

Following the 9/11, the West, led by the US and the UK states, governments and ruling classes, the Europeans and many local elites hanging in the tail, has launched a war on democracy. Neo-cons and Zionists have names this endless war they kicked off “war on terror” which is composed of illegal occupations, covert operations, organized coups and civil wars that disintegrated series of sovereign states; turning them a source of real terror, slavery, and barbarism, as in Iraq, Libia, and Syria. This war on democracy based on lies, threats, corruption, and manipulations. From the beginning of the war democracy and ‘liberalism’ got undermined at home (in the West) and globally, and the rise of more terrorism, more wars and fascisms guaranteed. The revaluations of the real nature of this war by Manning and Snowden, publicized by Wikileaks with Assange, caused and become a symbol of broader counter organizing and resistance to the rising global fascism. Most of the mainstream liberal media and academia was cowardly silent. In passing weeks the 18 years loop was closing. In the wake of Bradley (Chelsea) Manning’s and Julian Assange’s arrests, terrorist Netanyahu was re-elected in Israel as prime minister. While this was happening, one of the top global political economists, Kees Van der Pijl was being targeted by the Zionist Israeli lobby, since he was tweeting about US gov. zionist Isreali gov. involvement in 9/11. Previously such accusation was successfully avoided, by pressures and threats on academia and media, and turned into a conspiracy, mainly feeding into the resurgence of the extreme right wing. This time, by highlighting capitalist-zionist ruling class base, backed by scientific research, in such a conjuncture Van der Pijl’s analysis put forwards the naked truth. It becomes clear today that fascism emerged and it is irreversable with the means of democracy. Manning and Assange’s arrests signify a historical turning point. If we give Manning and Assange silently to these monsters it will take a revolution to get him back.

The ‘Emergence’ of the New World View was with Tektology, not Systemology; with Alexander Bogdanov, not Ludwig Von Bertalanffy!

by Örsan Şenalp

In 1927 German professor Johann Plenge (1874-1963) did publish his review of the first edition of the German translation of Alexander Bogdanov’s Tektology: General Science of Organisation (1926). The very same year Ludwig Von Bertalanffy, who would later be known as the founder of the General Systems Theory (German Allgemeine Systemtlehre), completed his dissertation in which he developed his initial ideas. The following year, in 1928, Bogdanov died as a result of a blood exchange experiment he conducted on a student, who survived from Malaria at the end, and Von Bertalanffy’s published his new study, which was based on his doctoral thesis and titled Kritische Theorie der Formbildung (Critical Theory of Development), in Berlin.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is Plenge.jpg
Johann Plenge

Plenge’s review of Tektology was negatively critical. He thought of Bogdanov and his bold attempt as flawed. To him, Bogdanov was intoxicated by Marxism and Marxist ideology and his Tektology was dismissing all the differences amongst the vast variety of types of organizations and degree of complexity amongst systems under investigation. He also highlighted Bogdanov’s own claim to be “distant from morality as mathematics” in order to warn the reader that such an approach has the potential to generate an ethicless total-control mechanism -similar to the one indeed created by Stalin later on. However, Bogdanov himself made his warnings public about the dystopian future applications of such science with much emphasis, especially in an authoritarian framework like of Lenin’s creation. Bogdanov also gave a lifelong struggle against Lenin’s authoritarian politics which gave way to rise of personal cult of Lenin after the Revolution, and Stalinism after Lenin died. The result of this was Bogdnaov’s political demise and removal of his name from the official Russian historiography (White, 2018). Whereas Plenge did dedicate his work to create his own personality cult. And later Hayek would accuse Plenge of inspiring the national-socialist ideology (Hayek, 1944). What is important to note here is that while Plenge was complaining about Bogdanov’s Tektology of not recognizing the differences in forms and contents between varieties of ‘organizations’ of systems for instance by conscious man or self-organization in nature etc., he was missing all the point Tektology was making: the argumenting for the need and actually building unified, non-reductionist meta-science that is investigating possible generalizations, common organisational patterns and principles to all complex wholes, no matter physical, material, social or psychic or otherwise. Exactly this has later become the main promise of the GST as proposed by Von Bertalanffy. Beyond that, most of the principles proposed by Von Bertalanffy between 1927-1950s can indeed be found in almost word-to-word identical fashion in Bogdanov’s Tektology, which was delivered between 1911-1928 in its original Russian. Milan Zelený quotes from N. N. Mosieev, in his 1988 article titled Tectology: “All systems problematique, undertaken by L. von Bertalanffy and his followers, is contained, practically in toto, within the theory of organizations of A. A. Bogdanov, but not vice versa. For these reasons, it seems to me that the “general systems theory” represents a significant step backwards in comparison with Bogdanov’s “Tektology” which, after its author’s death, was unfortunately never reissued in Russian language. [This should certainly be corrected in 1989-90, M.Z.]” (note is original by Zelený). Sadovsky, Gorelik, Zelený, Dudley, Gare, and others have shown the similarities between GST and Tektology, and to what extend Tektology ecceeded the GST. According to this “Bogdanov’s work anticipated the (entire) systems quest of the twentieth century” (Dudley, 1996). Indeed all piece meal developments and discoveries of systems concepts, mechanisms, and principles: like open-closed systems, bifurcation, emergence, self-organisation, self-reguation or feed back mechanism, autophiesis as well as a concrete methodology for studying variety of systems were addressed and explicitly described in Tektology.

Image result for bertalanffy
Ludwig Von Bertalanffy

In pursuing his negative critique, Plenge was also joining the term ‘general systems’ science/theory/doctrine’ for the first time, suggesting as a replacement for ‘tektology’. The term ‘system’ is used 23 times in that article and several times to redescribe Tektology as a general science of systems of reality (Plenge, 1927). Plenge was the first to join the term ‘general systems’ to refer Tektology in his 1927 paper however the term later come to be solely associated solely with Von Bertalanffy’s work (Boulding, 1956/2004; Hofkrichner, 2005 and 2010). This requires historians to reconsider the entire intellectual history of the GST. Moroever the issue of Bogdanov’s influence on GST needs a clarificaiton. It is a fact that both Tektology and Plenge’s review of it got published in Von Bertalanffy’s own native German, and this happens at the time he was on top of the topic; studying and developing his initial ideas of ‘general systems theory’ since 1926. Moreover between 1924 and 1926 Von Bertalanffy studied at the University of Vienna, where he completed his PhD. dissertation which titled (translation) “Fechner and the Problem of Integration of the Higher Order” (BCSSS archive). When he was studying biology here “five hours a week he went to the lectures of Moritz Schlick (1882-1936) on “Logic and Epistemology” and took part in a seminar organized by this neo-positivist philosopher and founder of the famous “Vienna Circle” in 1929.” (Pouvreau, 2009). According to Zelený Moritz Schlick, “… the author of General Theory of Knowledge (Allgemeine Erkenntnislehre) in 1918”, “.. was backing Bogdanov in his lectures..” (1988, p. 332). The fact that Von Bertalanffy’s teacher at Vienna University, on epistemology knew about Bogdanov and Tektolgy and was tlaking aobut it in his lectures minimises the chance that Von Bertalanffy did miss it and not picked it up. Especially if we consider that he took part in a seminar organized by Schlick. Von Bertalanffy published his first book in two years after completing his doctoral dissertation and the publisher was located in Berlin, where Tektology was published too. That year the second edition of the German translation of Tektology’s came out and Bogdanov died.

