A really existing leftist group?

 

Förbundet Arbetarmakt (FAM) was a small left-wing group in Sweden that existed between 1973 and 1979. (If their predecessors and successors are counted, this particular current existed from 1972 to 1985.) I´m too young (sic) to have met FAM, although I met some ex-members years ago. I also read back issues of their magazines "Arbetarmakt" and "Rådsmakt" at a local archive, and even have some of their pamphlets. During my sadly misspent youth as a leftist hang-around, FAM struck me as one of the more serious and less crazy far left outfits, an impression admittedly based solely on their printed material. I might have joined FAM had I been old enough during the 1970´s. Would I have liked it? Not sure, after reading "Vitboken", a draft document published in 1980 that tries to draw a balance sheet of the really existing FAM-ish experience. 

Among the positives is that FAM seems to have functioned in a relatively democratic manner, never experienced any major splits of the usual kind, and was (relatively speaking) non-sectarian (at least for a small far left group). The negatives seem to have been more or less the same as in many other leftist groups, so FAM doesn´t come across as particularly bizarre on that front either. Still, there seems to have been a rather strong "anti-authoritarian" and anarchistic-individualist streak among many of the members, of a kind I frankly don´t like, so perhaps not really my cup of tea anyway...

FAM called themselves "council socialists" and belonged broadly to the council communist or left communist current (think Gorter, Pannekoek and the KAPD). The group waged a kind of "two front war" against both anarchism and Leninism, criticizing the anarchists for being too disorganized, and the Leninists for being authoritarian in both theory and practice. Ironically, this created a strong tension within the group between people who had joined due to previous bad experiences with anarchists, and those who themselves had an anarchistic streak, primarily reacting to the dogmatism and perceived authoritarianism of the Leninist groups. 

It seems that FAM in practice functioned (or tried to function) as the "Leninist" groups it was criticizing (albeit with less abuses). There was a division of labor between, on the one hand, "theoreticians" and "experts", and ordinary rank-and-file members on the other. The former were disproportionately male, while most women in the group belonged to the latter category. The workload was enormous, with constant internal meetings and administration. There were many "committees" and "organizers" of this and that. Despite its small size, FAM published both a monthly "paper" (Arbetarmakt) and a theoretical magazine (Rådsmakt). It consciously attempted to mimic the somewhat larger leftist groups in terms of activities and style. This led to constant conflicts with members who had joined in the hope that FAM would be a *really* anti-authoritarian group (or anti-group) devoted to the "total revolution" mentioned in its platform. Many of these members seem to have been young women from the feminist milieu. 

I was surprised to learn that FAM only had about 40 members at most, and that the total number of people who had been members was about 70. There were only three real branches, although members and sympathizers could be found all across Sweden. I assumed FAM had been larger. Indeed, this seems to have been a common assumption, and many new members felt cheated when they realized how small the organization actually was! One problem for FAM was the existence of a somewhat larger and broadly similar group, Förbundet Kommunist (FK). While FK was ideologically a peculiar Maoist organization, much of their early practice looked "left communist": independent workplace organization outside the Social Democratic labor unions, and calls for boycotting parliamentary elections. I think FK also had an "anti-authoritarian" streak of sorts. Just like FAM, they were interested in alternative forms of Marxist theory (Western Marxism). So why not simply join FK? FAM did cooperate with FK and the Trotskyist KAF in a kind of "anti-Stalinist bloc". 

One irony that struck me when reading "Vitboken" is that FAM´s uniqueness created problems for the group. I assumed this would rather be a strong selling point! FAM´s homebrewn version of left communism was apparently too exotic for the Swedish left. It also necessitated a high level of theoretical understanding among FAM´s members - something many couldn´t live up to. The most distinctive FAM-ite idea was the notion that the Soviet Union and similar societies represented a new, bureaucratic mode of production. Many FAM members doubted this theory, however, and others didn´t understand it. Nor was the theory ever fully worked out. 

FAM´s concrete activities weren´t much different from those of their temporary allies or competitors on the left: strike support work, solidarity work with Portuguese and Chilean leftists, May Day marches, anti-nuclear activism, and attempts at "proletarianization". FAM participated in or supported attemps to organize radical workers outside the official union structures. Judging by "Vitboken", however, FAM members also run for local union office! I think they did quite a lot for just 40 members...

So why did FAM fail? Obviously, all kinds of reasons could be pointed to, but I think the authors of "Vitboken" are right that ultimately the objective conditions in Sweden weren´t ripe for the growth of a "ultraleft" tendency (this is frankly a no-brainer). The ex-FAMites point to the fact that the middle class layers from which the left gains most of its support had - at least relatively speaking - gone "to the right" compared to the red year 1968. At the end of the 1970´s, the average left-wing sympathizer wasn´t interested in "revolutionary theory", let alone revolution, instead demandig "concrete" (realistic) policies, leading most leftists to join or adapt to VPK, the major leftist party in Sweden, which is represented in Parliament and many regional and local councils. (Today VPK is known as Vänsterpartiet.) FAM´s anti-Stalinist allies FK and KAF decided to "relate to VPK" and change their politics accordingly, while FAM steadfastly refused. 

Ultimately, the real limiting factor for any leftist group in Sweden during the period in question was the almost complete domination of the labor movement by the Social Democratic Party. It rested both on tight bureaucratic control and internal party discipline, but also on the honest convictions of many workers that Social Democracy really does work (after all, it *did* work in Sweden). The leftists who de facto gave up on the working class and instead joined various middle class protest movements were "tactically correct", since this enabled them to make an end run around Social Democracy. Of course, this eventually led to the famed "long march through the institutions" and the current pro-establishment leftoids, who defend corporate censorship, EU membership, "identity politics" and green capitalism (ironically often in alliance with restyled Social Democracy), but that´s another story... 

As usual, I have no good close, so I just sort of close!