No.915584[Last 50 Posts]
This is a thread only for people who actually do IRL organizing to exchange tactics and ideas. Its time to stop whining about bullshit like Wiccans or shizo pedo rape cult conspiracies, and actually get some actual lessons out of each other, for fucks sake.
Explain your situation, ask a question on what you would like some advice on, and give insight into what you do right now and how successful you are.
Let me start off
>I am the chairman of a local chapter of a socialist nation wide youth org of a european country
>We have, on paper, 90+ youth members in our local chapter
>We have, on paper, 1000+ members nationally
>Recently formed out of a split, still very much in flux
>The real local cadre is around 10-15 people with varying levels of commitment, about 6 people at each weekly or so meeting
>The ideological and practical education of our cadre is low
>Following a broadly orthodox marxist line, as opposed to classical marxist leninist, or maoist, but also containing trotskyites and anarchists
Now the thing I would like your feedback on is explaining how you conduct meetings, how to educate cadre, how to retain cadre, how to ensure people show up, what communist youths are even supposed to do. So let me sketch out what we do now
>We meet once every 2 weeks, set time, set place, set day
>The meetings agenda is made during the two weeks by people finding interesting topics to discuss, and compiled by me, together with any things that need to be done organizational wise
>We discuss developments nearby, such as opportunities for media stunts on specific topics (such as fucking with rich fucktards), setting up protests, our involvement in activist groups and the student union/labour union protests
>We check our list of tasks we made last time, and see what got done
>We discuss the points of that week
>We formulate new points of action based on the outcome of the discussion
>End of meeting
Now, what we do not do is, but not out of any conscious decision
>making or selling newspapers
I think our largest issues right now is retaining and educating our cadre, both ideologically and in terms of skills, as well as finding enough tasks to do to keep our members engaged if more people happen to show up. We have an okay influx of new members because of the media attention we have, and via direct recruitment via friend circles. The biggest issue is making sure new members keep showing up after the first 3 times.
How do your orgs handle these topics, how would you do it differently, and does it translate into tangible results? How do we (if we should at all) find work to do for our, on paper, sizable cadre, that youths (below 28, mostly highschool and student aged) find enjoyable that also contributes to the workers movement and our party?
>Do you have a motherparty?
Sort of, but not really. Our org is the result of an entire youth wing getting expelled together with a few, but not many, older members. The youth currently dominates the amount of members, which is both a blessing and a curse.
>Go commit terrorism
>Doing anything actually useful is CIA, just post on leftypol about anime titties behind 4 vpns instead
Ok, why are you posting here. This is ICL, not IRL….
Its called being able to ask the advice of people who might have some experience, like our comrades in India, the philipines, the chinese comrades, people organising in southern europe, south america.
If my own org had all the answers, we would have taken over the country.
where anime tiddy tho
>>915584>european>>Following a broadly orthodox marxist line, as opposed to classical marxist leninist
just admit you are in an imperialist nation and that makes you oppose leninism, lmao
can someone explain to me the point of organizing, and how it fits into a broad strategy for meeting your aims, and what those aims are?
I don't think I really agree that the "just get people some wins" mentality works, but thats from hearing people not ever getting any wins, getting burnt out, then turning lib…. The other side of that seems to be engaging in perpetual charity for the homeless to claim some kind of win.
Is there even any point? I feel like i dont fuck with a pure economic or structural idea of socialism, it's more about social control of the political sphere and political control of the economy for me, a society based on socialist philosophy rather than just trying and failing to get some kind of welfare support or something. What's the way to actually make shit better? Without the anarchist shit of stopping at "just build a whole economy and make it how u want from ground up" bullshit. Can people even be gotten on your side for political action? Does political action like voting actually matter when so much is literally actually rigged? Should we just focus on local elections? Should we build a movement to gain support? What's the strategy, and what are your goals?
I hope someone can answer, cause i'm asking in good faith, not trying to be cynical. Just i really don't know what strategy to follow to begin to effectively and scalably help out with shit.
Is there point to trying to organize if you happen to be autistic? I can talk to people reasonably well but I'm not confident that I can break down years of propaganda and anti-political cynicism in my older colleagues (most of them)
this book is essential for actually organising gang, the most important of all gang
the imperialist core left is at least 2 thirds leninist in some way shape or form
How exactly would being autistic negate the benefits of organization?
Seems like a non-issue.
>>915677>I don't think I really agree that the "just get people some wins" mentality works, but thats from hearing people not ever getting any wins, getting burnt out, then turning lib…. The other side of that seems to be engaging in perpetual charity for the homeless to claim some kind of win.
Consider someone whose values are helping the community.
Ideology and political involvement is just a means to an end. If you want to help homeless people, and 'the left' where you live aren't doing any mutual aid, then the church or lib institutions are likely to be the most effective method to promote your values, even if you believe believe socialism is the solution and charity/aid is a bandaid.
Anyway, your initial question of 'the point' and 'your aims' are completely relative and change from org to org. It's still an excellent question and I want to hear answers, but there is certainly no universal answer even if just talking about communist orgs.
I see it as beinv an obstacle to the actual task of organizing, especially when there's little to organization locally, I'd be starting from scratch
>>915669>As opposed to means you actually oppose something, rather than it being a different way of saying "rather than"
English comprehension is hard for you I see. Just because you don't adopt 100 percent of the Bolshevik ml party form doesn't make you reject Lenin.
>>915677>I don't think I really agree that the "just get people some wins" mentality works, but thats from hearing people not ever getting any wins, getting burnt out, then turning lib…. The other side of that seems to be engaging in perpetual charity for the homeless to claim some kind of win.
It's worked for religions for centuries. But you're right it doesn't translate into revolution at all.
>>915584>>Recently formed out of a split
C L A S S I C
I'm so sorry the party we used to be in decided to denounce Marxism, expell us, said immigrants ruin the country, and declared they would be willing to work the hardest neoliberals.
You got anything useful to say or are you just going to jack yourself off?
kek is this in the Netherlands?
>>915677>can someone explain to me the point of organizing, and how it fits into a broad strategy for meeting your aims, and what those aims are?
Lets formulate the aims, in a way that probably all marxists could agree on
>We wish to establish a society where the workers are, as a class in its totality, in direct control of the political and economic power of out society, in order to repress the bourgeoisie and build toward a society where the bourgeoisie is abolished, opening the way towards full communism
Now with that out of the way, lets get into the broad strategy
The only way to do this is to capture and replace the state with a workers state. To achieve this, there must be a political party, a political organization, that acts as a workers government, being the expression, under the control of, the proletariat, which enacts the above stated aims. This party is the political decision making body of the proletariat, just as the state is the decision making body of the bourgeoisie. The party is the political power of the workers movement.
To sustain and grow this party, workers power must be build. This means labour unions, not in the apolitical self-interested sense, but linked directly to the party. Unions aren't to be just small groups of workers working in a cartel form, but a large organization that recognizes that only the working class as a whole, working in solidarity and lockstep, can defeat the capitalists. In this manner, labour unions protect all workers, the ones who aren't on strike support those who are, unions will try to ensure workers dont engage in activities to undermine the work of the other members via indirect scabbing. These unions are the economic power of the workers movement.
Additionally, to ensure our media, our message, our ideology can be spread uncensored, we need our own media. We need newspapers, websites, tv networks, radio, whatever we can build independently of the bourgeoisie, to spread proletarian values. We also need cultural groups with an explicit proletarian ideology, to ensure workers can freely participate in culture on their own terms, rather than being subjected to bourgeois institutions. Proletarian gyms, proletarian cinemas, proletarian bars, proletarian libraries. This media supports the union and party with cultural power, and the party and union support the media with economic and political power.
These are the three main pillars which we ought to build. The workers movement of europe, before the first world war, were build in this manner, and were massive. Only by building these 3 pillars of power, can you attain full dominance.
With these three, you have actual dual power. You have dual power in culture, via your media. You have economic power, via the unions. You have political power, via the party. Only with a base in all three can you sustain secondary projects such as "mutual aid", as the video here >>915696
explained. Mutual aid should not be charity, it should be the political education of the masses. First, we show that by consistently being able to provide these things, the party, the movement, is stable, reliable, and is there for the workers. To do this, you need a strong economic base. Then, you use this to ideologically educate the people. For this, you need the cultural and political base.
"Get people some wins" or "win an election", isnt a political strategy. You're not building workers power. Charity, community gardens, helping the homeless, does not build workers power. These are good things to do, obviously, but should be done consciously with a good political motive and benefit, when your party has the power base to do them. Helping the homeless is a show of strength to the working class, that you are able to solve the problems in their neighborhoods, but in itself, it does not build any kind of power.
Now that we've gotten this down, lets go by your post one by one.
>I don't think I really agree that the "just get people some wins" mentality works
Indeed, it does not work>The other side of that seems to be engaging in perpetual charity for the homeless to claim some kind of win
Also does not work>it's more about social control of the political sphere and political control of the economy for me, a society based on socialist philosophy rather than just trying and failing to get some kind of welfare support or something
You are correct. I hope that my earlier writing clears some of this up, but if not, feel free to ask for clarification.>Can people even be gotten on your side for political action?
They can. If we look at how it was done before, we can see that the way to do so is to find workers with specific grievances, and be the people organizing them. Workers needing a union, people trying to protect their homes from being demolished, that sort of stuff. You, as a marxist, go in there, and train these people to organize themselves, you teach them how to conduct meetings, you explain why certain tactics work and why others won't, you explain why they have to fight for themselves rather than vote. Do this, and you are already making people class concious. Make it clear that a true marxist/socialist/communist/whateveryoucallyourself party is not about electrocalism, we are not about "winning votes". We aren't there to tell them to "just vote for us, we will save you". They have to save themselves, and we are like them, also fighting for ourselves. Only together, as a class, united in a party, can we make a fist and destroy the system that causes our collective misery.>Does political action like voting actually matter when so much is literally actually rigged?
A twofold answer:
1. We cannot vote ourselves to socialism. Voting, in the end, is not the solution. This much should be clear from everything i wrote before.
2. Nevertheless, voting does something
. With voting in bourgeois democracy, you can enact limited control over society. You can frustrate the bourgeoisie, you can, in some situations, push for laws that will make the organizational work of the workers easier, protect their rights in the workplace, protect unions from the bourgeoisie, direct some of the funds of the bourgeois state towards the workers. So voting is always something you ought to do.
In the end, the bourgeoisie will show that they are fundamentally anti-democratic. Eventually, you will get repressed. A large socialist party getting repressed only solidifies what we have been saying all along about the bourgeoisie into the minds of the workers. Even when illegal, we will go on. We still fight for the workers, we still have our newspapers, and now the workers will be more galvanized.
Hopefully all this gives you some insight into what we ought to be doing, in broad strokes.
Thank you, i will read it.
Kek I sympathize, that entire org completely melted down holy shit haha
Yeah the original socialist party is collapsing in on itself.
Gee, i wonder why, when you purge all the people who actually did all the work.
We are trying to keep going though, especially as a youth group. The time within the SP wasn't the best for training principled cadre, so any tips are appreciated.
interesting. Good work!
What's the general tendency, if I may ask?
I think the dominant tendency right now is Orthodox marxism, whatever you may define that as.
The real thing that links all the people in our orgs is two core points though>Fuck capitalism, we need some form of communism through a political party>You should be able to talk to comrades outside of structures of the party, and openly criticize the party. As much as possible of the discussion of the line of the party ought to conducted openly, as it will show to the working class the reasons and tendencies that exist because of them, and also trying to run an airtight vertical org is untenable and undesirable
The main point around which we we're expelled, or rather, which was used to justify the purge, was that we "worked outside the party structure" by doings things like "drinking a beer with people from other chapters" or "discussing and coordinating in the party with people who we ideologically we're close to". So thats a strong core value, which is also why we have anarchists and had a trot org join us, there is room for their line too.
We will see how it develops, a more solid tendency should be able to solidify over the coming time.
>>916463>which is also why we have anarchists and had a trot org join us, there is room for their line too.
Can you elaborate on this further? I don't think it's much of a secret which org you're referring to now.
I'm especially interested in the Trot group, because the Orthodox Marxist ethos of party organization is usually at odds with them. Was it a case when your local campus IMT / CWI / etc. chapter broke with their masters in the UK to join a less sectarian party? Or did that leadership order them to join the numerically bigger party so they could "build the cadre" with entryism?