Von Bertalanffy was so fresh in his studies on the idea so closely following the debates related to ‘unity of science’ movement, which was popular in Vienna and Berlin circles to both of which both Bogdanov and Plenge were known figures. Hayek devoted an entire chapter on Plenge in his Road to Serfdom to which Von Bertalanffy refers in his “An Outline for the General Systems Theory” (1950). Hayek and Bertalanffy also met at the 1960 Symposium on Principles of Self-Organization, organized by Heinz von Foerster, a relative of Hayek and Wittgenstein. These connections increase the chance that Bertalanffy knew Plenge, and decrease the chance that he did develop his ideas totally independently from those of Bogdanov’s. Although it seems almost impossible for Von Bertalanffy to miss neither the German translation of Tektology, of which second edition came out just in two years, nor a review by someone like Plenge, especially also hearing about it from his teacher Moritz Schlick. Yet still he did never refer or credit his precursor, even after the rediscovery of Tektology in 1960s in Russia (Pouvreau, 2009) Von Bertalanffy, who was explicitly anti-ideological (especially in terms of Marxism), remained silence on the issue. After Von Bertalanffy died in 1972, Bogdanov and Tektology gained wider international recognition as the forerunner and precursor of systems thinking and cybernetics. Yet to a large extent becasue of Von Bertalanffy’s silence this recognition remained reather limited. In the end, Von Bertalanffy and his GST still gets most credits even today as the founder of the Systems Thinking and he enjoys such recognition against the historical facts and new generations still takes Von Bertalanffy’s foundership status as granted. We will never know how would have Von Bertalanffy reviewed Tektology if he had lived through the 70s and 80s. When suggesting to see Tektology as an attempt to build a general system science (Allgemeine Systemtlehre) Plenge was also offering another, shorter, term general “systematology” to use instead of tektology. It is very ironic that a similar term ‘systemology’ is being suggested 80 years later, by new generation systems scholars (Pouvreau and Drack, 2007) to replace the term with Bertalanffy’s GST, celebrating it as a full-fledged science of systems.

Image result for alexander bogdanov
Alexander Bogdanov

All in all, taking together the fact that the terms ‘general systems theory’ (Allgemeine Systemslehre) and ‘general science of systems’ were already coined in the 1920s by Johann Plenge in describing Bogdanov’s Tektology, and the fact that Tektology was inclusive of almost all (and identical) terms and principles suggested by Von Bertallanfy and presented more (Dudley, 1996) we finally have to conclude that it was not Ludwig Von Bertalanffy and his GST but Bogdanov and his Tektology was the real moment of emergence of the new world view that called later in the 20th century systems and later complexity thinking. What emerged as Tektology, in its original form, however, was a critical and historical unified science, serving for building new systems and eventually a world to be replaced with capitalism; instead of a tool-box for solving its problems, or change management technology for managerial and ruling classes’ use. As a promise of new world-view (as picked up by Von Bertalanffy), it meant to be developed by, from the point of view, and the for the purpose of the ruled and oppressed (the part left out by Von Bertalanffy). This latter aspect was the main characteristic of Bogdanov’s work and meant to take social power relations and inequality at the core -as the main characteristic of the epistemology that lied underneath all enterprise. It meant also taking social classes as the parts forming the societal whole ontologically. These main aspects of Bogdanov’s Tektology were unsurprisingly shaved off (or totally missed) in Von Bertalanffy’s version.

Since the early 2000s, there emerged a discussoin on the nature of the development of the systems paradigm, and made calls for undertanding the reasons behind its relative failure -in becoming a genuinely general / universal science with a clear and unifying methodology and principles, as it was promised yet not delivered by Von Bertalanffy and his collegues like Boulding (1956/2004). Thus leading figures in systems thinkers community have started to debate and invite their collegues and for a return to origins and re-evaluation (Rousseau et. al. 2016). Rousseau and at. al. even developed a porposal for such a model for ‘really’ general general systemotology (2018). Yet although they do themselves make the call to the original sources where they returns at best is again to the work of Von Bertalanffy, and those came after him. Even though ‘the emergence phenomena’ is one of the key topics for the scholars and experts of system and complexity thinking it is a serious contradiction that these thinkers insist on referring Von Bertalanffy as the founder and the inventor of the GST and skipping to engage the general and unifying methodolgy proposed already by Bogdanov in Tektology.

Even if there was no case of plagiarism whatsoever to talk about for Von Bertalanffy’s work there is an urgent need for broader recognition of and engagement with Bogdanov’s work and his Tektology as the precursor of the GST -as well as Cybernetics, OR, ect. The current situation is misleading and promoting a wrong conception of ‘the emergence of systems/complexity thinking itself’, and as a result, new researchers are missing an important source of inspiration. Even more ironically, Marxian and post-Marxian scholars and theorists who were inspired and influenced by systems thinking do not know about and recognize Bogdanov and Tektology; amongst them worldwide recognized scholars and philosophers such as Immanuel Wallerstein, Jurgen Habermas, Gilles Deleuze, Jaques Derrida, Michael Foucault, Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe, Bob Jessop, Antonio Negri, so on so forth. This must change and it is high time to turn from a historical mistake and make the correction.


Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science, page: His Life – Bertalanffy’s Origins and his First Education. Retrieved 2019-02-04 Archived July 25, 2011, at the Wayback Machine

Boulding K. (1956/2004) “General Systems Theory – The Skeleton of Science”, in Management Science Vol. 2 No. 3, April 1956, 197-208. Reprinted in E:CO Vol. 6 Nos. 1-2, Fall 2004, 127-139.

Dudley, P. (1996) “Back to Basics? Tektology and General System Theory (GST)”, Systems Practice, Vol. 9 No. 3., 273-284.

Hayek, F. A. (1944) Road to Serfdom,GeorgeRoutledge&Sons.

Hofkirchner, W. (2010) General Systems Theory: The Origins of General Systems Theory. Online at:

Hofkirchner, W. (2005) “Ludwig von Bertalanffy. Forerunner of Evolutionary Systems Theory”, in: Gu, J., Chroust, G. (eds.) The New Role of Systems Sciences For a Knowledge-based Society, Proceedings of the First World Congress of the International Federation for Systems Research, Kobe, Japan, CD-ROM (ISBN 4-903092-02-X), 6

Plenge, J. (1927) “Um die Allgemeine Organisationslehre”, Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 25. Bd. (1927), pp. 18-29, online at: [Google translated version of Plenge’s review is online at:

Prouveau, D. (2009) The Dialectical Tragedy of the Concept of Wholeness: Ludwig von Bertalanffy’s Biography Revisited, ISCE Publishing.

Pouvreau, D. and Drack, M. (2007) “On the history of Ludwig von Bertalanffy’s “General Systemology”, and on its relationship to cybernetics”, International Journal of General Systems, Vol. 36 No. 3 June 2007, pp. 281-337.

Rousseau, D. et. al. (2018) General Systemology: Transdisciplinarity for Discovery, Insight, and Innovation, Spingler.

Rousseau, D., Bellingham, J., Wilby, J., & Blachfellner, S. (2016) “In Search of General Systems Theory”, Systema, pp. 76-99.

Susiluoto, I. (1982) The Origins and Development of Systems Thinking in the Soviet Union, Dissertationes Humanarum Litteratum no. 30, Academia Scientarium Fennica, Helsinki, 1982.

White, J. (2018) Red Hamlet: The Life and Ideas of Alexander Bogdanov, Historical Materialism Book Series, Brill.

Zelený, M. (1988) “Tectology”, International Journal of General Systems, Vol. 14, No. 4, 331-342.

