Sympathy and Struggle
Cooperation and struggle are two contradicting concept-doctrines that affect the society. Whereas, the doctrine of class struggle urges the lower classes to overthrow the ruling class and the existing social order for the purpose of establishing equality, while the doctrine of class cooperation urges them to accept inequality as part of the natural state of things and preserve the social order. But then, cooperation has different purposes. It can be preserving the social order or even changing it, and cooperation as a means of change lies accepting of struggle, of accepting the fact that the main force lies in the productive forces and be guided by a vanguard, of equality and of overthrowing the social order to attain a just society and happiness to all mankind. For in fact, Within struggle lies sympathy and cooperation of all the affected sectors of the society in pointing against the oppressor and in developing the socialist state, whose inclination is progressive and willing to change the society through all means necessary. Cooperation in a sense that involves arousing, organizing and mobilizing in accelerating the struggle against the reactionary forces and its cohorts, of integrating one's own with the productive forces and finally of proletarianizing the society to liberate from the centuries-old system which is rotten and degenerated.
And one of the examples would be China.
China is one of the examples of having cooperation as a part of revolutionary struggle to attain socialism-for they enter directly into socialism through a coalition of progressive-leaning classes (an example of cooperation) fighting the old ruling order that involves the reactionary-leaning ones and its cohorts. And this coalition is subsumed under the leadership and guidance of the working class and its communist party, and that coalition involves the patriotic and progressive leaning intelligentsia, who opted to integrated ones self to the people and contribute to the struggle in itself both in liberating the nation and to proletarianize themselves to contribute to the struggle towards socialism and eventually to communism.
And since cooperation is within struggle (and vice versa), it becomes a part of human progress since it involves mutuality, especially to those who are affected in the stage of human struggles man hath experienced, and it involves continuous energy, extreme consolidation and coordination of all progressive classes to grab state, economic and cultural power as unity becomes stronger and paving way to integration with the productive forces-as the progressive leaning ones, including those who are enlightened despite reactionary backgrounds to remold and become a part of the primary forces.
Well...
According to Sun-Yat-Sen:
"The main force of human progress lies in mutual help", but then that mutual help involves collective action and unity to the productive forces as means to spearhead the revolution both as a battle for national survival and for class liberation-since it is a two phase struggle and most of the oppressed masses are not fighting for mere "independence" but also for "land and bread" and a society wherein anything "is according to work" to attain "need", and somehow that kind of mutual help amongst the oppressed and progressive sectors within social struggles inculcates sympathy as they accept the fact that the masses, to be led by the proletariat are the makers of the society, having the power to create and as the masters of human fate. And that kind of mutual help, of integrating to the basic sectors ought to remold and rejuvenate social spirit in creating a liberating tomorrow what the masses wanted as they understand the reason of joining or even the intention of struggle.
Well...
From the basic unity of the workers and peasants to the progressive alliance with the patriotic and progressive leaning intelligentsia lies a straight path towards a just tomorrow, guided by the productive forces and of the vanguard, that kind of unity also serves as a nucleus of protracted revolutionary process as it restructures the society and advancing towards the democratic dictatorship of the proletariat, for we all know that the proletariat serves as the leader of the struggle being set upon.
Lenin, in his work also stresses a need for cooperation. In his work, concerning a possible unity with the peasantry, said in his work "To the rural poor":
"...meanwhile, after the abolition of serfdom, a new class struggle arose, the struggle of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie...The urban workers started a new great struggle of all the poor against the rich...The peasants were defeated [in the past] but they will rise again and again...[and] the class conscious workers will do in their power to help..."
As what he have said, Lenin wanted a stronger unity with the peasantry, of uniting Marxism with Russian populism against the reaction, although at first he opposed that kind of idea, Lenin finally understood since he felt a need for a "unity" of all the poor and exploited sectors like those of the peasants and even the petit bourgeoisie with progressive inclinations, somehow, the Hammer and the Sickle is the proof that the unity between the exploited, poor workers and peasants are for.
And perhaps,
The potentiality and the possibility of the unity of all progressive leaning peoples with the exploited may carry through within the revolution, for they may rather wanted to give all and contribute to the cause wherein it would benefit all sectors according to their productive work to sustain their need. Somehow their understanding may lead to a change that affects their past lives as they enter a different setting as they studied every fact, every situation that no band aid solution can cover it and end up fail as they do so, and a need for a revolution would be its solution as it carries a long term series of program-action that may benefit from it.
And for sure the fascists and "left" opportunists may oppose this kind of idea, but they didn't notice that struggle has phases that involves both cooperation, integration and eventually struggle to accelerate the transition to a degree. Even Gregor Strasser (of the black front) affirms that National Socialism had a phase wherein struggle involved, but Strasser, like any other National Socialist leaders stress much of their Anti-semitic appeal rather than the general anti-capitalist appeal in repelling capitalism and the forces of reaction.
But then, Strasser, like Mao, somehow tried much to make it into a more radical, mass-action and worker-based form, to be initiated alongside nationalism. But then, Since the struggle towards communism is on its way, the idea of the fraternal unity and partnership of all progressive classes and eventual integration to the working people (the proletariat) will always be a part of it-especially in the undeveloped and developing countries and nations that end as pawns of the imperialists. And this kind of unity also involves unity of oppressed nations pointing against domestic oppressors and even the ones who ought to dictate domestic policies since struggle will always be both national and class whose victory of the oppressed would lead to eventual fraternal unity and brotherhood of nations and a system wherein "in each according to work done, in each according to need."
But then, Strasser, like Mao, somehow tried much to make it into a more radical, mass-action and worker-based form, to be initiated alongside nationalism. But then, Since the struggle towards communism is on its way, the idea of the fraternal unity and partnership of all progressive classes and eventual integration to the working people (the proletariat) will always be a part of it-especially in the undeveloped and developing countries and nations that end as pawns of the imperialists. And this kind of unity also involves unity of oppressed nations pointing against domestic oppressors and even the ones who ought to dictate domestic policies since struggle will always be both national and class whose victory of the oppressed would lead to eventual fraternal unity and brotherhood of nations and a system wherein "in each according to work done, in each according to need."