Oh that's nice to hear!
Personally I've always found Trots a chore to work with because of a tendency amongst trots to prefer absolute doctrinal purity and are very quick to dismiss anything that doesn't follow it, but hey if you guys are managing to make them stay without excessive conflict, that's all the better and I wish good luck to you, comrade!
>>916550>>916530>I don't think it's much of a secret which org you're referring to now.
Oh yeah sure. Theres people from IMT in local groups. There arent any specifically in my local chapter, but i haven't heard of anything that indicates they throw a wrench in the cogs or anything. (They did whine about some chapter working together with maoists and called for it to be forbidden but they got laughed off)
I imagine they hope to gain some new members, but having a mass socialist youth movement is in their interest. I dont think they broke off the IMT. IDK.
>but hey if you guys are managing to make them stay without excessive conflict, that's all the better and I wish good luck to you, comrade!
When I was in a youth com org, I was not there for long time.. but I think what was missing, is organizing workers and some goal like "free time for workers, no wage cut!". My education on the subject was very weak, just private property and porky is garbage blah blah.
It was at time when I was studying in school, but I had a job too, and even then I was tired at this job and the future looked bleak. Sadly there was no one else working, or working with workers, so I had no one to discuss this with.
I did not read Marx and Lenin page to page, what can I say, mostly I lurk something I do not know which is not systematic.. But in fact mostly scientific study is done like this. You take a problem, lurk, think and conclude something. And a simple goal like less working time, can be rigorously put in simple concise text, sure like any publication it should link to Marx and etc.
I'm not in a position to contribute anything useful, but this is a good thread idea and best of luck to all of you
>>915584>Let me start off>>I am the chairman of a local chapter of a socialist nation wide youth org of a european country>>We have, on paper, 90+ youth members in our local chapter
nobody gives a shit about your zoomer LARP splitter party, Rat.
Then don't reply, fucko
So what do you guys do? Bike Infront of cars to make people drive less? Cuz that's what I would do if I had an org in the NL
>>916717>Bike Infront of cars to make people drive less?
Why would we do that?
If you want to reduce car use were better off trying to get public transport to be affordable rather than bully car drivers.
Based thread. >>915584>The biggest issue is making sure new members keep showing up after the first 3 times.
I'm not an organizer, but speaking from the little experience I have, in order to attain this you first need find an answer to:>what communist youths are even supposed to do
You need to have some theory of change and plan of action in order to hold onto people. I was very briefly involved with a Communist party, and I simply stopped going to meetings because beyond theory discussion (which was good) there was nothing to do, but hand out flyers and write manifestos that for some fucking reason had to be in the style of Soviet bureacratics.
The "doing stuff" part doesn't need to be anything grand or sexy either. Just something realistic enough that committed members can feel that fullfilling their obligations is actually building towards a purpose other than embarassing themselves publicly. There's an actual personal cost to being an active and open Marxist, and so there needs to be tangible, achievable goals to motivate people to make that commitment.
I quit looking for political orgs and simply moved from working an isolated and lonely job in care industry to factory work. People know I'm some vaguely commie type, but I get respect for being good at my job and showing up for union shit. It's not agitating for a revolution, and it's not really even organizing but just knowing I'm clearing up the Commie name by being a normal human being and a good work mate feels better and more productive than the depressing shit that goes on in some of the far Left orgs I know.
>our involvement in activist groups and the student union/labour union protests
I think this is the most promising line of inquiry, especially the union part. There are excellent resources in terms of how to organize unions (check out Jane McAlevey), but I haven't found a resource on how Leftist cadres can organize within unions. Maybe build a squad of SLATs to infiltrate some industry with a lot of young blood in the workforce? IDK, but I hope you keep posting on this thread. >>915589>Its called being able to ask the advice of people who might have some experience, like our comrades in India, the philipines, the chinese comrades, people organising in southern europe, south america.
I think you should be very conscious of the fact that all since all those places have conditions different from yours, their strategies will not necesserily apply to your ssituation. I'm simply saying this because this is a real mistake Leftists keep making. Trying to apply Mao's tactics of protracted people's war in places like France and Italy completely fucked some orgs up. I honestly think the best course of action for those of us in the developed world is to look at people like McAlevey and some other labour organizers that are doing good, and finding ways to apply those lessons to more radical and openly political organizing. Real innovations come from grappling with very particular, concrete problems.
>If my own org had all the answers, we would have taken over the country.
Absolutely based and humble-pilled attitude.
I menat SALTs.
>>916717>So what do you guys do?
Try to hook up with chicks, mostly. Lots of girls looking for activist groups, and they usually tend to go for the leaders of the group. It's the only reason to do a split, tbh.
>>916733>Lots of girls looking for activist groups, and they usually tend to go for the leaders of the group.
There's a certain truth to this, but it reveals a dynamic in many leftist parties that's much darker. A Marxist party will of course have a big emphasis on theory and political education, and therefore the more knowledgeable and experienced members will teach the immortal science to the new recruits. What this means in practice usually is that the new recruits are first and second year uni students and that significantly older members of the party will assume a mentor role, and this mentor role can be exploited to entice your awestruck students to have sex with you. This dynamic is especially strong in Trot and ML orgs where all members must pretend to agree with the "party line" because members can be shunned or expelled if, for example, they put the wrong date on when they think the russian revolution was betrayed.
The end result of this, usually after years of abuse, is a rape scandal. Rape scandals have caused a large number of Trot and ML parties to implode, notably the UK SWP, the US ISO, and most infamously the Workers' Revolutionary Party in the 1980s. The WRP was led by Gerry Healy since its founding in the 1940s, and Healy exploited his theoretical authority to have sex with student recruits - even as Healy himself entered his 70s. It all fell apart when more than three dozen women simultaneously accused him of sexual abuse, although he likely had hundreds of victims over his decades as theoretical high priest. It reminds you of all the sexual abuse scandals of the catholic church - the same dynamic is at play, both in left wing sects and literal religious sects.Sorry OP (if that is you), I didn't mean to imply that you are / will become the next Gerry Healy, just had something to say on the structural origins of all these left rape scandals. As for how to stop this dynamic from happening, I think banning dating within the party is a step too far (the dating aspect is an undeniable draw for a lot of young people including myself tbh), but I have a few ideas. The first is to deliberately avoid creating a theoretical orthodoxy, "party line" or cult of personality. Obviously the activist core will still mostly be theory nerds, but try to keep a diversity of opinion and share responsibility for political education. Definitely avoid the Trot scenario where you have paid full-time lecturers driving from campus to campus and fucking a different girl at each one. The second is just to know this dynamic exists. The religious sexual abuse scandals have led to a lot more caution if not reform, the Gerry Healy scandal should provide the same lesson for the left.
Im going to contain my sneers for now to this post>>916733>It's the only reason to do a split, tbh.
Being kicked out for being a marxist appearantly isn't according to this dude.
But yes, splitting off as a group known for being a sausagefest, while I myself wasn't anywhere near any sort of leadership role at the time, to get pussy, is totally why we split off with several hundreds of people.>>916859
You know, I feel like you guys are just projecting tbh.
>Sorry OP (if that is you), I didn't mean to imply that you are / will become the next Gerry Healy,> I think banning dating within the party is a step too far
We defacto did this>The first is to deliberately avoid creating a theoretical orthodoxy, "party line" or cult of personality
Which is what we have, we have none of those> Definitely avoid the Trot scenario where you have paid full-time lecturers driving from campus to campus and fucking a different girl at each one
We don't have this>The second is just to know this dynamic exists.
We know. We appointed an LGBT and womens work group and also party confidants, one male, one female, one non binary, to prevent such issues.
Everyone knows trot groups are rapey, and we do everything to avoid such situations.
Thank you for the wise words
>You need to have some theory of change and plan of action in order to hold onto people. I was very briefly involved with a Communist party, and I simply stopped going to meetings because beyond theory discussion (which was good) there was nothing to do, but hand out flyers and write manifestos that for some fucking reason had to be in the style of Soviet bureacratics.
Insightfull. This confirms some of the suspisions i had.>The "doing stuff" part doesn't need to be anything grand or sexy either. Just something realistic enough that committed members can feel that fullfilling their obligations is actually building towards a purpose other than embarassing themselves publicly
We will try to work on this
> There are excellent resources in terms of how to organize unions (check out Jane McAlevey)
>I think you should be very conscious of the fact that all since all those places have conditions different from yours
True, thats why we aren't maoists. But I imagine there must be some people somewhere in an industrial part of india or whatever that have some experience with running an org, or at least know who to point to to get advice. Nothing is a blueprint, but learning is always useful as long as you measure it up to your own conditions.
>look at people like McAlevey and some other labour organizers that are doing good, and finding ways to apply those lessons to more radical and openly political organizing. Real innovations come from grappling with very particular, concrete problems.
Will look into it. Thank you.
I hope you will find a leftist org near you some day that isnt hyper cringe. Good luck, comrade.
Also what is a salt?
>>916979>We appointed an LGBT and womens work group and also party confidants, one male, one female, one non binary, to prevent such issues.
You split off from the main party so you could engage in identity politics and get women and LGBT people into leadership positions? This is communism to you? Why should the gender of a person or who they fuck matter when choosing appointees?
Strong arm labour tactics. Basically this is an old union tactic where young and commited activist infiltrate non-union workshops to help orginze them from within. Takes high levels of dedication, but can be highly effective.
>>916987>But I imagine there must be some people somewhere in an industrial part of india or whatever that have some experience with running an org, or at least know who to point to to get advice. Nothing is a blueprint, but learning is always useful as long as you measure it up to your own conditions.
This is also a good point. And getting in touch with proper worker's organisations in India and other such places can be useful on its own. If you form relations with them and later gain a foothold in a union for example, that can open up some real opportunities.
>>916979>You know, I feel like you guys are just projecting tbh.
No idea why I thought Trot rape scandals were relevant tbh. I thought about scrapping everything at the third paragraph but said fuck it and posted it.
I think it's because I went on another research dive about the Healy rape scandal lately, specifically the SEP / WSWS's reaction to it (they split from the WRP after the scandal). You may remember that the WSWS was adamant about defending accused sexual predators of #metoo like Weinstein and Spacey. Well, even back then their newspaper defended
Healy from most charges of sexual exploitation, only drawing the line when one of his victims was below the legal age of 16. This wasn't Healy's worst crime though you see, it was him betraying Trotskyism by vulgarizing the dialectic. Really bizarre stuff.
you actually think you’re the genius that’s gonna craft the perfect system that creates a revolution through your theoretical prowess?>>916979>Everyone knows trot groups are rapey, and we do everything to avoid such situations.
ok. have you ever tried being critical about why that might actually be the case? is there a reason why wouldn’t have a desire to be critical about it in the first place?
What exactly do you mean by >muh
When you say >muh organising?
Why is that there in the context? Do you think communist should be disorganised? Or perhaps you think they talk about organising without actually getting into the nitty gritty of what that means and how it is done? In which case, that is literally the point of the thread so contribute something positive instead of being a moaning little bitch.
i remember when this was a kind of funny meme instead of a raging cope
Don't be afraid to talk to your local union organizers or the IWW or something to get help with organizing your workplace. They want to help you.
I asked some comrades who have also dealt with inactive members in their orgs what they did, the advice they gave was to contact each of the inactive members one-on-one. Either by calling them or texting them and hava a conversation on why they're inactive, if they're interested in getting involved again etc
Having the one-on-one conversation had greater sucesss than just sending out a mass email that would just go into people's spam folder
>Now, what we do not do is, but not out of any conscious decision<educating cadre
I'm a candidate member for my org, and what I've been doing is attend weekly zoom calls discussing sections of our program as part of my onboarding. The purpose of these weekly meetings isn't necessarily to just educate me on the party and its program. But also as a way for me to demonstrate my commitment to the party, that I won't suddenly just ghost the party once I become a member.
I think having weekly reading groups on your program or any other important text would be a good way to give people who do come thing to do, and a reason to keep on coming. And perhaps once your org has sorted itself out it could move to a candidate member system for new people who join
>>917649>I've been doing is attend weekly zoom calls
P R A X I S
Amazing post comrade, this is exactly what this forum needs. Someone please screencap.
Are there any good books you recommend that go into more detail on these topics?