Bogdanov was the founder of ‘Critical’ ‘Cultural’ ‘Western’ ‘Marxism’ as opposed to Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant versions of religious and scholastic Marxism(s)

The below is the list of Alexander Bogdanov’s main works in book format.

And here is the Russian language list compiled by one of the editors of the Alexander Bogdanov library, Evgeni V. Pavlov:

Bogdanov’s books in Russian:

Bogdanov A. Short Course of Economic Science. Moscow, 1897; St. Petersburg, 1899; 1905; Moscow, 1920; 1922; 1923; 1924; Petrograd, 1922; 1923; Kharkov, 1922; 1923; Kursk, 1922; Novgorod, 1922; [15 editions]

Bogdanov A. Key Elements of Natural Studies. St. Petersburg, 1899

Bogdanov A. Cognition from Historical Point of View. St. Petersburg, 1901

Bogdanov A. On Psychology of Society (Articles of 1901-1904). St. Petersburg, 1904; 1906

Bogdanov A. (as Ryadovoy). Olminsky M. Our Misunderstandings. Geneva, 1904

Bogdanov A. Empiriomonısm: Articles on Philosophy. Vol. 1. Moscow, 1904; Vol. 2. Moscow, 1905; Vol. 3. Moscow, 1906

Bogdanov A. Red Star: Novel-Utopia. St. Petersburg, 1908; Moscow — Leningrad, 1924; 1929; [6 editions]

Bogdanov A. Destruction of a Great Fetishism. Faith and Science. St. Petersburg, 1910

Bogdanov A., Stepanov N. Course of Political Economy. Vol. 1. St. Petersburg, 1910; Vol. 2. Moscow-Prague, 1919-1920; 1925; [3 editions]

Bogdanov A. Cultural Task of the Present. St. Petersburg, 1911

Bogdanov A. Engineer Menni . Fantastic Novel. St. Petersburg, 1912; Moscow, 1918

Bogdanov A. General Science of Organisation. Tektology. Vol. 1, 2. St. Petersburg, 1913; Berlin — Petrograd, 1922; 1927; Vol. 3. Berlin — Petrograd, 1922; 1925; 1929; [3 editions]

Bogdanov A. Philosophy of Alive Experience: Essays. St. Petersburg, 1913; Moscow, 1920; 1923

Bogdanov A. Introduction in Political Economy (in Questions and Answers). St. Petersburg, 1914; Moscow, 1917

Bogdanov A. Science about Common Consciousness. Moscow, 1914; 1918; 1923

Bogdanov A. Question of Socialism. Moscow, 1918

Bogdanov A. (as Werner N.) For What does Society Develop? Vyatka, 1918

Bogdanov A. Introductory Course of Political Economy. Moscow, 1918; 1920; 1924; Kazan, 1918; Tashkent, 1918; Tyumen, 1920; Kharkov, 1921; Yekaterinoslav, 1921; Ryazan, 1923; Saratov, 1923; [11 editions]

Bogdanov A. The Elements of Proletarian Culture in Development of Working Class. Moscow, 1920

Bogdanov A. Essays on General Science. Tektology. Samara, 1921

Bogdanov A. On Proletarian Culture: 1904 — 1924. Leningrad — Moscow, 1924

Bogdanov’s books in English:

Bogdanov A. A Short Course of Economic Science. Ed. by S. M. Dvolaitsky. London: Communist Party of Gr. Britain, 1923; 1927

Bogdanov A. Essays in Tektology. The General Science of Organization. Transl. by George Gorelik. Seaside California, 1980

Bogdanov A. Tektology: The General Science of Organization. Transl. by George Gorelik, 1989

Bogdanov A. BOGDANOV’S TEKTOLOGY Book 1 Ed. by Peter Dudley, 1996

Bogdanov A. Red Star: The First Bolshevik Utopia. Ed. by Richard Stites, Ann Arbor: Ardis Publishers, 1982; Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1984; 2006

Bogdanov A. The Struggle for Viability: Collectivism Through Blood Exchange, 2002

Bogdanov A. The Philosophy of Living Experience, 2016

Bogdanov’s books in German:

Bogdanow A. Die Kunst das Proletariat. Leipzig Wolgast, 1918

Bogdanow A. Uber der Kunstnachloss; Die Kritik des Prolet. Kunst. Leipzig, 1919

Bogdanow A. Was ist proletarische Dichtung. Berlin: Seenol, 1920

Bogdanow A. Die Wissenschaft und die arbeiter Klasse. Berlin— Wilmersdorf: Dia Diaktica, 1920

Bogdanow A. Algemeine Organisationslehre (Tektologie). Bd. I. Berlin, 1926; Bd. II. Berlin: Hirzel, 1928

Bogdanow A. Ruga Stelo. Fantasia romano. Leipzig, 1929

Bogdanow A. Sowjetphilosophie. Darmstadt: Hrsg. W. Goerdt, 1980

From the above list itself, it becomes crystal clear that it was not Ernst Bloch, Karl Korsch, Gregory Lukács nor Antonio Gramsci, nor the early Frankfurt school philosophers, nor Althusser who did produce the first systematic Marxist work on ideology, consciousness, cognition, and culture. It was Bogdanov who opened the path, starting from 1897 and developing his ideas in more than 6 books focusing on cognition, culture, and ideology both in an integral way to the critique of political economy and as an autonomous field of inquiry.

This fact alone makes Bogdanov the most important Russian follower of Marx, Engels, and Dietzgen, who upgraded historical materialism for the 20th century and shattering the myth of ‘critical’ ‘cultural’ ‘Western’ Marxism. This makes Bogdanov the precursor of all the others, who were aware of Bogdanov and his work, as Gramsci who secretly translated Bogdanov’s Red Star (see Ghetti, 2016) during his time in Moscow in a collaboration with his wife Iulia.

To remember, and put in perspective, Bogdanov’s major contributions are:
1. Production of first vernacular study book on Marxian political economy.
2. Production of the standard version of the Russian translation of Marx’ Capital.
3. Production of first systematic work on ideology, culture, cognition, consciousness.
4. Production of the first communist utopian novels: Red Star and Engineer Menni
5. Production of the meme of Red Star, as the symbol of future communist, collectivist, comradely society.
6.  Production of Tektology, as the emancipatory alternative to reactionary  Cybernetics, General Systems Theory, Chaos and Complexity Sciences.
7. Production of the first form of “Input-output” analysis, as the core of the democratically planned economy.  

Every contemporary Marxian, or radically critical thinker and militant should, therefore, be questioning and knowing very well how about of the demise of such an important figure and work, by conscious and continuous efforts of the ‘makers’ and ‘the leaders’ of the ‘revolution’, Lenin first and Stalin after him, those who made gods and prophets of emancipatory praxis out of their personal cults, which has became one of the major religions of modern times, as the main cause of the great failure of emancipatory praxis before capitalism. Similarly, it is essential to see how this massive body of forgotten work, offering a revolutionary new paradigm have preceded and exceeded those Westerners like German critical theorists and French post-structuralist, both influenced and manipulated by the development Cybernetic apparatus, developed by US imperial army, and became part of it in the post-War and Cold War era.

A new theory, science, and practice; a praxis of revolution, which is capable of simultaneously building cultural, political, economic hegemony and alliances, is on the rise as an inevitable and unstoppable force.    

