August 13, 2016 - No. 31

Historic Anniversaries

August Celebrations

• The Need to Act Is Now, Consciously
- Ideological Studies Centre -

Historic Anniversaries

August Celebrations

In the month of August, the Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist) celebrates several historic anniversaries. It organizes specific activities which highlight the significance of these events which, since 1963, have made CPC(M-L) into the kind of Party it is today. Its aim is always to take a pause to appreciate its achievements, rekindle the revolutionary drive which guides its work and celebrate the profound mass democratic and revolutionary spirit which imbues its life and work.

One important anniversary the Party marks every year is the historic Necessity for Change Conference held in London, England, in August 1967. That meeting adopted the Necessity for Change Analysis on which CPC(M-L) was founded. The Necessity for Change analysis begins with a determined and thoroughgoing offensive against ideological subversion and block to development through social forms. It does so by giving the most revolutionary call, "understanding requires an act of conscious participation of the individual, an act of finding out," placing action in the first place and understanding in its service.

Hardial Bains addresses Necessity for Change Conference in London, England, August 1967.

This analysis led to the reorganization of The Internationalists as a Marxist-Leninist youth and student movement. The Internationalists was the precursor organization of CPC(M-L) founded by Hardial Bains at the University of British Columbia March 13, 1963. The Necessity for Change Analysis opened a way forward for the youth and student movement at that time allowing it to become a worthy contingent of the communist and workers' movement.

Founder and Leader of CPC(M-L) Hardial Bains, addresses the Chertsey meeting.

Another important anniversary whose significance grows more profound with the passage of time, is the historic meeting held in Chertsey, Quebec from August 15-19, 1989. At the time the Chertsey meeting took place, the world was on the eve of being plunged into the retreat of revolution with the collapse of the former Soviet Union and the regimes in Eastern Europe. The Chertsey meeting affirmed the orientation the Party had adopted in 1985, that no individual, collective or social force could act in the old way but had to find their bearings in the new conditions of the retreat of revolution. In Chertsey, on behalf of the Party, its leader Hardial Bains boldly reaffirmed the character of CPC(M-L) to march on courageously under all conditions and circumstances as it has always done, despite whatever treachery and betrayal should rear its head. CPC(M-L) has consistently shown its convictions through its deeds, its constant preparations to lead and determination to uphold the Marxist-Leninist line, Comrade Bains pointed out.

Special attention will also be paid to the role of leadership. It is one of the themes which will be discussed in the course of celebrations of the 90th birthday of the historic leader of the Cuban Revolution, Comrade Fidel Castro.

On the occasion of the August celebrations, the Central Committee of CPC(M-L) sends its revolutionary greetings to all the Party organizations and members, and to all those involved in the crucial work to open society's path to progress. Across the country, Party members and activists are preparing for the battles which lie ahead, confident in the road of the Party. Never has their contribution to making new breakthroughs been more important. Never have they been better served by the model set by CPC(M-L) and its founder and leader Hardial Bains who declared:

We Are Our Own Models!
The Issue Is Not to Wave the Red Flag but to Show Our Colours Through Our Deeds!

The Need to Act Is Now, Consciously

- Presentation by Ideological Studies Centre to The Dialectic Lives! Seminar, Ottawa, August 15-17, 2007 -

Relations and Thinking Them Through

Understanding requires an act of conscious participation of the individual, an act of finding out. How many times have we read this; how many times have we said this; how many times have we heard this and thought about it? Here is an experience recounted by a comrade:

"Building the banner for the Necessity for Change! Seminar, I originally remembered the quote as 'Understanding requires the conscious participation of the individual, an act of finding out.' But when I looked up the quotation it actually reads 'understanding requires an act of conscious participation of the individual, an act of finding out.' Now I was faced with a question: what is the importance of stressing an act of conscious participation of the individual?"

This experience posed a problem, but what is its nature? In this new period of retreat of revolution it has often been repeated that all social forces and individuals must act in a new way. We cannot simply go back to the written text, go back to the classics (and Necessity for Change! is such a classic for us) and repeat things by rote. Nor can we simply rely on our memory. All of us can offer our opinion on what is in the text, what is in our memory. We might be right or wrong but so what? It doesn't go anywhere. We might feel edified when we have correct things to say but it does not help us change the situation.