There is little reasons to drive a car in the Netherlands. Most car users here deserve to get bullied. Yes PT could be made more affordable but people here use cars to get from their neighbourhood to the centre when it takes 15 minutes max to do so by bike
it's a terrible post and the anon does not know what the fuck they're saying.>2. Nevertheless, voting does something. With voting in bourgeois democracy, you can enact limited control over society.
As a political party or organisation you should only enter elections if you know you will win. Only starry-eyed liberals and their pet project single issue party acolytes are the only ones who think you can gain power or popularity through electoralism. If your first step is to get on a voting list among the 2736252737363 parties in your country, and fight over the 10% of the votes of people who do not vote for one of the major centrist parties, you've already failed.
Start a local, city org, gain power on the ground. Build networks, provide services. Then, once you know you can get a seat on the city or regional council, or a mayoral position, then you get the org/party on the ballot, and then you win. Then the election and votes become an actual expression of what people want, not just a way for you to play politics.
"Even where there is no prospect of achieving their election the workers must put up their own candidates to preserve their independence, to gauge their own strength and to bring their revolutionary position and party standpoint to public attention. They must not be led astray by the empty phrases of the democrats, who will maintain that the workers’ candidates will split the democratic party and offer the forces of reaction the chance of victory. All such talk means, in the final analysis, that the proletariat is to be swindled. The progress which the proletarian party will make by operating independently in this way is infinitely more important than the disadvantages resulting from the presence of a few reactionaries in the representative body. If the forces of democracy take decisive, terroristic action against the reaction from the very beginning, the reactionary influence in the election will already have been destroyed."
Workers state in Belgium? In US with 76% GDP - services? Same percent is employed in services.
I think the workers should organize to gain monopoly in necessary for living production: food, fuel, construction, etc. Since not just one company produces say grain, the workers should organize to gain control of multiple farms/factories at once, to form the monopoly. This between-factories organization is why they need a party.
If they have monopoly, they can produce for themselves what they need very efficiently and trade with everyone else on their terms. It is still capitalism, but with workers monopoly in some of the production. This monopoly is just a continuation of collective worker bargaining. Collective bargaining is what workers do when they join a union.
It is also an order more interesting for workers, than just some slightly higher wage at some individual factory.
What I propose is not against the workers state, but just some initial formation.
Why SALT when you can SLAT?>*bashes them over the head*
I think you got the wrong impression, comrade. Either that, or i misinterpreted the original question.
Voting, even if you dont participate, works to gain some control. Voting for socdems is better than not voting.
As you correctly pointed out, participating when you can be assured to at least get a seat is a good idea. Electrocal success requires lots ofextra work in campaign season, which is why we, as a youth party, do not participate in national elections.
I think you read too much into my answer on "does voting work", because it does do something. Even voting lesser evil, does something, it helps a little.
I do agree with marx here >>918572
but keep in mind that putting up a candidate and pulling off a full campaign are two different things. For small parties with limited funds, keep your means in mind.>>918475
This book (pdf related) goes into it a bit deeper, but its also a critique of the ML party structure, so its not only about that topic.>>917649
Thank you. I will discuss with some of the older cadre and the national org how to make work of the education.
check your calendar, it is 2022. The political landscape has changed a bit in the past 172 years.
"My word is gospel. What I write here are universal truths that are true for all time." - Karl Marx
marxism is a science this is why it must remain ever unchanging and keep clinging to shit thats doomed to fail like electoralism lmao
Czerwona młodzież, is that you?
No. What is their ideological orientation with regards to marxism, previous "real existing socialism" and internal democracy?
It might be worth for us to get into contact with them as a national org.
What's a good org to join in USA?
Name something more viable in the present conditions, unless you're infiltraring the military and forming a free officers movement or something you're not going to overthrow the government
thank you very much for answering my question so well.
I have some more:
So i understand now that the point of organizing is well, to organize the people with grievances into a group who can leverage their power for change, and to educate people on the nature this change should take (and not educate dogmatically, but scientifically, as putting forward what has worked before and what should work now). I'm pessimistic on two fronts (and i should say i've never attempted to organize so this is just from my perceptions, there are 0 socialist organizations in my state at all):
One, if only people with grievances are gathered, will there ever be enough people to actually enact change at any given time? And this kind of leads into my next question,
Two, how do you retain people? This is a really stupid/naive question i feel like because it kind of assumes people will drift away if their immediate needs aren't getting met, or if they aren't drawn into stimulating action or at least finding companionship in the organization - but do people just stick around and wait till critical mass is built or what? Most importantly, it seems like there's a difference between the fundamental problems which cannot be dealt with under the current system, and the symptomatic problems which draw people in. If you get people on the level of the first, the deep problems which characterize a deep reality of our life in modern/postmodern capitalist society, they will be philosophically socialist and long-term socialists, true converts. But if they're only drawn in on the surface level problems, then theyre only looking for a solution, not a revolutionizing total worldview which socialism is (at its best, at least). To add to this, the elites already know they need to enact some kind of structural socialism to compete with china and keep the economy somewhat alive, how do we distinguish ourselves from these "socialists" (who right wing people somewhat correctly identify as socialist). The difference is at the level of actual people's control, but the level of any individual material grievance is that the level of material reality, which can be ameliorated some by those in power… This all taken together, does my question even make sense? lol. I hope you get it anyways. Like how to move from superficial (but very important) needs, to what really characterizes even the most basic and broad platform of anyone who is socialist? Thank you
>>916444>>918772>Defending "lesser evil" voting
I hope you're not implying what I think you are implying, because I'm not voting for a bourgeoisie party period. Some random socialist party which is making some kind of ill attempted bid? Sure, but anything other then that, no.
>>942817>One, if only people with grievances are gathered, will there ever be enough people to actually enact change at any given time?
Definitely. Remember that grievances of our class are things like "my entire neighborhood, and those others, is being bulldozed", "i don't earn enough an hour to feed my children healthy food" or "i am forced to work with toxic chemicals and all my coworkers die at 60 from cancer". The working class has a lot of grievances to address at all times, and capitalism only allows for so much concessions to the working class for so long before the need for profit rears its head again.
>Two, how do you retain people? This is a really stupid/naive question i feel like because it kind of assumes people will drift away if their immediate needs aren't getting met, or if they aren't drawn into stimulating action or at least finding companionship in the organization - but do people just stick around and wait till critical mass is built or what?
Very good question. This exact thing is what plagues serial single-issue socdem/left-populist parties. They try to organize, but don't bind those people to them.
I think figuring this out is one of the main points we have to tackle. But in my view, the important point is to bind these people to your party not on single issues or promises of better tomorrows if they vote for you, but for you to fundamentally integrate the people into the party, a true mass party, where the orgs they set up directly have a say in the policy of the party. Soviets, if you will. Of course, this is not even mutually exclusive with aspects of a vanguard party, because you would still want to actively recruit the most class conscious and oratorically capable workers into your party.
In my opinion, what we see in a lot of left populist parties is that the main way they do activism is charity cases, the party helps the people, vote for the party and they will make your wages go up, trust the party. But they don't encourage union membership, they don't organize permanent neighborhood councils. They just pander populistically. Advanced communist parties have street chapters, floor chapters, where everyone from the street or neighborhood, or the factory, can come and meet, if they operate openly, and discuss their grievances. Most socdem and left wing parties in the west (western Europe, mostly), only have two sorts of membership. "Be a bureaucrat", for which you have to spend long times weaseling your way up the top down structure and kissing the right asses, or "pay up and fuck off", where you are a member but really, you don't have anything to say.
The cultural pillar is perhaps also important to keep in mind. In the past, the workers used to congregate in socialist pubs, socialist neighborhood houses, socialist sports clubs, all of which promote cohesion and continued politicization.
I personally think that if we really try to politicize these organizations we help workers set up, to make sure the tenants union isn't just about getting better rent rates for only its own members, but recognizes and agitates on their root causes of their suffering, and bind them together with an overarching societal ideology, we should be able to prevent single issue atomisation. This might be difficult in the west due to rampant individualism, where people cant see the whole of society for what it is, but it might be the only way.
You are entirely right in the fact that you can't just "do some organization of a tenants group" and then have them in the pocket. The capitalists will try to make these single issue things. But I am confident that, especially with the deteriorating standard of living in the west, many workers can see that their wages, their safety, their lack of housing, their lack of future prospects, is all connected together.>>942926
Two different people, but it fits together nicely.
Biden and trump is a special case since trump might due to sheer incompetence actually be the less shit option. Nonetheless, this isn't applicable in most of the world where usually politicians aren't reality TV stars, but calculated sociopath.
Trump had policies that were actually decent
Biden just causes things to fall apart
mid terms will be fun
Also I think it's quite a stretch to say "voting is revisionism" given that no serious socialist thinker ever advocated against it. Its just that people like Lenin never wrote about "we need to vote for the srs" because there was no democracy. Likewise, the SPD before their betrayal, contended in elections themselves, so didn't need to do lesser evilism.
However, considering most of us are in tiny parties with no chance at national elections, I think voting for the lesser fascist, because of a lack of alternative candidates, is a smart move.
>>943620>I think voting for the lesser fascist, because of a lack of alternative candidates, is a smart move
who is the "lesser fascist"
want my banking details too?
Alright, you guys do realise one of the sides in European elections (and America too for that matter) calls for what amounts to McCarthyism right? I vote for the side that wants to freeze rents, not the side that opened a hotline to doxx leftist teachers.
Im trying to rally fellow university students to start translating rare political books into a language most of the country will be speaking in the near future, alongside with building a pirate library of historical and political books in both english and spanish, but each time we set our agenda they never keep it. I feel like im hearding cats, I feel do disilussioned because Im of the few people in my country that is in the position to do this work. Im not sure what to do
meant to say we are
>>943667>Alright, you guys do realise one of the sides in European elections (and America too for that matter) calls for what amounts to McCarthyism right?
are you referring to cancel culture?
Look bro I don't care if you're so autistic about voting, since it literally matters very little. Go ahead and don't vote. But if there is a local election I am going to vote for the least shit option if there isn't a Marxist option. Pick some other hill to die on and stop derailing the thread. We clearly both agree that there should be revolutionary parties participating and that of we can vote, it should be on them.
No I'm saying they are litterally saying the left has infested all levels of education's and they need to purge every teacher who isn't right wing.
the issue is you're probably voting against working class interests
but what liberals are doing to anyone who straws too far from the mainline democrat neo liberal view could also be considered a form of McCarthyism like the Biden admins new ministry of truth
Also I'm not sure you Americans realise how far the red scare went in most places. It used to be you wouldn't be able to get most jobs, even in the private sector, if one of your relatives was a communist. So strawman me all you want with "only Hollywood and academia", you're just talking out of your ass. I like being employed, I like not having my windows thrown in by right wing mobs, I will vote, if forced to choose between two, for the succdems putting a stop to that, rather than the ones who allow it.
Now back to organizing.
I agree that is a reason why not to support democrats and liberals with their modern day McCarthyism against anyone who strays from modern liberalism
You didn't prove me wrong, you're kust shouting very loud, this thread is about organizing, and I don't care to get into a multi day shit throwing fight over whether or not you should for Joe liberal over Adolf Von Nazi in the one or two elections between starting to organize and the moment you can put your own candidate forward.
>>943703>You didn't prove me wrong
prove what wrong? I was mocking your shitty political nihilism and masquerading as liberalism
>and I don't care to get into a multi day shit throwing fight over whether or not you should for Joe liberal over Adolf Von Nazi in the one or two elections between starting to organize and the moment you can put your own candidate forward.
your concessions is accepted
the issue is you're probably voting against working class interests
but what liberals are doing to anyone who straws too far from the mainline democrat neo liberal view could also be considered a form of McCarthyism like the Biden admins new ministry of truth
I agree that is a reason why not to support democrats and liberals with their modern day McCarthyism against anyone who strays from modern liberalism
You've shown where your class interest lies. I think you're scared of the truth.>>943703>You didn't prove me wrong
prove what wrong? I was mocking your shitty political nihilism and masquerading as liberalism>and I don't care to get into a multi day shit throwing fight over whether or not you should for Joe liberal over Adolf Von Nazi in the one or two elections between starting to organize and the moment you can put your own candidate forward.
your concessions is accepted
Yes, being employed is my class interest.
Glowie Glowie Glowie glowie fed fed glowie glowie glowie glowie glowie glowie cia fed fed fed psyop glowie glowie glowie glowie glowie fed fedpost glowfag glowie glowie glowie
It's called the real movement to abolish the present state of things, not the real movement to organize or go outside glowie
>I like being employed, I like not having my windows thrown in by right wing mobs,
<You've shown where your class interest lies.