The Global Tapestry of Alternatives

The Global Tapestry of Alternatives

The world is going through an unprecedented crisis engendered by a dominant regime that has resulted in deepening inequalities, increasing and new forms of deprivation, the destruction of ecosystems, climate change, the tearing off of the social fabric and the dispossession of all living beings with immense violence. However, the past two decades have witnessed the emergence of an immense variety of radical alternatives to this dominant regime and to its roots in the capitalist, patriarchal, racist, statist, and anthropocentric forces. These range from initiatives in specific sectors such as sustainable and holistic agriculture, community-led water/energy/food sovereignty, solidarity and sharing economy, worker control of production facilities, resource/knowledge commons, and inter-ethnic peace and harmony, to more holistic or rounded transformations such as those being attempted by the Zapatista and the Kurds in Rojava, to the revival of ancient traditions or the emergence of new worldviews that re-establish humanity’s place within nature and the values of human dignity, equality and the respect of history.

The Global Tapestry of Alternatives is an initiative seeking to create solidarity networks and strategic alliance amongst all these alternatives on local, regional and global levels. It starts in the local interaction among alternatives, to gradually organize forms of agreement at the regional, national and global scale, through diverse and light structures, defined in each space, horizontal, democratic, inclusive and non-centralized, using diverse local languages and other ways of communicating. The initiative has no central structure or control mechanisms. It spreads step by step as an ever-expanding, complex set of tapestries, constructed by already existing communal or collective webs, organized as alternatives to the dominant regimes, each of them autonomously weaving itself with other such webs.

It organizes mechanisms of interaction between those regional and national structures and with the societies, in which they exist, in diverse languages and different means, promoting periodically regional, national and global encounters, when the conditions allow for them, as well as close and synergistic linkages with existing organizations, like the World Social Forum. The Global Tapestry of Alternatives is about creating spaces of collaboration and exchange, in order to learn about and from each other, critically challenge each other, offer active solidarity to each other whenever needed, interweave the initiatives in common actions, give them visibility to inspire other people to create their own initiatives and to go further along existing paths or forge new ones that strengthen alternatives wherever they are, until the point in which a critical mass of alternative ways can create the conditions for the radical systemic changes we need.

  • A small group of activists from several regions of the world started the initiative, which community-led its structure as it takes shape in different parts of the world. The initial group will continue supporting the initiative as long as necessary. It has some sponsors, who subscribe to this document and will try to weave itself with similar initiatives around the world. Anyone interested in following the evolution of the initiative or participate in it may write a mail to

ACT 5: THIS TIME IT’S INTERGALACTIC | A call out from the Gilets Jaunes (Yellow Vests), for solidarity actions everywhere!


A call out from the gilets jaunes (yellow vests), for solidarity actions everywhere.

On Saturday the 15th of December 2018.

It began as anger against neoliberal climate policies, a revolt againstunfair petrol taxes that pass on the cost to working people ratherthan the rich and the very multinationals most responsible for polluting our planet. Now four weeks later, it has become a popularuprising for dignity, a rebellion against the elite and their world,a cry for equality. It has evolved into a powerful refusal ofrepresentation, of spokes people, political parties and unions. Wehave all been overtaken by what has been happening, everyone hasbecome more than themselves; because we areimpossible to define, the only code we have is a colour code, all theother codes are broken. We are too diverse and decentralized to becalled a movement, too different to be categorized, let’s simply saywe are an uprising ! Some in Europe have tried to turn this into anemblem of ideas from the extreme right, attempting to instrumentaliseour heterogenity..The yellow vests was at first a piece ofroad safety equipment, now it become an unprecedented event whichopens up the fault line that charts our future, a chasm we mustbridge, between social and environmental justice. It invites us allto make a choice between the political classes and the people,between closing borders and opening possibilities, between despairand hope.

This Saturday 15th of December, will be a key moment, ACT 5. Each Saturday has been called an act, an acknowledgment that the most beautiful popular theatre takes place in the streets, when we are dressed in costumes of fluorescent yellow, swarming like disobedient bees. During the week days, our call has been to block the flow of the economy – roads, oil refineries, factories etc. Already the minister of the economy is saying that more than 10 billion euros have been lost and that France’s economic growth will be affected. Every Saturday the instruction is to shut down consumption – supermarkets and malls – and to gather around symbols of state power – the president’s palace in Paris and the prefectures in the regions. Whilst all the world’s cameras have been focused on the capital’s Champs-Elysee, our swarm of yellow vests does not come from the metropolises, but from the forgotten peripheries, and the uprising continues with blockades in villages and towns up and down the country. Those of us who cannot spend our days and nights in the makeshift cabins that have popped up on occupied the roundabouts, or join those shutting down motorway toll gates, bring cakes, palettes for firewood, hot morning coffee or legal advice to those who have never disobeyed a law before.

In theatre, Act 5 is the final one, it either ends with catastrophe or victory. This Saturday the future of this rebellion is in the balance, this is why we are calling on you, across the world and beyond, to join us, to put on your yellow vests and take action in solidarity. In the past, France has already provided the spark that set light to the powder keg of history, and today’s sparks needs the breath from afar to keep it alight. This Saturday we need to show that Act 5 is not the last one and that we are still writing the script and becoming actors of our own lives.

In the lead up to Act 4, last Saturday (8th December), the French state tried to put out the fire with the weapon of fear, “people are going to come with guns…they are ready to kill” the Minister of Interior told the cameras. He announced France’s biggest police mobilisation since May 68 – 89,0000 officers across the country, twelve armored vehicles in Paris, helicopters firing tear gas, water cannons. “The republic is safe” he reassured the nation. Then they began to arrest and humiliate high school students rising up against the reform of the school system and people who had made call outs on the social media networks which have been the lifeblood of this uprising. But it did not work, we did not stay at home, tens of thousands of us came out for Act 4, and continued to call for Macron’s destitution. 1700 of us were arrested (hundreds as preventative arrests), over 200 injured, some journalists stopped from doing their work by the police and riots breaking out in several cities.

The elite, and their live TV channels are dumb struck, they try to label, to understand, they search for spokes people, a representative, clear demands. But they are looking for the old world, we are making the new one. Their greatest fear is that despite their attempts to split us, to claim we are far right, or far left, ‘violent hooligans’, ‘professionals of chaos’, the population remains with us, 72 percent, whilst only 18 percent are in favor of Macron, according to recent polls. To their ridiculous fantasy labels, many of us reply we are simply revolutionaries, we are those who were once nothing in the eyes of power, and now make it tremble.

On Monday night, President Macron, whose deep contempt has poured fuel on the fire, broke his aloof silence, 23 million watched him live as he tried do fein authority and calm the anger. He promised things he had promised never to fold on two days earlier: a small raise in minimum wage, no tax on overtime. (The petrol tax was already cut last week). He never mentioned the word ecology and made sure that the rich and capital would not be taxed. But few were duped by the crumbs he threw us, as the yellow jackets watched, every announcement was booed: “He doesn’t give a shit about us… Macron has not grasped the extent of what was happening,” said one to the press “we are now asking to change the system !”

Huddling around a bonfire in the middle of a roundabout, one of us reminded everyone about the force of friendship we have made this month, “We meet, we kiss. Our silence killed us.” he says “We’ve been silent too long. We were invisible. Yellow saved us.” Meanwhile scrawled on the walls and chanted everywhere are the words “we do not just want to survive, but to live”.

Last Saturday in Paris a cop, told one of us: “If you want to stay alive, go home.” His chilling words simply echo the violence that all governments are prepared to use when they feel like the people have become ungovernable. The yellow vest was once an everyday symbol of safety, a colour to avoid danger, now it has become a magic cloak of visibility, a fluorescent force that asks who will be in charge of safeguarding our fragile future, either those who see it as an opportunity to make money, increase their control of the population, or the people…

We were once invisible, just nothing, we are now everywhere…

Saturday 15 December, ACT 5 this time it’s intergalactic, block everything (especially French multinationals, symbols of the French state and banks in your territories).