The issue is not one of memories, readings, opinion rendered as abstract thought but rather a question of motivation and outlook. Which prevails? Does the capitalist motive to protect and enlarge private capital reign supreme or does the motive of the working class to seek truth from facts to serve the people prevail? Is the dominant vision one of defending the status quo with its empty values and anachronistic concepts or is it one of taking up concrete problems to solve and organizing to change the world within an outlook provided by arguing out modern definitions?

The author's preface to the 1998 edition of the Necessity for Change! pamphlet places "action in the first place and understanding in its service. In doing so the Internationalists smashed the prevailing bankrupt notion of placing understanding as the prelude, a precondition to action. If an individual, collective or both are to have any understanding, action is its precondition. This action is considered not merely a thing-in-itself divorced from everything else but 'an act of conscious participation,' 'an act of finding out.' This revolutionary pamphlet not only puts action in the first place but also stresses the quality of participation and the action according to a plan known as 'Action with Analysis.'"

Understanding is not merely gaining personal information but the thinking needed to see what the conditions are and how to change the situation in a way favourable to the people. If our thinking, whether in the form of feelings, memories or thoughts etc., is detached from the conditions of life then we are deprived not only of the information that comes from the conditions but blocked from grasping how to view the situation, which is our necessary perspective. Without being able to see the connection between the conditions and how to view the situation (our perspective), the rulers who have usurped power by force will impose their thinking and outlook (their perspective). This alien perspective of the ruling class coupled with lack of information of the conditions effectively negate acts of conscious participation of individuals, acts of finding out, and deny as relevant the experience, memory and thinking of the working class and its allies.

Conditions are simply what exist, subjectively and objectively. In our conditions of life we respond to what we have in place, to what we require and to what is missing. The powers-that-be supply understanding of conditions in the form of preconceived notions coercively, compulsively and repetitively. Over and over again the clamour is repeated: "There is no alternative; greed and ruling classes have existed since time immemorial; human nature cannot be changed; the world is unknowable," ad nauseam. These notions are asserted and imposed to condition the working class and its allies to respond in anti-conscious ways, to act against their own interests. These preconceived notions prevent us from seeing what the actual situation and conditions are and what needs to be changed, and divert us from taking action to change the world and bring in the new. From the moment of birth we are being conditioned and trained by parents, schools, other institutions and the general din of the prevailing culture, especially in ideology and social form, to fit into the status quo and not question why things are the way they are.

As youth we are deprived of our facility to have our own aspirations. We are supposed to fit into others' expectations for us. Our responses are geared towards being no more than reflex reactions. These reactions are so deeply ingrained that our responses are immediate and require no deep thinking, a form of anti-consciousness. Our muscles move in a certain way, our emotions well up in a prescribed way, air escapes our mouths in the shape of words in a way conditioned by those who hold power, and all occurring without us giving it a single profound thought. In fact, we are led to believe this ensemble of conditioned responses is our own thought and understanding.

Emphasizing that an act of conscious participation, an act of finding out is a precondition to understanding is not merely calling attention to a sequence of events -- first act and then understand. Emphasizing that understanding requires an act of conscious participation directs our attention to the possibility of subverting the conditioned responses that are imposed on us, which see things and conditions as just happening to us and block us from being proactive. In our present conditions, it is extremely important to respond and resist and take stands against all the aggressions and anti-people policies of the powers-that-be. We discuss, demonstrate, protest, organize, communicate and carry out exposés. Immersing ourselves in the problems that are present in the current situation and looking for solutions and going into action over and over again to change the conditions orientate our responses to break with the status quo. The Necessity for Change! program was put forward to facilitate this break with the old by placing the development of the subjective factor for revolution at the centre of all work and by taking up the question of organization and the remoulding of our world outlook. The connection is revealed between our thinking and how we view the actual situation and conditions, what needs to be changed and how to organize to bring in the new. According to the Necessity for Change! analysis we cannot live split lives with revolutionary thoughts on the one hand and bourgeois lifestyle and culture on the other with their assault on social consciousness and promotion of narcissistic and egocentric individualism.

The Here and Now

The conditions exist as a vocation, a calling. Our life activities are conditional to time and space. The call of the times is to take up as our occupation what the conditions are telling us and position ourselves within the space for change.