What did he mean by this?
resorted to larping and schizo posting now?
>>943728>>943730>doesn't like right wing mobs>votes for the right wing mobs
What did he mean by this?
I'm not >>943739
Now back to organising.
lol well guess you ran away
why did my posts get removed when i pointed out one's oppurtunism?
>>916717>put yourself in danger and cause traffic accidents
Great advice, comrade!
Literally, they're good for some things but perhaps looking further afield like language groups like ESL things is better.
Alright, time to stop putting it off. I'm going to join a socialist party.
I live in the middle of nowhere so I'll definitely have to relocate in the near future if I want to actually do real organizing, but I figure I can at least attend some online events in the meantime. Even beyond my politics, I think being part of an actual group will do wonders for my mental health.
praise me for doing the bare minimum pls
Also, when I do move, any recommendations for what American city has the most active/effective labor and/or socialist orgs? I have no real career aspirations beyond organizing workers so I'm cool moving wherever.
wow thank you, my hope is resparked lol idk how i didnt think of this myself cause it seems so simple now, thank you so much anon <3
Organizing in rural areas is possible and necessary.
What is your political orientation? Different parties have different territories so to speak. PSL is big in California for example.
yeah i wasn't gonna say anything cause i think they gotta just live it and work it out themselves, but i'm in the same situation, live in a rural area that seems kind of bleak, but moving away also was a bad idea, like at least i get the vibe of this place better. And anyways someone's gotta organize somewhere… might as well start where u are
but that said i think everyone's journey has to work itself out thru practice
but i know where i'm gonna be, it's right here in this small city in the middle of nowhere.
Fucking nice comrade, proud of you. You're already doing more than half the radical lefties in the west.>>945691
Don't worry, I had to read manuals of old communist parties, books about organizing, and discuss this extensively with other to figure it out. These all seem obvious in hindsight, but it took many people many decades to figure out these basic things. The best we can do is read what they wrote down about it, so we don't have to reinvent the wheel.
im the ceo of antifa
we kidnap straight white married men and force them to watch bambi sleep in exchange for soros bux, it’s bussin 😎👊💸💰💰🤑
So at this point I feel I have 4 options:
>Unionize my workplace
>Get involved in politics in my immediate locality
>Start some sort of group at my (online) school
>Get involve in politics online
However I feel like unionization at work is doomed to fall and screw me over if I even try, and I currently still live at home in a very right-wing, semi-rural area so I think it's a situation similar to my workplace.
So I guess that leaves me with two options, but I have no idea what kind of group I would start through school, how I would set it up, or what it would even do.
And well, since this is a thread about actually organizing I feel like online "activism" is out of the question.
Does anyone who does mutual aid know where one could get large amounts of fruit for cheap?
>>945561>Alright, time to stop putting it off. I'm going to join a socialist party.
Now join a union too.
Then join a local liberal activist circlejerk as well.
Once you've collected all three, you'll get more experience about what not to do in four months than in years of just doing one.
Don't start anything yet.
Join what you can, even liberal orgs, and just suck up knowledge and learn (what not to do).
Sign up to what you can, attend what you can, reach what you can, then in two months review where you're at and then maybe start something.
Failing is still learning, and it's good fuel. Let the hopelessness wash over you, and once it has you'll be mentally and emotionally liberated to pursue your goals.
i'm a ruralfag too and recently ive realized that i had lots of organizing opportunities at my last job, people would come up to me and talk about how management fucked them over, how they'd discriminated against and not getting moved to another department, etc. But instead of being like "yeah i know what you mean theyre horrible, we can put the screws to them if we gang up whats ur number?" i was just happy to gripe with them and shoot the shit. I feel like in retrospect one of the people might have been trying to get smth going but i was just too stupid to see it, since we both got injured and fucked over by the company. I feel fucking stupid now, cause i just assumed there was nothing u could do i guess….. now i'm gonna be a fucking magnet, i wont leave anyone un-squaded.
p.s., there's lots of drug problems, lots of fucked over vets, and lots of angsty kids in rural areas. People might not be there politically in explicit ways, but they have the instinct cause we're all workers at the end of the day. And at least if we're not all workers, we all feel screwed by the coastal elites and washington and shit.
>>950367>Does anyone who does mutual aid know where one could get large amounts of fruit for cheap?
Yes, Go to your loca wholesale fruit and vegetable market where the local buisnesses go to get their frut or get it delivered from. Everything s picked up pretty early in the morning so late morning is the best time to go often, just ask people, they are usually happy to give you the stuff that's going o turn soon and the stuff nobody want as most people are against the wastefulness of capitalist society.
If not you can still take it from their dumpsters but it's not as comfie.
I can maybe answer more questions about this if you need as it is something we used to do a lot.
Do you reveal your political aims at all or just say that it's going towards people that need it?
I'd go with the latter always. Even from a normal every day perspective I think it is better to be about what you do than what you believe, Obviously read a situation but I'm not sure that the former relevant or would gain you anything most of the time.
my party already operates an organisation that sets up stalls in the city for about 3 hours every sunday. We already offer food, drink, and clothing, it's just we rarely - if ever - give out any fruit.
Please tell me how to organize if I am an autistic shutin with 0 friends who can barely say hello to a stranger
Dont. Focus on yourself first.
Well this feels lazy. I'm also a transhumanist and do not feel comfortable interacting with large groups of people who I don't know especially from my 4chan mind poisoning about how many people want to murder me.
I don't think anyone cares anon. If you are not a firstie move to somewhere actually safe and normal, if you are a firstie, nobody wants to kill you, consume less twitter.
Get friends, to do this, stop acting like a freak and take some diazapam.
Sage for this has nothing to do with organizing.
Thanks anon. Ur rite sorry
>>952274>4chan mind poisoning
please don’t “organize”, thanks
Your life is never too bad to read theory. Even the best communists of all time had to take a break from life every now and then to catch their breath and read some books.
p.s. 4chan is not at all representative of public opinion, as I'm sure you're aware. Very few people in the first world have any violent inclinations towards trans people so you shouldn't let that stop you from trying to make friends.
In my immediate area I know of a branch of the DSA, a soclib/socdem Latino organization, and an organization of older hippies from back around the Vietnam War. Unfortunately my work schedule makes it hard to go to meetings because I work evenings and my anxiety issues don't help either, but I can try to go to as many meetings as I can.>>951127>>951131
It happens, no reason to feel stupid. I guess I can try to talk politics with more people, see if anyone else feels the same way.
Based on their manifesto published few weeks ago (they are splinter from PPS, a "socialist" party that went full neoliberal)>support for planned economy including wide social services, guaranteed employment, lowering the working day>pro-ecology>freedom comes after having basic necessitiet met>synonim of socialism is participatory democracy (no mention of DotP tho)>patriotism (as in self-determination)>very pro-feminism>critical of NATO and Russia
Source in Polish (good full google translate on that shit): https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hLKKn1GvjWM-MNttC1FGAsQPakiLcSih/view
Given conditions of polish movement. They keep quiet about AES, are infiltrated by trots (but arent fully commited, and do have ML fraction connected loosely to Instytut Marksa) and as for internal democracy I can't tell.
CPK stay vibing>>952811
If I'm moving to a small city in the American south that appears to have zero local orgs, what should I do? I've thought about trying to start a DSA chapter, since I think that would have the highest likelihood of success in the area and I could maybe help keep it from becoming radlib if I get in on the ground floor. I've attended a few DSA meetings where I live currently and their theory was actually pretty good, but I really got involved because I didn't plan to live here long. Any advice?
I advice against this path. You'd better recenter and start building a chapter of a communist party with a good line instead.
Comrades, how should a socialist do to try and organise if islamic conservatism is very dominant and communism(marxism-leninism specifically but it's ambiguous) is banned in his country? Considering I am a uni student what is the best thing to do, and how to do to minimise risk of being burned to death or jailed for 7+ years?
I wish i could help you in that. I don't feel confident advising you on this with any degree of confidence.
Are you from iran? I know that there are some communist groups in diaspora, but the safest thing is to just to push within the allowed limits of your country and not try to be explicit about being a marxist or ml, but just to push class conciousness. But don't listen to me, this is so different from my own circumstance that i have no idea. In real talk, looking to lenin, who operated in illegality too, might be worth it.>>952763
thanks>>952592>but I can try to go to as many meetings as I can.
Sounds good>>952274> my 4chan mind poisoning about how many people want to murder me.
1. Get off 4chan (and this board, for that matter)
2. Get off twitter
3. Go outside and have drinks in a bar at least once a week with some friends. Call up old friends you lost contact with if you dont have any current ones. Go to some event via something like meetup.com or some activity club if you cant find anything.
4. Keep this up for at least half a year
It should help you with your extremely toxic internalised fear and hatred of yourself. You really shouldn't try to see politics as a way for you to fix such a major part of your life, politics is exhausting. The important part is to deprogram yourself ie touch grass
thanks for the advice, i am from the jakarta method country. i might organise a reading club or some sort to get some comrades first, as i am now totally alone and couldn't join any union before getting a job. i know there is a street anarchist presence in a neighbouring province but i have no idea on how to get in touch with them, and i am not really an anarchist.
I love CPK so much lmao
hello! my city's communist/left orgs are doing a rally this weekend over a local issue i'm pissed off about. i feel i should show up and support it. not a communist but it's not explicitly a communist rally-it's organized with a range of left and advocacy groups.
i've never actually been to a rally-i don't know anyone here whose really politically active & growing up lived in small places with dead political scenes. im kinda realizing that i have no idea what you do at a rally lol. i've done like canvassing stuff but with that you just show up and they tell you what to do and send you your way. so i guess i'd really appreciate some general pointers and maybe answers to some questions from you more experienced guys
1) safety-is it okay to go alone? should I wear discrete clothing? covid mask to cover face? it's not going to be heated so i don't think there's any worries about cops or anything like that, but i'm just thinking about like if there's going to be people taking photos of protestors or following them home or shit like that esp. since it's going to be a rally with hammer and sicke flag waving communists.
2) what to do when there? just talk to people, ask questions? is there like some specific protest culture/etiquette i should know about? obviously common sense stuff applies-don't be a dick, don't be a sperg, etc but i'm just making sure
3) is it worth going if i can't really commit to future work? i'm busy with uni and work, & i dont plan on formally joining any orgs as they're all demcent parties & i'm not ideologically a good fit for them.
these might be silly questions idk, i just have never really had a chance to do this before and i'm realizing i don't know what i'd be doing. going straight into unknown political situations is kinda nerve wracking i guess.
>>963340>safety-is it okay to go alone?
Of course!>should I wear discrete clothing?
I wouldn't worry too much tbh, if you want to avoid trouble with cops just wear regular clothing, nothing that makes you look anarchist/black block/antifa/communist. Regular jeans and shirt is fine >Covid mask to cover face?
Just take one to be sure, the organizers might appreciate it depending on what stage of COVID your country is in.> it's not going to be heated so i don't think there's any worries about cops or anything like that, but i'm just thinking about like if there's going to be people taking photos of protestors or following them home or shit like that esp.
Ive never heard of that happening. If it's not gonna be explicitly communist then you should be fine if you just wear normal clothing, the crazies won't target you>what to do when there? just talk to people, ask questions?
Its a great opportunity to meet the local groups. I would hover recommend talking to the ones who are specifically doing things like manning a stand or handing out flyers, they are the ones most likely to feel comfortable with talking to strangers. If you find a group you like, ask if you can come by some time.>is there like some specific protest culture/etiquette i should know about?
Don't take photos or film people. It makes you look like a cop or right wing wacko and lots of the more radical people get upset about it because of possible incrimination.>is it worth going if i can't really commit to future work? i'm busy with uni and work, & i dont plan on formally joining any orgs as they're all demcent parties & i'm not ideologically a good fit for them.
Of course! I think you might be surprised about who you find. You don't need to be a cadre member to be in an org, you can be a "yeah I show up for protests or a cool lecture sometimes" member too! Or just talk to them. If you can network a bit, you can always just say no afterwards.
