>>1106615>I don't idolize or fetishize the BPP
cool great nobody does. That doesn't change the fact that this method of organisation was highly effective.
You've gone from ignoring the question, to making up an arbitrary standard by which it has to hold up to "it has to be mutual" which, I showed it does, now you're just changing directions yet again, trying to imply I idolise or fetishize them.
No, wrong, i am simply pointing specifically to this tactic they used to great effect.
>Plus that's like YOUR ONLY example
No, its not, I posted here >>1106530
"Or the many communist parties across t he world who provided healthcare, education etc to the proletariat." examples include, the revolutionary forces in Cuba, in China during the civil war, many other examples throuhgout Latin America, such as the Sandinistas, in Venezuela under Chavez, The MAS party engages in these sorts of things, in fact basically most socialist experiments.
>According to the Wiki article
How can I tell the rest of this is going to be utterly brainwormed?
>"voluntary exchange", you mean like coalitions?
doesn't in the least follow logically. No, a coalition and facilitating the free distribution of goods is not the same thing, although sure, you could do it as part of a coalition.
> Like, what does that even say, people help each other?
sure, but specifically in this context, there is a long history of the idea which informs the word how we use it. Semantic bitch
>I mean the mafia does mutual aid too. So do politicians.
Yeh and "the mafia" (there are numerous of them) tend to be highly successful organisations you dumb fuck. So do lots of politicians. Even though this is supposed to be a gotcha, and sounds like it comes from the mind of a 13 year old, so shouldn't even be considered, what you have actually done is re-inforced the idea that it is a succesful tactic.
>it means everything from nothing
nonesense statement >>1106654
no, of course you don't, but many revolutionary organisations have seen fit to put some resources into this. >>1106655
okay so extend it to whoever needs it. Like the BPP did. >>1106717
yeh he really is bottom of the barrel dumb as is literally everybody who makes this lazy critques by the way. I want all of you who do this to feel insulted and shamed, you are brain dead. >>1106828
Some people may well do that. So what. Most won't. You have a porky mind set. >>1107445
This is a classic example of a poster who just wants to say words.
this whole concern troll line of
>oooh it has to be literally 100% like for like mutual
is just a bizzare internet brained critique. Why must it be fully mutual? Nothing really works like that. The point is to create a program which builds your base, just because it doesn't sweep up 100% of participants into that, doesn't mean it isn't worth doing. With any kind of organisation you will have hangers on not 100% in line with the goals, or even actively anthetitical to them, particularly in mass organisations.
>its people getting food from local businesses and food banks and giving it to the local homeless population while trying to talk politics with them. a good goal for a group like that would be to get the homeless to run the entire project themselves, in that way it would be more mutual as they would be helping each other survive.
So, what you are saying is, there is a good way to do mutual aid, and a bad way to do it. You've pointed out the good way. In line with the OP, that doesn't make "mutual aid retarded" it means, you should do it properly. Same with literally anything. Being bad at boxing and getting your ass kicked in a fight doesn't mean the discipline of boxing is retarded.
I have seen mutual aid done in the bad way you describe, I have also seen it done in the good way you describe.
>also, anyone who has the idealist notion that you can just read theory to people and feed them and that will turn them revolutionary will change their mind pretty quick
Sure, but it is 10 steps ahead of the idealist notion that you can build a communist party without mass organisation and mass work and rejecting those things.
>I think food is much better used to support unions during strikes and things like that.
It is entirely possible to do both.
> if you are able to organize a homeless union and able to strike solidarity between workers, homeless and tenants on a common issue that could be good but that is a cross-class alliance
it isn't cross class, the lumpen are a subsection of the proletariat at large.
>i think its a waste of time though and you could be doing better things like helping workers form strike committees
you know a party could have, for example, a department for labour agitation, as well as, a department for tenant organisation, and a department for mutual aid initiatives and that say, a central committee could coordinate their activities
>or doing communist agitation and education.
it is literally a form of communist agitation and can and is often combined with education even though you have just above claimed it is idealist to just try and educate people.
>also, people claim mutual aid builds mysical dual power but in most cases its just a glorified
again with the "in most cases". In most cases songs uploaded to soundcloud are awful. In some cases they are good though. But I suppose that makes the entire medium literally worthless in your eyes..
>but in most cases its just a glorified NGO
have you ever considered that the term NGO is completely nebulous and actually includes organisations widely ranging from the church, to a brass band, to a local football team.