[Zyx]

Why did not the Communist support May 68 and further was that a stupid move on their part?

May 68 on Wikipedia

[Red Star]

Well, in Poland and Czechoslovakia it was a movement against the communists, so that is pretty clear.

I think in France the PCF felt they were opportunistic, individualists, anarchists and non-working class (which they weren't) while the unions, as all unions inevitably do, tried to channel the workers' strike into the usual channels of mediation.

[Zyx]

I meant for the French. Supposedly the 'anarchist' movement would have been successful in France and thereby the Communists would have been able to take over France after the anarchist weakened the state, right?

In retrospect, weren't the Communists wrong?

[pikachu]

Supposedly the 'anarchist' movement would have been successful in France and thereby the Communists would have been able to take over France after the anarchist weakened the state, right?

According to the communists, this is a wrong supposition. They didn't think that the movement could actually bring down the French state in May 68, and I think they were more or less correct.

That, plus what Red Star said - the Commie bloc was afraid that this could easily spill over into their own countries, and they didn't think that the majority of the movement was under sufficient communist leadership.

Finally, and perhaps the most importantly, since the dissolution of the Comintern in 1943 (and probably starting even earlier that that), the Communist movement was becoming increasingly conservative, and as you may recall, Khrushchev officially declared a doctrine of peaceful coexistence between east and west, the era of Detente. Due to this, the PCF, along with the rest of European communist parties were becoming increasingly less revolutionary and much more integrated and subordinated to their States. Hence they did not support an anti-state movement.

[KurtFF8]

The Socialist movement (which includes most Anarchists really when you think about it) should always be united in trying to replace Capitalism with Socialism. If Communists see a true opportunity for an action that will have a positive outcome if successful, they ought to take it.

This same problem existed in the US during the 60s where the New Communist Movement didn't really get much support from CPUSA or SPUSA for example. (at least not to my knowledge).

This is a flaw in the strategy of Communists when they don't want to support student strikes/actions for example, while students are generally not part of the working class (especially while they are at school), they are indeed trying to help build revolutionary situations where working class consciousness can be raised and acted upon.

[Gletkin]

Except it wasn't just students. Many workers took part as well (same situation in Italy).
In Paris' "Red Belt" some of the working-class residents set fire to some local CGT offices in protest against the conservatism of the PCF (and hence, the CGT).

[Pleb]

FRANCE FRANCE FRANCE FRANCE FRANCE FRANCE FRANCE FRANCE FRANCE [/vomit]

How about the real revolution that happened in Northern Ireland? The new left was just as conservative when it came to real politics. People fighing for housing, jobs, votes and water weren't abstract enough for the British new left

[Gletkin]

How about the real revolution that happened in Northern Ireland?

I wouldn't call it revolution. Reform, but not revolution.
When all's said and done, the six counties are still part of the UK.

[Pleb]

Revolution, reform, revolt, rebellion. Call it what you want, but it's all new left semantics. And while the British new left were debating these points of theory over coffee, the pope worshiping mass were taking action.

But betrodden people fighting for water, houses, jobs and dignity are just old fashioned nationalists. They haven't read Marcuse, they don't understand the system. For that you need to look to the chic middle class Parisians. Uw hawhaw. It was them that lead the brave insurgency for mixed dorms.

[Gletkin]

Revolution, reform, revolt, rebellion. Call it what you want, but it's all new left semantics.

Marxist terminology actually. Of any class.

But betrodden people fighting for water, houses, jobs and dignity are just old fashioned nationalists. They haven't read Marcuse, they don't understand the system. For that you need to look to the chic middle class Parisians. Uw hawhaw. It was them that lead the brave insurgency for mixed dorms.

What's this hobby-horse of yours over "middle class Parisians"? Did you not read what I posted about the French and Italian WORKERS as well?

Anyway, those "old fashioned nationalists" were favored by People's Democracy, Ireland's own "New Left" (and hence all chic middle-class uw hawhaws eh?) movement over the Stickies.
That, and the "old fashioned nationalists" stopped being so old fashioned around 1974 and actually started reading Marcuse et al..

Although if you're going to stripe people over lack of "nationalist" credentials, then everyone's done a piss-poor job of it, since the six counties remain part of the UK.