I think going to that protest is a great idea. Don't worry too much about it getting messy. If it gets sketchy, just leave. You're under no obligation to put yourself in danger if you don't feel comfortable with that. If cops attack a protest, their main goal is to disperse the crowd, not to make casualties, so if you leave you are good. Its unlikely to turn bad though if it's organised by larger less adventurist groups like demsocs, it's mostly the anarchists and antifa who usually invite escalation by the police (sometimes just by being there, the cops hate black block). And the anarchists usually know that if they want to start shit they should do it seperately after the protest, so as to not scare normies away from future protests, they're not stupid.
There's a Zoom meeting being held by the DSA today at 8:30 PM to discuss actions to be taken with regards to the abortion debacle, should I bother attending?
It's a very broad question you ask.
Make contact with unions in other cities. Travel to meetings and make connections, get advice + training and see how workplaces similar to yours organize. Bring this knowledge back to your city and implement it.
inb4 but my circumstances are slightly different, what do
>Its time to stop whining about bullshit like Wiccans or shizo pedo rape cult conspiracies
A schizo pedo rapist wiccan wrote this
What kind of job could I get to help the cause? Or is my political science degree worthless in this regard?
yes probably very worthless
get a normal job, not some lizard person job
How difficult is it to understand that when communists say that you should vote, they are not saying you should *only* vote.
Food production, like learning industrial methods of food production that can be replicated instead of relying on the corporate supply chain. You saw what happened at CHAZ.
Police officer. Literal power with the ranks of our biggest immediate obstacle.
Having read ballots submitted by anarchists (compulsory booting or fine), I can understand someone requesting clarification.
I have a normal job and I hate it, I hate being yelled at by petite bourgeois assholes to fix their shitty Internet connections so they can go on Facebook and whine about Critical Race Theory, I want to do something meaningful>>993559
I don't know if being a cop is such a good idea but I suppose I can see about food production
Your political science degree is actually very useful, you just have to apply it to get into the ranks of the bourgeoisie party apparatus and the subvert the party from the indside aaaand you're an apologist for imperialism and are forming your own social-democratic party.
Sad. Many such cases.
See that's what I'd like to avoid
there's a culture within police departments that weeds out people like anon
Even double binds to pull you into the shit, e.g. getting heat on you for both ratting out corruption and abuses, and for being part of corruption and abuses. No matter what you'll be dragged into it, and forced behind the blue wall of silence. You don't get to be someone reforming from the inside.
(also military is easily a bigger threat + less evil for most people in it and you get good experience)>>993574
im sorry about your experience at your job, i know how it feels. I don't expect to ever have a job i feel "meaningful" since the nature of capitalism is that all your efforts go into private hands, and your job's survival is dictated by how well it competes, not how well it does meaningful or valuable work. Anyways good luck on winning the rat race anon. We're all trying to beat you to get that meaningful job that also pays the bills and doesnt involve being yelled at ;)
My advice is to find meaning outside of work, and try for a job that just doesnt force you to get abused by shitty people
Jokes aside, I think your position to construct a movement is better than you think. Political sciences can get you into some bourgeoisie party or movement, sure, but you should see what their errors in organization are, try to sway the more radical members or sympathizers to your side and eventually break off.
Though, will your comrades be classpilled enough?
you can't just construct a movement by having the right line and trying to steal people involved in bourgeois parties
poli-sci anon would be better off just talking to their neighbors and coworkers
some degrees are just a waste of money (unless you're trying to get in with bourgie political apparatus or academia)
That's exactly what Lenin did
Its what trots do and it doesn't work. Lenin also didn't do that.
I recently learned there's lobbyists for education and universities and whatnot. In the end though political science is a "how to fascilitate imperialism" study, so you might need a backup plan.
(Or build a portfolio, move to china and produce anti western propaganda)
I bet 100% that thread is filled with concern trolls saying stuff like
>the internet isn't for organising >not your personal army >it is simply not possible no point in trying >you're a larper
or some variation of these.
All of these responses are however complete and total bullshit, posted by either feds or idiots but the result is the same. The poster is absolutely right.
In their workplace, in their neighbourhood, talk to them and ask them about how things are in these places, start right in the immediate, and gradually expand the picture
there was a song in ussa (that i didn't heard b t w), it said something like "if all (young) guys of all earth…" etc
but later in the 90s or so it was memed as "if all hicks of all eath" (basically if all idiots/brainlets)
so obviosly that works only in theory or in maoist stalinst shit where you need machineguns to shoot hem as well
not convinced, but yeah works in theory
you see the theory implies that the individual is not idiot (while in practice it is greatly overstated)
this was also one reason austrian army (and empire) stopped existing b t w, they overestimated their forced but greatly underestimated russian forces (per capita) in their army, as the result they sucked tremendously and dramatically
and even the nazi commander was fired cuz he was retarded
tldr realz > feelz
Kenya is going to be alright 😊
Go to work places of workers, and ask them about their material conditions.
Only listen what they say.
Go home read theory about those particular material conditions.
Go back to the worker and present them your theory
See how it goes, do the workers accept your theory ?
Back and forth between theory and praxis, until it fits.
Recruit more workers, students can't be the main base for communist organizing because studenting ends after a few years and then your members evaporate away.
Party politics is hard, you have to ban everything that could lead to interpersonal drama, no relationship between members, no orgies, no social club functions like parties and no culture stuff. Focus only on the material conditions of workers and ignore all the topics that originate in the bourgeois political spectacle.
Start by building dual power as institutions for mutual help.
Get your members to go through military training or other enforcement institutions of the bourgeoisie, that can be a very good way to learn (positive and negative) lessons from the incumbent system. Especially if you have to defend your self against informal terror.
The best opening for socialism to regain prominence will be during partial systemic collapses of late stage capitalism. If your socialist organization can become a support structure for people during crisis, you will be able to entrench it. Your threat model is about defending that support. You are not preparing for a revolt that sweeps the old rulers out of the halls of power. The halls of power are crumbling away, and the next chapter in prehistory will belong to who ever can maintain civilization for the masses.
Hey anon, you got a temp/burner email you can be reached at?
Help guys I work at a US supermarket and two of our locations have just filed NLRB election petitions out of the blue. Anybody here been on a union organizing committee before? How do you go about building support?
Thanks comrade>My advice is to find meaning outside of work
Yeah I'll try that, thank you>>993584
I mean I figure it certainly wouldn't hurt to have all that information>>993594
I have no idea how to bring up the subject of politics though>>993599
That's what I'm afraid of, I don't want to be some Democratic Party bureaucrat
i bring up politics just like i bring up other stuff: awkwardly and based on what im thinking in the moment
I'm one the one to say how to organize, but how i've breached political topics is just to say "hey ive been thinking about this" and go from there basically. If your relationship to the situation is that you're trying to sell them on smth or recruit then, I'd focus on changing ur relationship to politics to be more chill, getting at the real reasons and understanding how those reasons are kinda universal, and then understanding if some of those reasons for being into politics are just personal autism, and then don't go from that angle unless you wanna just talk about smth that interests you (rather than trying to get them to vibe with it necessarily). I've been asked to join shit with a friend, and basically it was the same, just "hey i been thinking about doing x". I think the casual and self-interested route is the only acceptable one. Cause at the end of the day it is just that you want some change, and u want ppl to help. It helps to make friends first and gauge where their head is at overall, too.
The poster is semi-right
, but as the more serious people in the thread pointed out:>OP is an idea guy except without even having the decency of a rudimentary idea. Literally just another worthless "WOW WE SHOULD DO SOMETHING" post with no plan>join a group that knows what they fuck they're doing (they mentioned for example joining IWW )>most of the sub are libs>much of the sub aren't USA and most would be in different states
and as I will point out:>OP is a clueless lib>100:10:1 : if a thousand people saw that, only about 10 would do anything more than click an up arrow or type 'wow that would be great!'
Now, of course, I am absolutely not saying that the idea of 'use the interconnected web to amass a force capable of accomplishing useful online things or helping people discover real local groups'. Of course there are things that even shitty /r/antiwork can do (and debatably have done
; see Kellogg's anti-scab raid and legal advice giving). I just realize reddit is an abysmal (design-wise) and vulnerable
place. What they should be doing is finding communities that are capable of action (as much as we like leftypol, I personally think it's better as a social forum than a place to plan, for security reasons and unhelpful legacy). Hell, make a Lemmy instance or other forum hosted in a non-NATO nation to promote some definite actions. But making a vague 'i ll design the logo' post is lib shit that goes literally nowhere.
If I didn't screencap that post, it would have been forgotten already. You personally could do better to organize that community into something helpful.
Watch out for orgs that exist solely to rope people in and get them to pay subs solely to fund salaries for "full-time" members. The whole thing gets degraded into cadres basically becoming Mormon missionaries. Complete waste of time. Looking at you, Trots.
>Unfortunately as movements, orgs, and formations remain marginalized, so will these circles be susceptible to abusers, cranks, and opportunists. In order to combat this, mass literacy on trauma and abuse as well as individual principled practice can help insulate growing movements from these behaviors and guide individual comrades to navigate spaces safely and recognize threats to said safety.
>Growing orgs like CPUSA or PSL need to have accountability processes in place to help resolve long term conflicts and increase the capacity for rehabilitation of comrades who are still potential assets in the struggle in the face of allegations of abuse, true or not, that is centered around the needs of the victim as well as conflict resolution in general. Abusive behavior is reactionary behavior. Satiating sadistic or entirely self-serving impulses at the expense of comrades is to me a call-sign of potential corruption or lack of integrity that undermines the organizational culture when attrition and burn out are common problems that every org faces as members die, are caught up in survival in the system, or have not fully committed to action. Interpersonal and abusive dynamics are often times very complicated. NOT having institutional support on a national level to help resolve these is a recipe for same marginalization and attrition that has plagued left orgs for ages now.
>Marginalized movements who have no sense or understanding of mass politics and without such accountability processes will devolve into said cultish practice as they are too absorbed in intellectualizing and gratifying the needs of the abusers. Intellectual rigidity is a sign of dogmatism.
>t. Anon who organizes and encounters these problems way too often.
>>995165>Apologies for the late response. Regardless if you see this, I think it'd be handy for other folks.
>First off, when you can, read this study: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4358&context=gc_etds
>Sure, the main focus of the study is anarkiddies but the author uses historical contextual examples using other formations as well like the BPP or SDS. You might pick up something useful regarding interpersonal relations regardless. So imagine all of these issues, success, and limitations that a decentralized community has encountered, and now imagine if disciplined and principled cadre of organizations implemented forms of accountability on a local or national level.
>Suprisingly enough, the only org that has some sort of an restorative/HR/internal conflict resolution type thing is the DSA. Maybe PSL has one after the whole fiasco that was aired on Twitter a few years back, but haven't received an update on that. From what I've seen of which is aired publically, DSA only has a single national harassment officer that coordinated with local chapters and that hasn't been as effective as it could've been over ongoing internal struggles regarding Palestinian solidarity. Now they're considering from what I've heard, expanding this structure to a whole council of grievance officers instead of just one person as it is difficult to juggle all of these things individually. If your org has a bunch of social workers, honestly that could work quite well if you wish to look over what DSA has publically available and adjust it. Demcent is good during crises for dealing with conflicts, but isn't enough for movement building I believe.
>>952763>critical of nato
lmfao what, they love both nato and eu, they are also full of anarchists (go figure)
>>995166>Apologies for the late response. Regardless if you see this, I think it'd be handy for other folks.
No worries. I'm reading it just now :)
Thank you for the link, I'll read it and spread it to the team.
I've looked at DSA's procedures: https://www.dsausa.org/resources/harassment-and-grievance/
Looks like aye good basic framework to build on.
Just be careful anon. You never know if others who may benefit from the lack of internal accountability will crawl out of the fucking woodwork. Just be mindful of those who would pushback against something like this. That's why I recommend reading the study to get a grasp of historical examples to elaborate your case. Not essential, but I think it would really help.
Is there any point to me joining the IWW as a… what's the foodonym for an aussie? Kangaroo? Vegemite? Beer? Halal Snack Pack? Whatever.
-> My industry has a union already,
-> I suspect it would be too dilute to be any more valuable than the existing union.
-> I don't think I would be doing anything valuable in return, beyond donating.
-> I'm in a large corporate, the office alone has 10,000 people and my team is pretty well paid so most peers aren't going to be motivated to organize radically. The young ones are sharing our salaries but that's about it as far as I foresee.
I don't even know what to do with the current union apart from pay dues until I need a laywer or they push out an an enterprise agreement. Almost feels like I'm at the top of the bottom and there's nothing to do but run around to see which orgs need my help.