In opposition to the reality that our life activities are conditional to time and space, those who have usurped power by force insist that their notions on life's activities are timeless. Based on some primeval idea detached from the actual situation, the here and now, the powers-that-be contend the only change possible is through external force. This may be an asteroid that supposedly wiped out the dinosaurs or some avian flu, nuclear war, or global warming that could spell the demise of humans. Like the dinosaurs we are supposed to accept this apocalyptic future without a say-so. This is unacceptable! We vehemently reject the notion of timelessness and spacelessness. Our view holds that everything comes into being and passes away. Without matter, there is no motion and without motion, matter would collapse. Time and space are not things, they are the conditions of the mode of being; things and phenomena reveal themselves conditional to time and space.

The starting point is simply to raise the question. Where to begin? The Necessity for Change! analysis and program exists; it is known, something you can identify. It is an object and has a history. It is a pamphlet, a program; it has had different affects, influences and a history. So you recognize that it exists but which one of these aspects is crucial? Are you going to say how you read it and this is what it meant to you?

We must acknowledge the subject of our approach to Necessity for Change! The process of learning, of knowing must be acknowledged. Our approach to this Necessity for Change! must be without mediation. In this regard we are acknowledging the subject of our approach. That must also be, in that sense, without mediation. Our approach does not centre on what is known and on what is already written but on the question of knowing, of learning. We must be receptive. We receive information. We do not alter what is providing that information. That means we acknowledge both the Necessity for Change! and our approach, without mediation. They present themselves. The starting point must be the present. It is the result and starting point of history. Our historiography does not have its starting point in the past even though we are talking about the period from 1967 to 2007. We are receiving information about how the here and now presents itself. We know, we have read it many times and heard it said (and it is in the author's preface) the starting point is the present. But if we stop there, we fall into the same trap of anti-consciousness. We take something correct and turn it into an empty slogan. So what does the "I" do? What is the relation of the "I" and the Necessity for Change!? How do we activate this "I" in the here and now?

The present objectively exists. There is an object, a book in front of you, Necessity for Change!, or this program or this gathering of people who came to talk about Necessity for Change! This particular book, this singular thing, this singular experience, it is something you can point your finger at (indexical). It has its own particular concrete content. It is an object. And because we can point at it, this concrete thing, we are certain it exists. We confront it, we acknowledge it, nothing more than that. So let's take this Necessity for Change!, an act which seems so simple. It is a book, you can hold it up and look at it, turn it around, open the pages, see all the vocabulary. We already know it is filled with all these phrases. What are we to make of these words strung together in phrases? We know, and it says so, it is a summation of a particular historical period and experience. We know it is the basis of a whole program of action. We also know it has a very rich history. In fact, it is history making. It gave rise to an organization, an outlook; it became the thought material and contributed to raising the consciousness of the individuals who took up its program and acquired its outlook -- all those past and present, those who have carried on with it and those who have rejected it.

We are members of society. We participate as members with different levels of consciousness in that society. In that society, the individuals who are participating more or less consciously create a social being. A social being has history. Necessity for Change! was written in the midst of the cold war, chronologically at its midpoint. Now is the period of the post-cold war -- the demise of the bipolar division of the world. There is still imperialism and people are still seeking liberation from imperialism. This is the period. But what is the relation that "I" have to this history? What relation do "I" have to all the other "I"s? When we start to look at this we see the great complexity. It is overwhelming. Where do we start? Is it my particular understanding, history, experiences of different collectives, of others? Everything excludes us by force from participating in that history.

Similarly we could look at the particular history of Necessity for Change! It is a document, program, seminars... But whatever it is there is something there that has a crucial difference that is essential. And that is that there is this "I" that faces this overwhelming complexity, and faces this objective history, this object that is the overwhelming complexity. It is being called "history as such," with all its ready-made prejudices and rationalizations that are supposed to explain our place in it with no active role but with a crucial difference -- there is this "I," this objective history and this being, and they are not things merely in my mind. They actually exist. And they exist not as separate things and phenomena, this "I," this consciousness of the situation, and then the situation. They exist in this instant. Neither one nor the other stands alone in the present but in relation. This instant is now. This now is where past and present clash. Will this "I" be overwhelmed by the anti-consciousness of the old relations holding back development? Or will "I" play a role in this history? The "I" will only be activated to play a role to the extent that it rejects anti-consciousness. And at the heart of anti-consciousness are the notions of timelessness and spacelessness.

In the 17th century the thesis was advanced that "I think therefore I am." Two substances were presupposed, one of matter, the extended substance, the other of consciousness, the thinking substance. Matter was defined in terms of space, and time was defined in terms of the duration of space. The thinking substance, thought, was seen as distinct from material bodies and processes and independent of space and time.

