A leftist organization
ARALAR defines itself as a leftist and socialist organization.
1. New times; an open left. ARALAR has emerged mainly from a vision of understanding national construction that does not coincide with the visions of other leftist nationalist. At the same time, we understand this moment as an opportunity to build a vision of the left from an open exercise and deep work of renewal of previous formulations.
Many of the policies and interpretations of historical socialism are now out of reality, outdated or obsolete. We know that the left XXI century will be neither the same it was by the end of the nineteenth century nor the same of the twentieth century.
We live a new historical time, and this demands an open attitude to create new paradigms. We should realize that we are in a new historical cycle marked by diverse and profound changes: the technological revolution, the crisis of the work society, the crisis of the welfare state, the ecological crisis, the emergence of religious identities, globalization...
We have known the fall of the regimes of the called real socialism. Basically, they have constituted police and authoritarian regimes based on the denial of freedom, democracy, and after all, of socialism itself, as there is not socialism without democracy. The Keynesian recipes —those witch have formed the base of the philosophy and praxis of social democracy— experience a reformulation by means of so called the Third Way; The model of accumulation and development implemented after the Second World War is already ended. Finally, we have witnessed the strengthening of the economic and social project of liberalism. The beginning of this new century, therefore, imposes the task of building a left that leaves behind both the fall of the Berlin Wall and Keynesianism (at least the classical one). And at the same time, we should build a left that can confront the economic, social and cultural project of neoliberal globalisation
2. For a new left. The left with which we identify ourselves is not defined only on the basis of an economic critic of capitalist system, but as a thought and a practice against all kinds of oppression, that is based on certain values and ideas: equality, freedom, democracy, solidarity, human rights, ecology, social justice, feminism, anti-militarism ... At the heart of the left inhabits a critical attitude towards the currents state of affairs, a wish of social change and improvement in the direction of human emancipation. The left claims for another social logic that lies on a sense of ethical indignation against phenomena such as oppression, misery, hunger, exploitation, injustice, abuse of power, humiliation, suffering, ignorance, or poverty.
Socialism is the reference for ARALAR. We want to build a democratic and transforming left that will empower both society and citizenship.
3. The left as a way of life. Being a lefty is more than adhering to a set of ideas and a certain political activity. Beyond theories and political strategies, to be of lefts means to adopt a commitment in the life style of each one. In this sense, the men and women of ARALAR will tie our style of life to our political option.
4. Towards the self-constitution of society. We adhere to the fight for a increasingly self-managed society: we claim a model of society based on growing possibilities of personal and collective self-government, because the extension of self-government to all areas of social life is the expression of true democratization and balanced distribution of power. The social transformation we advocate is one that reinforces the possibility of self-management in the different areas of social life: economics, politics, business, culture, health, and leisure...
5. Transformative vocation. ARALAR wants social transformation. We recognize ourselves in the mirror of a left that wants a social change and we remark our commitment to implement our political practice in this direction.
The left must demonstrate that it is able to improve the life quality of citizens, to channel solidarity actions, to implement policies for greater social cohesion. The institutional job brings us into a mess of contradictions because reality is always difficult and contradictory. But in that direction there is a space more or less broad, more or less close, where one can enable partial initiatives for the social change.
A political activity that promote reforms does not have to suppose a functional reformism of the state of things. It is not the same 'change something so that it do not change at all' or 'change something, in a wide direction to go transforming the society'. We feel us part of this second, and for this work is necessary a radical perspective, in the etymological sense of the term: we have to fix the attention in the structural and deep causes of the problems, escaping of simple and superficial treatments.
6. Constructive attitude. The reactive attitude towards power should not be the single axis of structuring the identity of the left, not even the most important. The left should also develop its own independent project unless it wants to retreat into defensiveness and to limit itself exclusively to a response dynamic.
A constructive attitude requires a deep commitment, and a look at the reality that is challenging and critical. It requires a commitment to denounce the social injustice. Denounce and proposal of alternatives. Proposal and action. That will be one of the "hot spots" that should pose the left: besides thinking and denouncing will have to propose and to act.
7. Towards a change of minds. In this work of building a democratic and socialist perspective, we have to look back to the historical path done by the left and learn from it. Among many other things, history has taught us that it has no sense to expect some kind of great revolution, as the historical dynamics have not been written the means of large and sudden changes. Human and social processes, in most cases, do not respond to that principle. Human nature by itself resists to such principle. The processes of change that occur both in individuals and in society are usually gradual and difficult, not total and sudden transformations.
Therefore, those who today advocate social change know that a radical process or sudden change cannot be expected. Even if those were possible, perhaps because the balance of social forces permitted it, we should ask whether it is really desirable or not. When changes of the social order are rapid and violent, such processes often end up reproducing the structures of society that was intended to overcome. Historical processes of this type normally contribute to a superficial and formal change of power structures.
Thus, the main objective of a transformative left is not only the formal conquest of power. This left should be structured on the basis of another more demanding claim: the change of minds. In order the changes became real and not superficial, the left should aspire to the transformation of consciences, desires, needs and lifestyles. We aspire to articulate new ways of thinking, feeling and acting. Therein lies the challenge of social change.
We do not understand the change in an up-down direction. Change implies both the capacity for self-organization of civil society and the collective and conscious action of society, which will make possible the real transformation process. The road to real change has to do mainly with the responsible role of civil society; but not only the road, that role is also the aim itself. For the implementation and development of personal and collective self-government processes a new state of consciousness is necessary: an individual and collective subjectivity.