Is there any point to not joining? The best part about joining orgs like the IWW is meeting other people that might introduce you to other radical movements.
Let's say a new radical movement starts in your city that's better than IWW. How are they going to recruit? If they know you're a radical that might be interested, they will ask you first.
>>916859>Trot and ML parties to implode
lol, it only happens with Trotskyists.
bitch how do you think you organize a revolution? you just assemble a party the night before?
>>994091>one million page maoist essay
you quoted a part of the URL
and then asked for clarification, wtf lmao
to answer your question: NO lol, but if you want an in depth answer, PUT THE LINK IN YOUR ADDRESS BAR AND READ THE CONTENTS, OR EVEN THE **ACTUAL TITLE AND NOT JUST THE FILE NAME LMAO
(you) as well, you have been noticed
We forbid "slide into dms" of new members. It's our unofficial anti simp rule.
what they say:>We forbid "slide into dms" of new members.
what they mean:<party leaders have first pick of new members
Political parties, "activist organisations", "non-profits" are just dating clubs for leftist oriented people. Find me a party or org where those in leadership positions didn't fuck one or more of the members. FIND ME ONE.
Unruhe's Protracted Peoples War Brigade
United Red Army (Japan)
Members committed suicide because they took self-crit sessions too seriously. Pretty intense atmosphere; don't think anyone was screwing around.
I meant existing parties or orgs. >>1008255
I'm talking about contemporary ones, so 90s onwards. This thread is about current organising efforts, and all currents organising efforts boil down to people wanting to fuck.
Ok Maupin's org.
Also the Infrahaz collective. Haz is keeping his purity for Allah.
Wasn't a sex video leaked of Maupin? lol
Didn't he attempt to have sex with that girl streamer that came to visit him?
No that was just meme-ing from glowies because he's affiliated with RT.
Haz and Sameera Khan are fuggen. They said so on stream. She came out half naked from the shower.
>>1008252>Here is what we do, it works<NOOOO YOU ARE LYING YOU ACTUALLY ARE A SEX PEST WHO USES YOUR POWER TO FUCK ALL THE HOT CHICKS AND BOYS. THIS IS THE TRUTH, EVERYTHING YOU SAY CANNOT BE TRUE
Stop projecting, kill yourself, sex pest.
>>1008264>Maupin>Muh christian values married incel-tier soyboy ginger in a bad suit>Pulling any pussy
Jesus how long is this article
it was screenshots of a gay porn video (supposedly) of maupin
Awful article. Actually most people believe in building all those things in order to build the power to launch an all out offensive.
You can’t launch an all out offensive immediately.
For a guy that is rightly into vanguards, this whole thing is just ultra left bollocks. A revolution takes time
This is fucking long, where does he actually suggest an alternative? I’m guessing it comes down to “do all those things I’ve just said are bad, but do them cool like how I don’t do them but are saying you should”
Or “build a party and vooooote” as if that hasn’t been tried endlessly. The problem being that nobody will vote for you unless you have a strong base, and that base will lack discipline unless it actually has a reason to stick with you, I.e you are actually doing things for them.
Just some salty trot pretending to be a based Stalinist probably mad his 4 member party still has 4 members while the youth are actually out engaging people.
Sad. Many cases.
This is written by exactly the guy who starts speaking at a meeting and everyone switches off because they know what’s coming. Absolutely nothing tangible or useful to what is being discussed, tangent after vaguely related tangent, the chair asking the them to wrap it up, only for them to raise their voice and move on to another unrelated point, head so far up their own arse they can’t even see the blatant boredom they have just brought to an otherwise vibrant endeavour. He tries to open up his rants to people post meeting and they move off to somebody else. Frustrated, he goes home and writes this blog post where he feels the need to write (1920) after he cites infantile disorder lmao.
Hopped up on his own big brained intelligence, lots of finicky “well akshually”
Nobody cares Kenny, you’re fucking boring
why are you triggered by an anon mentioning something you totally don't do? why do you feel called out? wait, you aren't aware your leaders are "sliding in people's dms"? you sweet summer child…
>>1008061>>994091>you quoted a part of the URL and then asked for clarification
I didn't ask for clarification. That's a rebuttal to the retarded argument that I could glean from the URL alone.>READ THE CONTENTS, OR EVEN THE **ACTUAL TITLE AND NOT JUST THE FILE NAME LMAO
The title is literally the same as the URL.
As for the article itself:>For all their aversion to collective discipline and democratic centralism, for all their anti-vanguardism, for all their donning of dogmatic ideologies and petty sectarian bickering, it’s striking how firmly united most Leftists under the age of 35 in the US are on the notion that passing out free food, doing community gardens, and (maybe…most never get this far) some NGO-style tenant organizing will lead to…revolution? Beneath the absurdity lies the fact that revolution—in the sense of a civil war in which the bourgeoisie is overthrown, their state apparatus is destroyed, and the means of production are seized—has vanished from people’s political horizons. It has been replaced with grandiose illusions bearing monikers such as dual power, counterpower, “base areas,” and abolition. Unifying all these illusions is the notion that it’s possible to carve out “bottom-up” direct democratic forms of territorial (or “community”) control by the proletariat and oppressed people that gradually supplant bourgeois power without having to launch an all-out offensive aimed at the seizure of power—in other words, eating away at bourgeois rule without ever having to decisively overthrow it.
So the whole thing is a massive straw man. People don't do these things for their own sake, but as part of building a revolutionary organizaiton. Dual power and so on are ways to recruit people by way of proving at present that communistic models of organizing can help meet the people's needs that capitalism fails to do. It is much more effective to prove our case through action than words. The point, however, is to amass power so that eventually there will be the critical mass (and even more importantly, an already existing and functional communist organization that can handle large-scale supply and logistics
) necessary to do a revolution.
All you constantly do is post retarded shit, accusing anyone offering a solution as secretly plotting to do the opposite. You have no fucking idea about other people's orgs and how they behave, yet you accuse them of being the scum of the earth to a degree or specificity that I can only conclude you yourself have the fantasies you constantly throw at others. Yes you piss me off because your a right twat who doesn't do shit other than shit up internet forums, fantasize about power abuse and act just like some holier than thou liberal policing clapping.
It’s actually mad he took the time to do it really. It must be what, at least 10,000 words? Mans wrote a dissertation about how awful it is that some well meaning students handed out some food without first getting the consent of 1/5th of the local population, with citations and everything.
Somebody really needs to learn to chill. Reeks of autism and not in the good way
Also yes I know for a fact they "don't slide into dms" because I know them. It's not even about leadership, who have 0 respect in my hyper anti hierarchical national culture, but about random members who are sex pests, like the guy dming every new female member and asking to be dominated and asking for feet pics. that's the kind of people we kick out and make clear to others that this is unacceptable.
If you want to project your own depraved fantasies of being the eternal glorious leader of some random sect, go write some stuff on a fanfic site, but leave normal people out of it. We don't have eternal leaders, the only thing leadership entitles you to is being shit on on a constant basis, which is why nobody does it other than out of pure revolutionary duty.
it's lonely here in west coast Canada, I am having zero luck finding orgs even around my town.
I'll admit that I can't think of any major sex scandals that caused an ML party to implode, but that's because almost the entire organized ML movement imploded for other reasons over the course of the 1980s. I have no doubt that the leaders of New Left ML sects were often abusing their authority to have sex with student recruits, but it wasn't until the 2010s that this became widely viewed as exploitative. Take for example the Workers' Institute of Marxism-Leninism-Mao Zedong Thought, an ML political organization that devolved into an out-and-out sex cult starting in the 1980s.
My main point still stands: the structural form of older leaders recruiting young students makes this kind of exploitation possible, and the practice of Comintern-model "democratic centralism" makes it much worse. Right now it seems that ML organizations have been growing much faster than Trot groups. I think a major reason for this is popular image of Trotskyist splitting and sex scandals over the past decades (the history of ML splitting in the New Communist Movement is unknown to them). However, as long as these ML groups continue to share the same Comintern model of party organization, wherein members must hide their political views in public and the leadership manages control of information and debate, they're eventually going to run into the same problems. Case in point: we're already starting to see a string of minor sex scandals in ML parties, one in the PSL last yearish and apparently one going on in the Young Communist League right now. >>1007957
If you didn't see it already I have an earlier post dealing with the subject above ( >>916859
, also I'm not this guy >>1008252
). Besides that, having party confidantes or greivance officers is a good idea as suggested above. You also mentioned the UK SWP - they infamously mishandled the allegation against "Comrade Delta", but I've heard lately that they mishandled a recent allegation of sexual abuse in the complete opposite way. A completely anonymous blog post came out accusing one of the leaders of the SWP of sexual assault, and rather than investigate the matter at all they immediately announced the expulsion of the accused member. The problem was that there was zero corroborating evidence and the defendant in question was in a long term relationship and was not known to hit on anyone in the party. He eventually took his case to state courts as libel and won. I read about all this in the Weekly Worker sometime last year but I can't for the life of me find the article. Anyway, the evidence points to the guy being innocent and it's a warning of what can happen if measures against sexual abuse in the party go too far (where to draw that line I'm not sure). >how has the "no fucking within the party" worked out in previous movements?
I honestly can't think of any parties that had this rule, but I can think of a few that banned fucking outside
the party. J. Posadas' sect and the little known Democratic Workers' Party both regulated the sex lives of members. They insisted that both partners be members of the sect and demanded that the decision to have children should be approved by party leadership (less time for selling newspapers, you see). The DWP also demanded that all homosexual members hide their orientation in public, despite the group originally being founded by a bunch of lesbians.
Yeah it's worth it because they've got good tools and resources plus training.
Join for upskilling imo if nothing else.
>>1008255>Members committed suicide because they took self-crit sessions too seriously.
they killed someone for masturbating and visiting a bath house
They were still fucking. It's just that most of the time the sex pests were killed.
If the movie about the URE is accurate then they actually were revolutionary celibates. The second victim in the movie was subjected to a "struggle session" for wearing makeup and therefore "putting sex above the revolution". For her alleged crimes she was tied to a tree in the winter cold and frozen to death.
I'm not going to lie. The only thing I know about the URE is from that movie too. You do have to remember, however, that one of the characters was a mother.
Holy fucking shit
Glad to see the revcel movement is as strong as ever
>>1008333>this much cope and projection
sage why can't you be normal
>>1008488>The point, however, is to amass power so that eventually there will be the critical mass (and even more importantly, an already existing and functional communist organization that can handle large-scale supply and logistics) necessary to do a revolution.
I'd like to know what your understanding is of how a revolution could plausibly take place? I've been reading more lately and it seems like Lenin's model was that the party is for propagandizing and leading the revolution (having a program based on a deep understanding of the situation, and who have come to resolutions on how to deal with certain economic problems of, initial steps to take, etc.), but ultimately they wait and propagandize until there is a revolutionary movement already which is powerful and sweeps away (maybe temporarily+locally) the power of the bourgeoisie, and then to help organize soviets and then to struggle for the communist position within these soviets, and these will be the government of the dictatorship of the proletariat.
I never see the idea of soviets in modern (loose) revolutionary programs outside of dual power ideas, which lenin explicitly calls out as a bad practice, since the point is to replace and break up the bourgeois government, and if they're set up but have no power people will lose interest in them and it'll be propaganda against the idea of soviets. This idea seems to be held up by practice.
I think kites is cool cause they're actually trying to be constructive and put out sensible and thoughtful analyses- but as far as i can tell they have NO clear program, and their main claim to action is "going to the masses" and doing social investigation. But there is a consistency there, since they follow the tried and true method of building up a vanguard party of dedicated communists rather than a mass party with the dual intentions of both building up knowledgeable communists, and also doing direct action and being a sort of community council, all wrapped up in one.
Since no one seems to have a coherent revolutionary program, I'd love to ask you if you happen to? I'm here to learn>>1008561
Back in the day the strategy was one big party, and local sects of even two or three members. This was deemed super important. We don't have any competent revolutionary party anymore… RIP
Great thread, it was a pleasure going through you anons' thoughts.
Here's hoping there's anything setup here in Puerto Rico. Shit is fucking depressing in here.
Quick search on CPUSA and even >DSA brings no results. Shit's fucked
This is Jason Unruhe's mods?
Howw can we move organizing away from closed, antagonisitc platforms like facebook?