The connection of physical and thinking substances (matter and consciousness) required an external mediator, God, or what have you. Once the mediation was left out, the notion of the relationship of matter and consciousness lost coherence. Thinking appeared without connection to time and space except through mediation. This presented a problem for the people seeking insight into their own situation and their own thinking, by placing thought beyond where it could be reached.

Will the Necessity for Change!, which objectively exists, remain out of reach or will it become the basis for action with analysis. Importantly, what will be the perspective? The Here and Now is where the conflict of perspective or outlook takes place. In this instant, this now, is where through my connection to this question of Necessity for Change! and this history both exist. Only through this connection can this "I" become a conscious "I."

At this moment "I" and the Necessity for Change! exist. Which is in the primary place? If you place "I" in the primary place and say that "I" am the starting point and "I" am having this profound thinking about Necessity for Change! as my subject matter and I have such profound opinions, you will actually be left with "I am" and that is all. On the one hand you have "I am" and on the other you have "I am interpreting, I am describing, I am such a good person." It is literally "I am" and nothing else. There is not even a hint of "I's" self-movement, "I's" own history, experience. And there is nothing about "I's" now or then having an experience. It is the egocentric "I" without past or present. This could not possibly be the consciousness we were talking about. This "I" appears as if it transcends nature and society, comes from beyond. We are not in the business of peddling the beyond, the supernatural in whatever form; we are here with an interest in the here and now.

If we do not take up this question of the here and now in this instance, we will be left simply with history out there, history as such. And we will be left with the possibility only of "going out which is the root cause of discord," all the way to the stage of going out of our minds. It is the now, the decisive moment that anchors us in the present. This moment here and now is the connection to society and its history. In this moment is concentrated all the relations, transitions, directions of the movements, how fast things are going forward or regressing.

Whether a thing or phenomenon is possible (for example if we say another world is possible) depends on its content, the sum total of moments it moves through. The motion is within the moment then it passes away and then the next moment comes into being, etc. The order of the sequences of successive here and nows (the succession) is what is important. A moment, now, might be measured in years or nanoseconds; it is the order of succession that is significant. Furthermore, a thing or phenomenon's development and change reveal itself as that moment in the here and now. It is through the order of succession, of movement that the laws of development and the necessity for change are expressed.

The "I" is a universal, meaning it is nobody's personal property. It carries all possibilities for changing the situation both positive and negative. Consciousness resides in that "I," which is a universal. That "I" is the conscious "I." The act of conscious participation of the individual in the act of finding out is the conscious "I."

The "I" that has only personal understanding in-itself remains passive or worse egocentric and in contradiction with the "I" that is a universal and conscious.

In the here and now is where the "I" sees the cover-up, the lies, the rationalizations and justifications provided by those who have usurped power by force. In this here and now, the "I" becomes activated; the "I" feels alive. If the "I" sees the cover-up and does not actively resist and the "I" does not vigorously seek truth to serve people, then that here and now becomes a moment of indifference, passivity and unconcern. That indifferent "I" no longer has this moment as a moment of life but lives only for the moment, which is indifferent to the "I" and everything else. That "I" becomes passive to the point of going crazy unconcerned.

In the here and now the active "I" recognizes a crisis, a turning point; now is the time and place. Now, seize the time. Here is the rose now dance! If someone is sick, are they going to get better or worse? That is the turning point; that is the crisis. The "I" is the agent of the crisis. Will "I" become indifferent or activated? The crisis will make you or break you; it is the same crisis either way. That "I" as relate confronts the crisis. It is the moment of decision towards indifference or activation. That there is a crisis is not a question of choice. It is independent of will. But the will to be, which is fundamental, has the possibility of activation by seizing this moment of decision. The moment is now.

Consciousness and Anti-Consciousness

Anti-Consciousness pervades everything; it is the old thought. The way to reject this old thought is by working out a perspective right now by arguing out modern definitions. We are all born into this old thought. We are born into a modern society still saddled with the old relations of production holding back and strangling the modern productive forces. Thought emanates from these relations; it is the cognition of relations -- you can only cognize these relations. Old thought (anti-consciousness) comes from the old relations.

The modern productive forces include the human factor/modern proletariat, the means of mass socialized production and the ongoing industrial, scientific and technological revolution. These modern socialized productive forces (the working class, means of mass production and huge scientific and technological developments) right now are not directed towards the development of society because they are held up and entangled by this old capitalist system and its old relations of production based on non-socialized private ownership. So the working class and its allies have to change the old system and obsolete relations. This requires that the energy bound up in the modern proletariat, means of mass socialized production and the scientific and technological developments and all the peoples and their history have to be freed from the old system and relations.