La Maison du Peuple St Nazaire


As we finish this call to action, we hear that Egyptian authorities have ordered commercial outlets to restrict the sale of the yellow vests fearing that Egyptian protesters might copy us, especially in light of the eighth anniversary of the 2011 spring…


Read and spread the word in other languages:

Gramsci was Italy’s answer to Bogdanov

Since the 1960s and 70s Marxian thinkers came to believe that it was Gramsci who developed the first systematic ideas and concepts, building on Marx and Lenin’s ideas, on the issues of ideology and culture, and developed a unique conceptualization of hegemony, as an integral part of a theory of state and civil society. The influential contributions based on Gramsci readings of Althusser, Laclau, and Mouffe, Miliband, Poulantzas, Anderson, Frankfurt School theorists, cultural studies of Stuart Hall, French post-structuralists have come to inform the most important debates on the state, classes, ideology, MNCs, social movements, new imperialism so on.

However, below quotation from the preface to the English translation of the first ever Marxian Political Economy study book, by Alexander Bogdanov, shows clearly, that 30-40 years prior to Gramsci’s Prison Notebooks, there emerged the first-ever systematic study of ideology, culture, and social consciousness, both as an integral analysis or critique of the political economy, and as an independent study titled: The Science of Social Consciousness. Bogdanov’s conceptualization and the strategy of cultural hegemony and revolution clashed with Lenin’s concept and strategy of political hegemony and revolution. Anderson mistakenly identified that Lenin’s conceptualization and strategy, based on political dominance as the main influence on the ideas Gramsci later developed. However, it has become obvious since the 80s that Bogdanov’s work, which caused the notorious strategical rivalry with Lenin, actually was the main influence on Gramsci’s thought and

“The chapters on ideology in this and the other courses by no means serve as supplements to the main subject. Ideology is an instrument for organizing economic life an is consequently an important condition in economic development. Only within these limits and in this connection is it touched upon here. It is dealt with independently in a special textbook “The Science of Social Consciousness” which is written in a form similar to this.”

Download the book:

Against the Logistics of Exploitation (Stockholm Meeting, Nov 23-25) | Transnational Social Strike Platform

Continue reading

#Googlewalkout employee interviews | Vox


Nearly 17,000 Google employees walked off the job yesterday.

The Google walkout was about sexual harassment as well as a lack of transparency and accountability at the company, employees said.

Google employees in Cambridge, Massachusetts, join a worldwide walkout in protest of company policies on sexual harassment.
Lane Turner/Boston Globe via Getty Images

Nearly 17,000 Google employees walked off the job yesterday as part of a massive, worldwide protest against the company’s mishandling of sexual harassment cases.

The walkout, which was organized by seven Google employees, was a response to a New York Times report on the multimillion-dollar payouts offered to high-level employees who had been accused of sexual misconduct. Some protesters carried signs that read, “Happy to quit for $90m,” a reference to the exit package Google gave Andy Rubin, the creator of Android, who was forced to leave the company in 2014 after an employee accused him of forcing her to perform oral sex on him. “What do I do at Google? I work hard every day so the company can afford $90,000,000 payouts to execs who sexually harass my coworkers,” read another.

It was also an opportunity for Google employees — who have repeatedly clashed with senior management on a number of topics, from censorship in China to the company’s role in government projects — to put forth a vision for a better, more equitable company.

“A company is nothing without its workers,” the organizers wrote in a piece for the Cut. “From the moment we start at Google, we’re told that we aren’t just employees; we’re owners. Every person who walked out today is an owner, and the owners say: Time’s up.”

Some of the employees who chose to speak with me about why they protested asked to be referred to by a pseudonym and to not specify which campus they work at, but felt that it was important to come forward. Two of the three people who agreed to speak with me are men, as are nearly 70 percent of all Google employees, according to the company’s annual diversity report.

All of them emphasized that despite enjoying their jobs, they felt responsible for creating an environment where anyone could thrive, regardless of gender, race, or ethnicity, and where no one was afraid to report harassment or assault. They also referred to past Google controversies, like the sexual harassment reported by former Google software engineer Kelly Ellis, who quit the company in 2014 because of its “sexist culture”; and the fact that internal company communications, including a video from an all-hands meeting, were leaked to the right-wing website Breitbart.

Despite the massive size of the protests and the fact that Google sanctioned the walkout, support for it wasn’t universal. One employee told me that there were “people in the company who are against the walkout” and disagree with the organizers’ demands. (It’s worth noting that James Damore, the author of an “anti-diversity” manifesto who was fired in 2017, had plenty of ideological allies at the company.) Those who did participate in the walkout, though, view it as a necessary step in the ongoing fight toward equity and transparency at one of the world’s biggest companies.

Their responses have been condensed and edited for clarity.

Continue reading

Global Climate March on December 8: Climate Alarm

A proposition of international protest from France after the big succes of
the march for the climate in september 8 (more than 130 000 people) and
october 13:

The main platform calling is “It Is Still Time”

Facebook event

Facebook group

Facebook group for local organizators

Discord chat

34 events in France
Paris :
Albi :
Amiens :
Angers :
Angouleme :
Argenteuil :
Aubenas :
Auxerre :
Blois :
Bordeaux :
Boulogne Sur Mer :
Bourg en Bresse :
Charleville Mezières :
Grenoble :
La Rochelle :
Marseille :
Montélimar :
Montpellier :
Moulins :
Mulhouse :
Nice :
Orchies :
Rennes :
Roanne :
Saint Die :
Saintes :
Saint Etienne :
Saint Malo :
Senlis :
Tarbes :
Toulon :
Toulouse :
Uzès :
Vannes :

Thousands march across France to demand climate action

© François Guillot, AFP | More than 14,500 people marched against climate change in Paris on October 13, 2018

Tens of thousands of people marched in Paris and other major cities across France on Saturday to call for greater action on climate change.

Around 80 demonstrations were scheduled to be held nationwide on Saturday, from the northern city of Lille to Marseille, in the south of France.

The protests came a week after after an alarming United Nations report calling for urgent global action to avoid a climate catastrophe.

In Paris, an estimated 14,500 people marched from the central Opéra district to the historic Place de la République, according to the Occurrence research institute. The Paris police put the number much higher at 18,500, while organisers said that 50,000 people had turned out.

The huge crowds brandished colourful banners that read, “Change the system, not the climate” and “#ThereIsStillTime”.

An estimated 10,000 people took to the streets in eastern city of Lyon, while between 2,000 to 3,500 marched in southwestern Bordeaux. In Lille, the protest drew “more than 3,000”, according to police.

“The public outrage is justified because so many warnings are being ignored by governments around the world,” Rajendra Shende, chairman of the environmental organisation TERRE, told FRANCE 24.

The last major climate change protest in France – which drew an estimated 115,000 people nationwide, according to organisers – was held on September 8, a little more than a week after the country’s former environment minister Nicolas Hulot resigned from office, disappointed over the lack of progress on climate change and other issues.

Hulot was succeeded by François de Rugy, who hailed Saturday’s turnout as a “call to action”.

“I applaud those who marched for the climate this afternoon across France. Everyone’s mobilisation is a call to action!” he tweeted.


Proletkult (is back!), the fiction, by the Italian collective Wu Ming | via Noemi Ghetti

“Bogdanov imagined pulling out his revolver and shooting his heart. Then he would have tied the anchor to the corpse, he would have knocked it overboard, and he would have thrown the gun behind his body. The stories of Leonid Voloch would be lost forever at the bottom of the gulf. His journey on the socialist planet would have died with him. A philosophical story. A novel of science and fantasy that no one would ever read “.