Can we have a way to track Hot Protests In Your Area?
there are a million private ways to communicate. Pick a handful of ways to contact ur org on any propaganda, books, etc. u distribute. Also talk to ppl face to face. There's no reason to organize online. You're not there to organize leftoid hobbyists into a hobby group. You're there to organize the proletariat (and sympathetic petite-bourg and lumpens) into an educational and war machine. Facebook's only use for this is spreading propaganda, but not organizing
CP of Canada imploding and purging over a sex scandal. Get your formation a grievance process ASAP folks.
The kites article is 100% correct and it's mainly opportunists, revisionists and social fascists who are seething that their wasting their time doing all these defensive programs. The fact that nobody takes seriously the experience the Malcolm X society in doing electrorialism speaks volumes of the white supremacy that permeate these "revolutionary" charity groups (they'll also tell you to vote foe democrats or Bernie Sanders)
So is Figthback lol
I'm especially disappointed about this one since I had been getting involved with my local chapter and liked everything I saw. I was even going to apply for membership, but now people I know are being purged for siding with the victim.
Any juicy details on the scandal? For the sake of materialist analysis, of course.
>>1035124>Get your formation a grievance process ASAP folks.
Any suggestions to copy?
What is exactly is projection or cope about it? It is exactly your typical hoighty toity I am the only real Leninist listen to me you silly ultras while I present a criticism that is objectively ultra leftist.
So often people harp on about going to the masses as if they are this noble and mythical unicorn being. In fact, it is just everybody around you, unless of course, you are a pseud blog writer and all your friends are doing a PHD or work for an NGO… in which case you are actually still part of "the masses" probably, many people writing a PHD are skint. Neither are the masses in any way homogenous and very rarely is there consensus on much, or even consensus on the frames through which to look at things.
Having railed against these orgs not doing enough social investigation and "going to the masses" enough, in whatever fatuous fashion he means by that, he then goes on to tell us all, as if we didn't know, that a communist party should be preparing for an all out offensive on capitalism, as if those two things, at this stage, aren't completely ludicrous when said together.
The simple fact remains, the vast majority of the proletarian in western countries are not ready for an all out assault on capitalism, far from it.
First then, they must be organised into formations which resist capitalism directly, then through an actual, dialectal process of them learning through experience, they will come to see who the real enemies are and how they operate.
They will not learn through haughty blogs. They will not even learn, through you knocking on their door and talking to them about it. They will learn, through getting together to fight for something, and winning, or losing, repeatedly, collectively.
Only once this process has been repeated numerous times, by a lot of people, so that it is an engrained part of culture, having learned lessons, hard lessons, will those people have the discipline and knowledge necessary to actually carry out a revolutionary program.
Nobody, and I mean, nobody ever, has "gone to the masses" successfully by knocking on their door to ask them if they would like to do an all out assault on capitalism one day. It has literally never happened. To speak therefore, at this stage, of building a party with explicit stance of "launching an all out offensive" in this manner is objectively ultra leftist. If we were to say, we must begin organising so that one day we may launch an all out offensive, this is one thing, the correct things, to poo poo organisational efforts which directly involve the empowerment of the proletariat based on their lack of immediate all out offensive is frankly ridiculous. Kites blog should reveal which all out offensive he is preparing for so we can all have a good laugh
Many times however, communities have united over local issues, and workers over work place issues, which have then coalesced into intra communal or sector wide struggles.
again, all of this takes time.
There is literally not one piece of projection in my post. I am not a member of a political party, I am only a member of organisations which are specifically designed to carry out social investigation among the masses, and bring them together to do something about it.
There does not exist, in the USA, a communist party " going to the masses" in the way he describes. There does not exist one in the UK, although the one that is closest to doing it in any meaningful way supports the organisations I am part of.
What do you guys think of George Jackson?
The DSA has a publically available template called Resolution 33, but it is flawed and insufficient as orgs grow and the workload mounts. What is likely needed is a national *council* of trauma-informed harassment grievance officers. Currently the grievance process itself is subject of vicious infighting by the Dem-placating National who are using gaps in the structure to retaliate against the principled anti-imperialists within the org.
PSL has a process too I believe, but I don't know the details.
for more details.
>>1010641>Lenin's model was that the party is for propagandizing and leading the revolution […], but ultimately they wait and propagandize until there is a revolutionary movement already which is powerful
There's no reason to simply wait when you can help precipitate the revolutionary moment and build working class power to put the revolution in a better position when its time arrives.
>since the point is to replace and break up the bourgeois government, and if they're set up but have no power people will lose interest in them and it'll be propaganda against the idea of soviets.
It's only propaganda against the idea of the soviets if you fail to do anything useful with them or (wrongly) promise that organizing people in this way is itself going to revolutionize society. Contrarily, organizing people directly in the present is a more effective form of propaganda than simply biding your time and telling people the end is nigh. It's much harder to effectively guide a revolutionary movement if you don't already have a working relationship with the people, and it's additionally harder to have a deep understanding of the situation if you don't work with the people in the class struggle.
>Since no one seems to have a coherent revolutionary program, I'd love to ask you if you happen to? I'm here to learn
Yes, and it has enough in common with Lenin's plan, the difference being that the more you prepare for the revolution (by organizing and arming the workers) the more ready they will be. Dual power and the like is not the end in itself nor is it simply a "defensive" program as >>1036007
says, but it also functions as outreach/propaganda and material proof for alternative modes of production and distribution. Revolutionary organizations in the pre-revolutionary stage need to find the cracks in the system and handle the problems facing the workers that capitalism cannot and/or that it creates. In this sense they are defensive, but they also demonstrates how to construct a replacement and creates more opportunity to prepare (education, training, accumulating resources) by alleviating the strain placed on people by capitalism. Your outer circle should be involved in solving problems and marshaling resources to solve those problems, such as coordinating people in doing mutual aid. Your inner circle should be involved in educating, training, establishing contact with organizations elsewhere, more secretive actions like arming people, etc.
Recruitment to the organization proceeds from the outer to the inner, with theoretical education and participation in the organization being part of the process. This way people can benefit from and participate in the work the organization does, under the guidance of the communists who take any opportunities to push the people and related organizations in a more revolutionary direction, which is the short-term big picture function being fulfilled. This entails pushing the various organizations involved in class struggle (like unions) to become more militant and coordinated so they can do more effective action and build their strength. It's also important to have multiple centers or cells and to expand the inner circle so that there are too many people to effectively repress or control. To that end, the most essential education to be engaged in is not simply education in theory, but in how to organize and educate people. The body/bodies of theory are all there already and aren't in danger of disappearing in the way that effective organizers and educators are. And the thing about this method is that there are already people out there who actually are just doing charity, but you can bring them into the fold by making their efforts more effective at what they want to do and growing the revolutionary organization with people who are already engaged enough to be doing (as yet ineffective) work.
>>1038118>this smug>obviously didnt read the thing he's claiming to criticize>just as much of a "My org is the only one doing anything, no you don't "go to the masses", idiot, you GO TO THE MASSES like I do it, I am the only real Leninist listen to me you silly ultras" as he claims the thing he didn't read is about>this much projection>all this text to say nothing
this is a really great response anon, thanks
I'm sure I mischaracterized Lenin's strategy, since active involvement in class struggle for the purpose of raising people's political consciousness is key, and so it's no difference between your strategy and the OG one.
I think on the topic of dual power and filling in the failure of capitalism, one side of the coin is class struggle and the other is doing the government's work for it. Within activist and anarchist conceptions, the goal of dual power is worded the same as you put it, to fill in the cracks - the problem with this is that no dual power is established this way, there's only state power and charity/NGO-tier activism, whereas actual dual power would be contesting state power. And similarly, class struggle has to move beyond conceptions of failure of capitalism as cracks, because in reality they're antagonisms, and you have to take a side and fight rather than inhabit the crack opened to communist, solidaristic class power ways of doing things. The struggle is a struggle and, well the only example I have is the panthers, who really were engaging deeply in class struggle and it got into illegal means of strongarming people, and they had their neighborhood centers where people could come and get help with their problems, enlist to help, etc. They ended up getting raided and even fighting battles from those offices. Dual power means dual power, and power comes from the barrel of a gun. You're demonstrably 100% right about the need to organize, build up proletarian power, organizational capacity, knowledge and culture, etc. - but calling this dual power seems like a lie. It's a power struggle, there always is cuz the class war is always going on, but it's not an actual replacement, back-burner government which is ready to step in. These things always fall into activist causes and peter out, or they get in a shootout with government forces and don't last. There's a real need to take things in stages - to build worker's power, to agitate and help with organizing insurrectionary or insurgent moments, and then to step in to organize governing bodies.
But i can see the value also in getting people a political education through some dual power structure, my contention is that it won't be able to be a real organ of class power while out in the open. I don't see why underground or issue-specific organizations wouldn't also give the same level of political training and understanding of proletarian power and all of that- but with ability to fully wage class struggle, fully able to hold actual (if limited) power in their hands.
On another note, recently I've been thinking about the difference between leninist and maoist conceptions of revolutionary work. They're not far off, but the maoists have much more emphasis on the direct fight, and take for granted to obviousness of oppression and the causes. In america it seems like a split approach can be used, because people living in the barrios and ghettos and reservations know basically what the problem is, there's a general understanding that there's a war on, and there's no doubt about the economic causes, cause corruption is all around. So we have pockets of imperialized nations within the country which traditionally that's the sphere of maoist work, while the rest of the (mostly white) working class falls more towards needing to build up a political consciousness, and needing to build up solidarity, and so falling under the leninist conception of what needs to be done. It doesn't make sense to a street hustler to focus on unionizing and class struggle, but lumpens need communism as much as anyone else. I think we gotta approach the situation from that dual perspective. Anyways i'm just some person in a place with 0 politically going on yet lots of desperation and poverty and drugs, i'm not politically active so i'm not saying anything from experience, just lots of book-learning.
>>1039541>the problem with this is that no dual power is established this way, there's only state power and charity/NGO-tier activism, whereas actual dual power would be contesting state power. And similarly, class struggle has to move beyond conceptions of failure of capitalism as cracks, because in reality they're antagonisms, and you have to take a side and fight rather than inhabit the crack opened to communist
Yeah I meant to add to the previous post an extention to the metaphor that once you fill in the cracks you form a wedge you can drive into them to threaten the power of the current state and mode of production. In practical terms this means moving on from just picking up the slack of capitalism but taking over functions that it does try (and usually fail) to perform. That way you put the current system in the position of making itself overtly antagonistic to the interests of the people. One of the most direct ways to do this is by providing security. The Black Panthers are a good example of this, having patrols guarding their community from police. That's a step up from "filling in cracks" by running clinics for people without healthcare. One of the most fundamental functions of the state is providing security through force, and if you can usurp that function even partially you do a lot (at the very least ideologically) to undermine the current order. Not to mention the direct benefits to the people.
>It's a power struggle, there always is cuz the class war is always going on, but it's not an actual replacement, back-burner government which is ready to step in. These things always fall into activist causes and peter out, or they get in a shootout with government forces and don't last.
The organizations tend to come and go no matter what. The challenge is to build real gains that can outlast any individual person or organization. This is hard to conceptualize in our current situation where communism globally has seen such a big setback. But fortunately a lot of the history of class struggle and labor movements exist and can be learned from or reignited. We don't have to start completely from scratch. And that's part of the problem here, no currently existing organization (party or otherwise) is going to be what drives the real revolution (at least most likely not). Dual power isn't a permanent second state, because if we could get to that point we'd have the ability to replace it. It's just the means by which we wrest control from capitalism and the state while still living under them, and the way we can hold in reserve the power we need to take action when the opportunity presents itself, regenerating when something fails. What we call it isn't really what matters. What matters is its function of moving history forward by building up working class power.
>my contention is that it won't be able to be a real organ of class power while out in the open. I don't see why underground or issue-specific organizations wouldn't also give the same level of political training and understanding of proletarian power and all of that- but with ability to fully wage class struggle, fully able to hold actual (if limited) power in their hands.
It would behoove us to use a combination of many strategies at once, some of them overt and some of them covert. As I suggested before, we want to knit together the organizations that already exist or are now forming that are involved (or trying to be) in the class struggle in some way or another. The reason you would want a "main" or "central" organization that is (more or less) open is so that anybody who is open to taking that step from just being in the class struggle to being a Communist will have the opportunity. It really doesn't need to be centralized that much though; local chapters of course should be able to engage in education and training more or less autonomously.