These modern developments, including the struggle for production and scientific experimentation are trapped within old relations held in place by the capitalist system. It would stand to reason that it is the system that has to be changed to end those old relations. Thought is the product of relations. Old relations will constantly and permanently give rise to old thought as long as they exist. We are stuck with old thought from the old relations; we can tell what the tragedies are, see them, speak about the assault on consciousness, and talk about what needs to be eliminated to make our lives better but that is still within the old system and relations. It is fundamental change that has a necessity to it. If the necessity for change, to develop, to change the system and relations is not recognized and acted on, then there will be nothing but tragedy.

Consciousness is not the same as understanding. Understanding is specific to a particular historical situation -- an event, a deed, a historical moment. Understanding is what the active individual reaches in relation to the world. This would include fixing your frame of reference, deciding on your practical program, providing a concrete analysis. However, consciousness resides in the "I."

Anti-consciousness beyond itself, in itself arises to extinguish social consciousness. As a form of consciousness, anti-consciousness beyond itself gives the appearance of transcending nature and society, of being outside of history. It is a veil covering everything.

Anti-consciousness in itself appears static, never changing, eternal and detached from the vital force of history, from everything human and alive.

Nature and society show change all the time yet anti-consciousness beyond itself, in itself has the appearance of transcending all that. For example in an attempt to transcend nature and society, anti-consciousness makes the spurious claim that the human species is divided into inferior and superior races with membership in a race determining the quality of being. Such ready-made definitions transcending nature and society are imposed upon the whole world to provide content for anti-consciousness. These definitions serving anti-consciousness are not the expression, reflection, or product of the actual social and natural historical conditions.

This anti-consciousness is in itself giving the appearance of the defined categories having their own eternal life that are the product of something beyond the natural and social historical world. In this manner different slogans are concocted such as: "The end of history," "White man's burden," "The responsibility to protect," "Manifest destiny," "Universal values," "Failed state," "No alternative" etc. that purport to be the basis of how the world works. Yet in actual fact human life is produced and reproduced as a process of social production. Human life has a history and involves active participation, which must be the basis for all perspectives that would have a human quality.

Consciousness only develops by rejecting anti-consciousness. This is the consciousness of the "I," not an egocentric "I" of the egocentric individual but an "I" immersed in the historical situation and those conditions calling out for change. This "I" is a social historical "I." The rejection of anti-consciousnesses entails becoming conscious of those relations entered into between humans and humans, and humans and nature. The existing relations among humans and between humans and nature exist independently of our consciousness and will. The rejection of anti-consciousness beyond itself, in itself initiates discussion of conscious human action to change the existing system and relations, the type of discussion begun in 1967 with its concrete expression in the Necessity for Change! pamphlet and analysis.

A dream and desire for an alternative to the social system and old relations as they exist becomes concretized for those who come forward to take up that dream and draw up plans of action. The plans for action take those who have come forward beyond their individual scattered actions, whether they are protest actions, strikes, etc. We have to go beyond these individual scattered actions. We need a plan for action, program, and a coming together for action that emerges out of the actual conditions. This allows for unity in action beyond any single action of the people who are presently engaged. No matter how big or small the number of participants may be initially, those numbers can grow when the dream of the alternative is captured in organization and consciousness. The consciousness develops from the initial dream and rejection of anti-consciousness and grows in quantity and quality. The consciousness provides coherence and becomes a material force amongst all the people especially when it assumes an organizational form consistent with what the conditions demand.

As new content emerges, new forms must be discovered. This motion is something that we can further study. It is a phenomenon that we can cognize in all its rich relations and history; this is consciousness in itself. This consciousness can stand on its own, even as matter moves through a particular stage, as long as it can be reflected on to the brain. As this consciousness informs thinking upon reflecting matter and as matter unfolds and reveals itself, this consciousness in itself can find its way into the psychology, social traditions and legacies of the people. Consider as an example the history of the Necessity for Change! consciousness from 1967 down to today taken up by those organizing to change the world.