The book

Moscow, 1927. Let your stories mingle with reality to the point where you come to life: is not this the secret dream of every narrator? This is what happens to Aleksandr Bogdanov, writer of science fiction, but also revolutionary, scientist and philosopher. While preparations are under way to celebrate the tenth anniversary of the October Revolution and the showdown between Stalin and his opponents is approaching, the author of the famous Red Star receives a visit from a character who seems to have come straight out of the pages of his novel. It is an opportunity to retrace the steps of a life lived on the edge of the abyss, between insurrections, exile and wars, chasing the ghost of an old lost companion along the way. A search that will deeply shake the convictions of a lifetime. “They head to the exit, passing between the models on display. The different rockets seem to reveal the provenance of their designers. That of Max Valier, South Tyrolean, is a spindle of metal and German will, with two stubby wings, similar to arms, each ending in a pointed missile. The spaceship of Federov is a tin whale, full of mysterious diverticula and extroflexed trumpets, which one imagines to navigate melancholy and Russian to other galaxies. Goddard’s lunar torpedo is a giant, no-frills, pragmatic, and Yankee bullet. The Esnault-Pelterie aircraft are butterflies of French elegance, while the four-stage rocket engine with a double reaction engine, of the Italian Gussalli, is baroque from the name ».


Original Italian text follows (above is Google translated)

Continue reading

The Class Strikes Back Self-Organised Workers’ Struggles in the Twenty-First Century

The Class Strikes Back

Series: Historical Materialism Book Series, Volume: 150

The Class Strikes Back examines a number of radical, twenty-first-century workers’ struggles. These struggles are characterised by a different kind of unionism and solidarity, arising out of new kinds of labour conditions and responsive to new kinds of social and economic marginalisation. The essays in the collection demonstrate the dramatic growth of syndicalist and autonomist formations and argue for their historical necessity. They show how workers seek to form and join democratic and independent unions that are fundamentally opposed to bureaucratic leadership, compromise, and concessions.

Specific case studies dealing with both the Global South and Global North assess the context of local histories and the spatially and temporally located balance of power, while embedding the struggle in a broader picture of resistance and the fight for emancipation.

Contributors are: Anne Alexander, Dario Azzellini, Mostafa Bassiouny, Antonios Broumas, Anna Curcio, Demet S. Dinler, Kostas Haritakis, Felix Hauf, Elias Ioakimoglou, Mithilesh Kumar, Kari Lydersen, Chiara Milan, Carlos Olaya, Hansi Oostinga, Ranabir Samaddar, Luke Sinwell, Elmar Wigand.


Publication Date: 3 January 2018


YouTubers Union! | via Felix Stalder

Welcome to the official homepage of the YouTubers Union!

We are a community based movement that fights for the rights of YouTube Creators and Users. Our core demands are:

  • Monetize everyone – Bring back monetization for smaller channels.
  • Disable the bots – At least verified partners have the right to speak to a real person if you plan to remove their channel.
  • Transparent content decisions – Open up direct communication between the censors (“content department”) and the Creators.
  • Pay for the views – Stop using demonetized channels as “bait” to advertise monetized videos. 
  • Stop demonetization as a whole – If a video is in line with your rules, allow ads on an even scale.
  • Equal treatment for all partners – Stop preferring some creators over others. No more “YouTube Preferred”. 
  • Pay according to delivered value – Spread out the ad money over all YouTubers based on audience retention, not on ads next to the content.
  • Clarify the rules – Bring out clear rules with clear examples about what is OK and what is a No-No.

Everyone is welcome to join – we need you! No matter if you are PewDiePie or just a user.
You don’t have to pay any money and you have zero obligations.
You can join us simply be becoming a member of our Facebook group and/or by joining our forum.

United We Stand!
Jörg Sprave
– Initiator –

On  2nd March 2018 Jörg Sprave released a video entitled “Creators, Users… To Arms! Join the YouTubers Union.” The Youtube union was Born, It was created as a way to give Youtube creators a voice. The goal being to encourage, or force Youtube to consider the opinions or creators and recognise their important contribution to the platform. When Jörg first announced his intention to form a union there was a flood of support from large and small creators as well as viewers. The main purpose of the Union is to give creators a voice which is loud enough to matter to Youtube, one that is loud enough that it cannot be ignored.

Jörg has made it clear that he intends to run the Union as a democracy, operating as it’s leader only for as long as it is required to facilitate the Union’s foundation. Afterwards there would be a leadership vote and decisions made on a management structure as the need arises. In the short term it is far more important that we recognise the need to talk with one voice, rather than deciding the specifics of our goals. Jörg did lay out some goals as a starting point in his original video in order to get the ball rolling and he has bee instrumental in both organising the formation of the union and encouraging participation and discussion as we move forward in deciding the next steps to take.

Here is Jörg’s original video

For more information you can check out the Youtubers Union Forum, or the Facebook Group.

‘Nothing to lose but your chains’ – Rethinking Global Labour: After Neoliberalism via Linda Clark


RONALDO MUNCK, in conversation with Rebecca Gumbrell-McCormick.

Friday 2nd November, 6pm, Room 101, 30 Russell Square, Birkbeck, University of London.

Post-financial crisis, many have bemoaned the demise of labour as a political force given relentless globalization and the increased insecurity and precarious nature of employment for many workers. In his new book, Ronaldo Munck challenges this view and heralds a new era in which a new global working class and their organizations can resist capitalism’s onslaught. Join us for a discussion of the challenges and opportunities for workers in the UK and worldwide. Contributions from the floor are encouraged and there will be plenty of time for questions and discussion.

RONALDO MUNCK is Head of Civic Engagement at Dublin City University and a Visiting Professor of International Development at the University of Liverpool and St. Mary’s University, Nova Scotia. He has authored or edited more than 30 books on topics related to globalization, international development and social movements, including Contemporary Latin America, Marx 2020: After the Crisis and ‘Rethinking Global Labour’ (Agenda Publishing, 2018)

REBECCA GUMBRELL-MCCORMICK is Senior Lecturer in Management, Birkbeck, University of London. She is the author, with Richard Hyman, of ‘Trade Unions in Western Europe: Hard Times, Hard Choices.’


Rethinking Global Labour was published in September 2018. It is part of the ‘Building Progressive Alternatives’ series from Agenda Publishing.

‘A much needed book … should be read by everyone interested in understanding and building a truly international labour movement.’ – Melanie Simms, University of Glasgow

‘A remarkable book. It is a powerful call for labour to return to its social movement origins and fulfil its historic role in a post-globalized world.’ – Edward Webster, University of Witwatersrand

‘A wide-ranging, multidimensional and thoughtful discussion of the future for the workers of the world.– Goran Therborn, University of Cambridge

From the Introduction:

‘Traditionally, both industrial relations theory and the somewhat pessimistic tradition of Western Marxism have a tendency to view workers as passive and trade unions as purely reactive organizations. Yet all the factors that have led to a decline in labour’s power in developing countries – such as offshoring, restructuring and lean production – have also led to a recomposition of labour on an international scale and the creation of new forms of organization that challenge and resist the worst of capitalism’s onslaught.

Today – as workers, – be they settled or migrants, rural or urban – face an economic order that has had no clear strategy since the 2007-2009 crisis, they are forced increasingly to seek alliances across geographical regions and gender, age, race and ethnic divides. By joining together, not only do they stand to lose their chains but they can also be part of constructing another more humane world.’