A consciousness exists amongst humans that they belong to the same species. This particular human consciousness is distinct from any consciousness that might exist among animals. Of course there are those who insist on not having this human consciousness. They live in denial of the importance of the relations with society and with nature. They subscribe to a law of the jungle not the law of social development. Of course they could claim they are participating as an exploiter, as an oppressor or collaborators with those who have usurped power by force. They could claim they are carrying out this participation consciously as members of society. They could say they want for themselves a share in the wealth and everything society offers. The working class and its allies are always being sold a bill of goods by which they should wish to have a bigger share of the pie rather than change the socio-economic basis for their exploitation and oppression. Remember Aesop's fable of the Lion, the Ass and the Fox who participate together in a hunt for food and are very successful.

The lion because of prowess and position claims the right of might and tells the ass to divide up the food. That is what to participate means -- to share, to be a part of and accommodated. The ass with great scientific skill precisely divides the food into three equal parts. The enraged lion eats the ass and turns to the fox and says now you divide the food. The fox very carefully takes one tiny morsel puts it into one corner and leaves the huge heap of the rest in front of the lion.

The lion with a smile puts his big paw around the fox and says "my fine fellow, where did you get such intelligence to know how to divide up everything so well." The fox replies, "I learned from the ass."

So we are asked to be asses of this type. To teach the wise ones how to survive under the reign of might makes right. This is not social development. This is called the law of the jungle.

To change this situation requires a consciousness that comes with participation of the individual acting within the concrete situation, resolving the contradictions that exist in society and with nature. However, the Necessity for Change! analysis insists that more is needed: Not only must the relations we live within be understood, not only must the contradictions that exist be comprehended but the movement of the working class and its allies for emancipation must be edified with the consciousness of the necessity for change. The development of this self-conscious movement of the working class and its allies towards the necessity for change means the possibility of the humanization of consciousness so that a society can be created that is fit for all its members and organized along species lines rather than blood or class lines.

Recognition of the Necessity for Change

People talk about "Another world is possible" but this talk can only be coherent if connected to the recognition of the Necessity for Change. Necessity is the law of social development. It means there is no alternative to necessity. A possibility is not a law. It expresses opportunities that exist. But to make that possibility concrete in the actual world requires having a perspective of the necessity for change, arguing it out and engaging in acts of conscious participation.

Not to take up the Necessity for Change outlook but to accept the anti-conscious outlook would leave us like those describing an unfolding tragedy: a person who is drowning complains loudly from the water of those describing the situation from the riverbank, "Here I am drowning and there you are describing the condition of the water."

Society has all these problems; I have all of these problems drowning in a society with all these problems and there you are describing these problems.

This is usually heard as here I am with all the problems and there you are only describing and not helping. The plea for help of the drowning person at that point is empty and the concern of those on shore is likewise useless because the cries of the drowning person are met with descriptions of the water and the process of drowning from those on the riverbank. The person in the water and those on shore have reasons for their particular actions or so it is made to appear. The point is they are both indifferent to one another. Simply put, the laws of nature prevail without human consciousness. The problem is not two activities where one is drowning and the others are describing. No. The problem is no common space exists for the will to be to solve the problem, for the human factor to be activated. The person in the water and those on shore are detached and vanishing in relation to one another. There is no unity in action. There is no "I" in the here and now that acts to transcend this situation of desperation and change it. What is needed? The prevailing relation of separation must be overcome; a relation of unity out of the destruction of the existing separation is necessary. A new relation must be created with the destruction of the old system. And that relation has to be infused with consciousness. That consciousness comes by rejecting anti-consciousness and thinking through the phenomenon, thinking through the brain, thinking through the experience. Not only thinking things through and considering what exists are necessary. The consideration has to have an objectivity; the consideration has to go through the phenomenon. "I" is the phenomenon with its act of conscious participation in the act of finding out; the here and now is also the phenomenon, which appears as a flash, as an instant like a wave and then vanishes.

The only way that flash, that moment of decision can be sustained and turned into victory and history is if the collective phenomenon is organized, if it has an organizational form, which today is called the human factor/social consciousness. That organization, that human factor/social consciousness is what takes up the problem for solution and advances wave upon wave in a current, the flow of history.

All of the possibilities for changing the situation will be missed without actively taking up the Necessity for Change, which can alter this situation to human advantage. The need is to act now, consciously. With organization and consciousness, with the unleashing of the human factor/social consciousness, in organizing it, the alternative is clear. Another world is possible is the Necessity for Change! Here is the rose now dance!

PREVIOUS ISSUES | HOME

Website:  www.cpcml.ca   Email:  editor@cpcml.ca