The University of Westminster is a charity and a company limited by guarantee. Registration number: 977818 England. Registered Office: 309 Regent Street, London W1B 2HW.

This message and its attachments are private and confidential. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender and remove it and its attachments from your system.

The rapid spread of wildcat strikes in China is mapped!

China’s move into a “mixed economy” has created a wealth inequality crisis to rival any nation’s; wildcat workers’ strikes (aided by Young Communist movements) have become increasingly common, though they are not often reported in the news (it helps that Chinese state media and the country’s official censors suppress these reports).

The Hong Kong-based China Labor Bulletin maintains a map of all these strikes, which you can drill down into for news and other detail. As Naked Capitalism notes, it’s instructional to view the map as a time-series by filtering it by year; looking at the rise and rise of strikes from 2011 to 2018 paints a picture of a country in real upheaval.

You can also export the data from the map in a structured format, which should be very useful for a certain kind of scholar or activist.

via Cory Doctorow’s blog 


How tech workers became activists, leading a resistance movement that is shaking up Silicon Valley

Employees at Apple, Google, Microsoft and other tech companies are discovering their power to bend the trajectory of multibillion-dollar corporations.

When news broke in December 2016 that then president–elect Donald Trump would meet with some of the tech world’s most prominent CEOs—Apple’s Tim Cook, Alphabet’s Larry Page, Microsoft’s Satya Nadella, and Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, among them—many tech workers were furious. In an industry that draws talent and ideas from around the world, Trump’s anti-immigrant campaign promises were abhorrent, and just meeting with him seemed like a tacit endorsement of these views.

His promises of mass deportations and a Muslim ban raised additional alarms for some: “If you’re going to target a sector of the population, it requires a database and collecting information on people,” says software engineer Ka-Ping Yee, who worked at the mobile money-transfer platform Wave during the election. “[Databases are] a necessary component of that particular evil.” And who was better poised to build them than the highly skilled engineers of Silicon Valley?

So Yee was heartened when his friend (and fellow Canadian) Leigh Honeywell, then a security manager at Slack, enlisted him to help draft a statement to both the incoming administration and tech leaders that Silicon Valley’s rank and file were not on board. “We were seeing what felt like a new energy in tech-employee organizing,” says Honeywell, who had volunteered for the Hillary Clinton campaign. The result was the Never Again pledge, signed by 2,843 engineers, designers, and other workers at companies including Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, and Microsoft. Referencing the role of IBM’s punch-card technology in Holocaust record-keeping, the signatories vowed not to participate in the creation of any targeted databases for the U.S. government. And they laid out a playbook for worker-led resistance: Raise issues with leadership, whistle-blow, protest, and—as a last resort—resign.

Continue reading

Gramsci nel cieco carcere degli eretici/Gramsci in the blind prison of the heretics by Noemi Ghetti


via Gramsci nel cieco carcere degli eretici/Gramsci in the blind prison of the heretics by Noemi Ghetti

Gramsci in the blind prison of the hereticsBy Noemi Ghetti


downloadAmong the pages of Quaderni: Prison notebooks, the “Dante notes” on the Canto of the Heretics(Q 4, 78-88) give us access to the human, intellectual and political life of Antonio Gramsci.

In his outline of Quaderni on February 8, 1929, while Mussolini was ratifying the Lateran Treaty, concordat regulating relations between State and Church, the essay on Canto X of Dante’s Inferno was being written throughout 1930-32, after Stalin’s totalitarian revolt and the fracture between Gramsci and his comrades in the prison of Turi.

Uniquely, thanks mainly to the exchange of correspondence which, through Tatiana Schucht and the economist Piero Sraffa, went from Turi to Cambridge to Moscow, the notes were read and commented on by Togliatti precisely while the figure of Gramsci, canonized in April 1931 at the congress in Cologne, was being forced out of the public scene of the party.

Promising philologist and linguist in his university days, Gramsci questions the abstract interpretation of Benedetto Croce, the “secular pope” who by distinguishing structure from poetry, intellectual activity from life, becomes the “leader of revisionism”.

Contemporarily, through the translation of the works of young Marx, we find Gramsci’s analysis of the theoretic roots of Marxism and the crystallization in economisation of the structure and sub-structure of historical materialism.

The analysis of the Canto on the irreducible atheists who refuse the immortality of the soul is a new model of literary criticism: close relations, political passion, theological research and the cultural battle come together in his writing in an extraordinary praxis of prison life which, while his solitude becomes extreme, becomes more and more universal. Political tragedy and personal drama intertwine, like Cavalcanti and Farinata in Dante’s Canto, also in the extraordinary comment by Gramsci, who unveils, through the conflict between Cavalcanti and Dante that constitutes the enigmatic plot of the famous verses, an analogy to his conflict with Togliatti.  Hidden behind the protagonists is Dante’s mortal struggle with Cavalcanti, master and friend, poet and atheist philosopher, and the conversion from love seen as physical passion with which the Italian language was born in 1200, to Christian love. Gramsci returns to the origins of secular Catholic hegemony, directing his studies, Quaderni, on the “question of language” and the history of Italian intellectuals, and laying the foundations for an elaboration of the revolutionary and still modern question of cultural hegemony from the base, as a struggle to express a new secular humanism.

Translation by ©Matilda Colarossi



Noemi Ghetti’s writings include literary criticism and historical novels:  Il principe diabolic: La storia di Niccolò Machiavelli (Nuove Edizioni Romane, 1997), translated in 2012 in Slovenian for Založba Ark, and Storie di eroi greci e romani. Dalle ‘Vite parallele’ di Plutarco (II ed. 2008). She writes for daily and weekly magazines (Left, Il Sogno della farfalla,, Babylon Post, Cronache laiche, Formiche e Madrelingua, trimonthly supplement in «Pagine della Dante».                                               

She has worked on the transposition of classics for readings and musical dramas: these include Kaspar Hauser based on the memoires of Anselm Von Feuerbach, first presented in 2011 at the National Opera Theatre in Tirana.                                                                                                    

In 2011 she published L’ombra di Cavalcanti e Dante, and in 2014 Gramsci nel cieco carcere degli eretici, both with L’Asino d’oro Edizioni.



James D. White and the Red Hamlet…

Media of Marx and RussiaIn series of books and articles, James D. White have been building a strong and ground-breaking argument regarding Marx, Marxism, Marxist methodology, Marx’s theory of history and how and why his life project of critique of political economy was not competed and remained as “Das Capital”, could not expand on theorising State and World market, and forming an integral whole. With his 2018, Marx and Russia: The Fate of a Doctrine, White culminates his life work and set forward his argument. In doing so he does not only breakes a new ground for the study of Marx and Marxism, Russia and Russian Revolution, White also sets the modern history on its feet, clarifies key misconceptions generated by acts and non-acts of figures like Marx and Engels themselves, and others like Plekhanov, Lenin, Stalin, and Trotsky too. He brings back lost figures like Kovalevsky, Sieber, and finally Bogdanov and fixes a major cracks in the history, generated mainly by the official soviet histography, or historians of Marxism, who did not effort and go back to the original sources to uncover stuff and kept reproducing same misconceptions through generations.

The below are James D. White’s 1996 and 2001 books, in which he sets out this argument and presents sea of evidences.

Karl Marx and the Intellectual Origins of Dialectical Materialism (1996)Image result for Red Hamlet Bogdanov…

Lenin: The Practice and Theory of Revolution (2001)…

I could not find a pdf version of his 1994 The Russian Revolution 1917-1921: A Short History

Here is the link to White’s 2018 Marx and Russia:
And finally, his forthcoming book, in November 2018, is the first ever written and published intellectual history of Alexander Bogdanov, Red Hamlet: The Life and Ideas of Alexander Bogdanov (

Peoples of the World, stand up, assemble, and unite for peace, for life, and for dignity!

To the peoples and communities of the World

Stand up, assemble, and unite for peace, for life, and for dignity!

Those who rule the global economy and national states, liberal or conservative capitalist classes and factions in the West have been for long pursuing their own program and agenda to counter the rise of Chinese as well as other contending capitalist classes from Russia, India, Brazil, and others.

The contestation of one sides program to the program and agenda of the other, liberal / conservative, globalist ruling class factions ended up major conflicts in Eastern Europe, Africa, Middle East, South America and the Pacific. Leaving behind millions of death of innocent people and children and destroying nature and wealth that belongs to all.

In this fight of elephants, by forming and funding alliances, by covert operations, by proxy and drone wars; states using of armed terror groups and fake news has became normal. Surveillance, deception, manipulation, torture, and taking lives without punishment replaced consent based bourgeois democratic form of politics.

Engagement of part of ‘progressive left’ and ‘left liberals’, as well as left-right wing libertarians, some segment of anarchist and communitarian groups, have not only resulted in wide mistrust to alternative liberal-humanist politics in general, hence also caused the failure and expansion of the extreme, right wing, and fascist politics and politicians.

Fall of the liberals and lefts gave way to the rise of right-authoritarian politicians as Trump, Putin, Netanyahu, Erdogan, May, Le Pen, Orban, Wilders, but also this lead to the emergence of groups like ISIS and others across the world.

All resulting in expansion of conflict and wars in the periphery of the falling Western Empire.

At the end, the entire world was brought once more to the brink of yet another inter-capitalist and imperialist world war; where a massive nuclear arsenal can be unleashed and put into use to massacre billions of innocent people globally.

Today it appears even in mainstream media as if that the target of spreading wars is about stopping China or Russia, as well as other rising ruling class factions that capitalist system fostered. Yet in reality the real war has been on, the never ending ‘war on terror’ has been ultimately a war at billions of ordinary people. Unemployed, insecure, exploited, indigenous, gay, lesbian, women, men, and from all ethnic back ground.

The global liberal elite has been managing the chaos and financing wars for the benefit of its  own class fraction. Such interest was for a while about establishing a ‘global good governance’, that meant sort of soft imperialism backed by just wars and interventions justified only for the capitalist West.

The result have been everywhere the rapid increasing of military conflicts and erupting of the clashes between local, national and global ruling class factions, turning many countries into blood bath though wars, at the end of the day, launched on the innocent and oppressed governed people.

What got clear today is that a global war, spectacle, this time will be directed on China and Russia, and is about to be triggered and launched either with a false flag or covert action, like Douma Gas attack, as it was the case for the first and second word wars, may be in coming days or hours.

What would a launch of such a global war mean for the masses of oppressed peoples and communities in Europe, the US, and globally is nothing else than the expansion of the tragedies and destruction we have been witnessing with the imperialist wars in Africa, Middle East, Eastern Europe, and inner Asia, since the 90s.

The most important lesson one can get from the past experiences and from the experiences of the last decades, is that not that any program or campaign launched -neither by intellectual left nor its global liberal elite- with the purpose of gaining counter hegemonic political power, would be able to stop this coming war.

Such effective action for peace can only be led by those upon whom this global war is really launched.

Thus the remaining time for the peoples of the world are extremely limited and precious

This can be the real final count-down, and the war can begin in hours.

What you will do now will be historically decisive for all of the humanity, if not for entire life on earth.

This can be our last call, for all times.

That is why we urge all, whoever reads this call, to get energize and get yourself organized. Design and set forth your own local, national, and international action, assemblies and/or permanent networks to stop this war on all of us.

To discuss the ways and possibilities for stopping the coming world war, and for transcending the social and economic system that is may be about the destroy, at least, the human life on earth.

We beg you to connect with each other, face to face, not on facebook or twitter, and with other’s actions, assemblies and networks in mutual respect, love, solidarity, while recognizing each other’s individual – personal and collective autonomy, cultural and ideational differences.

Please keep your self-respect and creativity, while looking for ways and tools to deliver your findings and decisions in touch, together with others’ and forming coherent and homogenous regional and international bodies. That can become a critical mass and deliver accessible message and vision, with strong and universal expressions of such collaboration and solidarity for common humanity.

The day is the day to build a common humanity and rise together, for not only our own survival but for getting a final chance to create genuine wold in dignity.

One for all, all for one

Listen and share the audio version of the call


Emergence of Transnational Managerial Class | an update

Tektology is a comprehensive methodology. Upgrading Dialectic and Historical Materialism of Marx and Engels, with Energetics of Mach and Ostwald, it was founded by Lenin’s most important challenger Alexander Bogdanov Malinowski, between the late 1890s and 1920s. It was developed as a radical critic of Taylor’s Scientific Management yet beyond that in order to look at the entire universe and all its properties from an ‘organizational’ and ‘class’ points of view; in order to discover and study common/general patterns and mechanisms in the emergence, transformation, evolution, and demise of all complex elements and systems forming human experience, and rebuilt it in an emancipatory way. Although it is recognized as the forerunner of the modern Cybernetics of Norbert Wiener, and the General Systems Theory of Ludwig von Bertalanffy, some claims that Tektology was going further then the two and foreseeing many later discoveries made in these latter fields, following the developments in the 20th century.

This evolving project aims at visualizing and mapping the connections and dots for a longitudinal analysis of the emergence of a Transnational Managerial Class; which has been emerging form the early 20th century; the time of Tektology and the scientist-intellectuals in the West; from revolutionary Russian intelligentsia turned into Nomenklatura- to the management gurus and futurists of the post-war period: such as James Burnham, Peter Drucker, Alvin Toffler, Jeremy Rifkin. Tracing such agency until today, the research aims at making off such a transnational class, emerging within and between ideologies and planning practices of communism and capitalism. Such a class might finally be asserting itself as the agency of a new global ruling class fraction, with the eruption of 2007-8 crisis and claiming the commanding heights for itself. Doing so by declaring that it would be able to lead the world to an alternative route beyond capitalism: Post-capitalist world. With the concomitant rise of ‘cyber-imperialism’, at the current highest stage of capitalism, we might be witnessing this new class confronting the transnational and national capitalist class fractions as well as the emergent ‘collective worker. Therefore, the history of neoliberalism and rise of global governance may be about to become the history of the endgame for the current mode of production. The “collective worker”, agency of the global working class/proletariat, that would be the one challenging and contesting the alternative route to capitalism for its own terms. Providing an alternative to both the global capitalism vision as the agency of the ancient regime holds on; or the cybernetic ‘post-capitalist’ managerial system which is promoted by this emergent new global ruling class candidate.

For our argument’s sake, the form of organization for such class agency will be traced and mapped too. This form is the established network form, around which managerial classes agency is linked to, fused with, and convert those heads of corporations and state apparatus, the state-society complex: in academia, military, trade unions and NGOs, policy groups, etc. While the Corporation, and Corporate Governance are legal manifestation of such organizational form in the business dimension of the ‘civil society’; the WB, IMF, OECD, UN Agencies (as transnational quasi-state apparatus) and policy planing think-tanks: like Council of Foreign Relations, New American, Bilderberg, Trilateral Commission, WEF, Open Society, Open Knowledge, New Economy Foundations, etc. are manifestations of such form in the political realm.