>I think we gotta approach the situation from that dual perspective.
Yes, we should be using a mix of strategies appropriate to a given situation. Not just for different parts of the world, but for opposing different parts of the system in the same place. Smashies have their uses. Socdems have their uses. Maoist guerillas have their uses. Part of the problem we need to overcome is the attachment to tendency so much that we write off useful methods because they aren't part of our special brand of communism. Strategy and tactics have to be evaluated in context. Whether a certain move in a game of chess is a good or bad move depends on the state of the board.
Any advice on organizing unions within industries where workers are borderline petite-bourgoeis and have no serious material complaints, like in STEM?
Invest your efforts organizing unions in places where they are actually needed.
How can you organize unions in places you don't work and don't interact with the people?
Join a general-purpose union (IWW being the most famous example) and act as a liaison or equivalent to the workers in those industries.
Basically it seems to me that the rule of "don't shit where you eat" is a good rule of thumb.
Eh. I think institutionally established mass literacy on abuse and trauma is more important as abusive behaviors isn't always of the sexual nature. If comrades fall in love, I think that's fine, as long as they know the red flags that may interfere with their health, the heath of other comrades, and their work.
Like Lenin had sex. He just wasn't an abusive, reactionary charalatan as most of the sex scandals in recent decades seem to suggest of the accused.
>>1042253>institutionally established mass literacy on abuse and trauma is more important as abusive behaviors isn't always of the sexual nature
It should be part of core education, because it's directly relevant to class struggle as a common form of abuse and control used by capitalists, politicians, media, clergy, etc against the workers.
Absolutely x100. If folks have on-boarding meetings, I suggest displaying it as a prominent feature of organizing experience within this group. Also, consider this: what is the existence of the proletariat, but heaps of trauma placed upon them? To bridge the gap of understanding between us and the masses and to address the underlying concerns of workers, we must learn how to respect boundaries, understand what constitutes the trauma of who we are reaching out to and thus improve how to effectively show solidarity.
The National Lawyer's Guild in the US is something kinda similar although it isn't explicitly communist. Any thoughts on them if you have any? Or do you want groups like that to place a more explicit emphasis in your post?
>>1044094>Or do you want groups like that to place a more explicit emphasis in your post?
Exactly. It's one thing for a group like this to have vague commitments to broad concepts like civil rights or progressive politics. It's entirely another to have a group that consciously aims to wage class struggle in the courts with the explicit goal of aiding in the proletarian conquest of power. It's like the difference between a anti-capitalist and a yellow labour union.
How viable would it be to organize through a "Church" of Communism to benefit from tax-exemption and the other bullshit that the SCOTUS is currently passing regarding religions? There are currently lawsuits being brought by Jewish people and the Satanic Temple to demand a right to abortion under religious freedom principles, since both groups treat abortion a religious ritual. We are of course on track for christo-fascism, but even then you could form a "Christian" communist church or even one that is crypto-communist. How viable would something like this be for outreach, as a front organization, or even as the org itself?
Isn't that what basically what Caleb Maupin and Keaton Mansford are doing with the CPI?
The Church of Karl Marx of Latter-Stage Capitalism.
Isn't this just liberal reformism? I guess if the focus is on helping individual people's cases it's not though.
As a big fan of Jesus Christ I think he's clearly a communist. I don't think it would be a big stretch. Realistically, they just won't bother allowing it though. It may be better to have it be a religious front WITHOUT explicit communist ties, but in reality you personally and all the other members are just also coincidentally communists?
No, it's waging class struggle on the front of legal battles. Like I said, this would need to be combined with a wider range of strategies including electoralism, mass line, mutual aid, labour action, militant activity (in Minecraft), etc. However all of these other areas would benefit from having a robust legal arm that could frustrate and even thwart attempts to deploy the legal system against the ruling class movement.
Social justice unionism.
Basically drop material interests and build a de-facto union over issues like the employer being involved in "illiberal causes*, like selling arms or supporting gentrification or doing business with an anti-trans law firm. Lean into idpol, and look for ways to turn allyship into solidarity. For example if your employer has H1B staff try to use their identity as a platform for idpol "allyship" - and then turn that into real solidarity rather than white guilt. This will build an activist core that can step in when your field is proletarianized.
UAW has had a lot of success with grad students as well, I think going after early career professionals is the way.
>>1044218>Isn't this just liberal reformism?
Everything that isn't revolution is reformism. Sometimes you just gotta use the tools to have to address the problems as they arise. Just keep your eye on the prize and it all adds up imo.
>>1044883>UAW has had a lot of success with grad students as well, I think going after early career professionals is the way.
Can you expand on this, never heard of them…
This was actually implemented on a wide scale during the years of the Comintern. It was called International Red Aid, and it was devoted to "organise material and moral assistance to vanguard fighters for the cause of communism who are locked in prison, forced into exile, or for any reason excluded against their will from our fighting ranks". The most successful section of the IRA was its US affiliate, International Labor Defense, led by later Trotskyist pioneer James P. Cannon.
<Cannon mapped out plans for the ILD in a 1925 discussion in Moscow with exiled IWW leader Big Bill Haywood. “Deeply concerned about the persecution of workers in America,” Cannon later recalled, Haywood “wanted to have something done for the almost forgotten men lying in jail all over the country…. They were not criminals at all, but strike leaders, organizers, agitators, dissenters – our own kind of people. Not one of them was a member of the Communist Party! But the ILD defended and helped them all.”
<The ILD’s greatest campaign was for the victimized anarchists Nicolo Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti, framed up and convicted of murder in a robbery. International Red Aid launched an international campaign to save them from execution, which included demonstrations in the tens of thousands. The two defendants were executed regardless, but the Sacco-Vanzetti case remained a defining experience in the radicalization of a generation.
The reason that you've probably at least heard of Sacco and Vanzetti's case, as opposed to the dozens of accused anarchists of the nineteenth century, was thanks to the tireless efforts of International Red Aid. They defended all "prisoners of the class war" even if they didn't share the politics of the Comintern. What makes this story tragic is that James P. Cannon himself later became a prisoner of the class war when he was sentenced in the first ever Smith Act trial in 1941. Not only did the CPUSA refuse to support his case, they actively celebrated
the jailing of the "Trotskyite wrecker". This later came back to bite them when the Smith Act was turned against the CPUSA itself in the 1950s, devastating the party.
Source is here: https://johnriddell.com/2021/07/29/international-red-aid-1922-1937/
Thank u so much for effort post anon
Can u share ur list of personal theory that u found most important to get this smart?
So it was q comie version of anarchist black cross? Cool.
This is exactly the kind of thing I had in mind, I'll definitely look into it more.
hey does anyone know why the ML parties (USA) have such different tactics than the MLM parties? To explain what I mean, CPUSA and PSL both cater more towards the myriad activist/political struggles, while FRSO basically flat out says the importance of socialists is in embedding in the working class (i guess they mean like unskilled jobs for the most part) and then (agitating and) properly summarizing the outcomes of various efforts at class struggle. Basically MLs be like "yeah join our mass org, we do marches and shit, also everything under the sun as long as it helps ppl" (PSL e.g. seems to have a heavy focus on the housing issue and all it's facets and struggles around that), while maoists be like "join the rank and file of the working class and help directly with political education through class struggle. The only difference between a socialist and non-socialist worker is that you know how capitalism works, so you can sum up experiences more accurately and with a class bent that gets people class conscious"
What's the deal? both seem good. Any of the organized huge dick/breast chads want to tell me which your org does or which u think is better? Cuz tbh FRSO is the only non-clowny party in the US but they're still kinda clowny. It's weird how PSL at least is obviously catering more to activist and leftist types than about like merging class struggle with socialism. Maoists seem cool but why are they not taken more seriously? Why have trots and ML boomers dominated? Tbh idek what CPUSA is about as far as action, it seems to have less reach even than PSL, but they seem more labor oriented and less activisty.
i'm not in any org rn cuz i'm a student and live in the basically depopulated apocalyptic wasteland that is western middle america, so sadly i dont have any experience with any of these guys to go off of so i might be wildly misinformed, just getting my shit from what their websites and publications focus on but not seeing their local impacts
It's wrong to say that frso does not cater to activists, all maoist formations attempt to work from the relatively advanced masses to the intermediate masses. The reason that the frso has such a disproportionally large role in organized labor is that the current incarnation of the frso grew out of a split from high union density states, and that they actually practice union infiltration. But the bulk of frso activity was in the oppressed nationalities movement when i was a member. My experience in the FRSO was during the George Floyd summer and they were not really able to support new locals. They also insisted on recruiting through front groups and it became a chicken and egg problem where we didn't have enough manpower to build a front group to get more manpower.
I think that another problem that the FRSO has is that it, as the only above-ground national maoist formations in the country, pulls in a lot of maoists who then realize that it is actually M-L more than maoist and leave. I think a large formation organized in Florida under FRSO and the split off. They are in this weird cognitive dissonance of supporting the current PRC while at the same time supporting CPP, NLFP etc.
You have to think about communist organisation with the resolute idea that you mean to overthrow the world capitalist system and the full consequences of that idea in your mind. This is not an arena for half measures. The thing you intend to do, if done correctly, will liberate the working masses from the culmination of thousands of years of class struggle. It is a historical sea change that would change forever the course of humanity. Because of this, there are extremely powerful interests, with massive resources, and absolute not moral scruples, who will resist to the death, probably yours, whatever form of organising against them you attempt to achieve.
Because of the vast power imbalance, and because of the nature of capitalism. You will NEVER have as much capital as they do. You will NEVER has as many resources to buy weapons. You will NEVER have the same level of technology.
You are left then with two advantages, the weight of numbers of working class people compared to the bourgeoise, and the ability to withdraw your labour, which is what creates all value within the capitalist system. These two advantages work only in tandem. You do not have the numbers if they are unable to work together, you do not have the ability to withdraw your labour if it is not in numbers.
The entire communist game therefore is getting people to work together, in vast numbers, to cease working for the capitalist it to work for themselves.
The removal of labour does not necessarily mean the strike, but every endeavour which removes the proletarian from their historical place as an instrument of production, to their historical place as an instrument of revolution. The repurposing of human labour for revolution is the withdrawal of labour from the capitalist system and into the revolutionary system. A soldier in the red army has withdrawn their labour from capital and now works actively against it.
This represents an inherent problem however. In the immediate, in an unstable system, the larger the numbers, the more difficult it will be for these people to work harmoniously together. To strike as one. The interests are so various and vast, coming from all different kinds of perspectives, that it is inevitable they will come into conflict, even in the pursuit of revolution. If they act sporadically, coming to differing conclusions, which may make them work against each other, they will not be able to achieve revolution.
The interests must therefore be lead by a body which represents their shared interest alone, that is, their class interests. This body is of course the communist party.
The communist party, in order to achieve its purpose, must be completely resistant to, subversion, assassination, arrest, infiltration, ideological degeneration, dogmatism, infighting, and so on.
The only way to over come external problems, assassination and so on, subversion, is to act so as that your actions are not detectable. Your ideas not known. Your leadership not known.
But then, how can this leadership gain the trust of masses? How can this leadership direct the diverse interests of the working class, when the working class do not even know their name?
This is why in discussing organising, we must discuss 2 things: the creation of mass organisations, which are the only means by which large numbers of proletarians can come to decisions to resist their situation and 2 the relationship of a hidden communist party to these organisations, which is the only body which could possibly successfully lead these mass organisations.
So when I think about organising, it is split completely. At the same time, amongst the masses, we must act in a certain way, suggest certain structures, unions which are member lead, directly democratic, from the bottom, are necessary by fact in order to properly engage membership.
But, how can there be democracy within a hidden paty? Democracy of which the proletariat have a say? Not possible. Though, if the relationship of the party agents is simply to be within the mass movements, pushing them forward, and collecting the perspectives of proletarians within them, the party leadership can begin to become informed of the wants and needs of the masses and answer to them.
So, there is organising in the one sense and organising in the other.
I'm gonna write more posts on this. I'm not sure how long I've rambled now.
>>1072377>You have to think about communist organisation with the resolute idea that you mean to overthrow the world capitalist system and the full consequences of that idea in your mind.
is that why you're a part of an org whose peak activity is collecting signatures for a petition?
No, Sage, I'm not mad, I'm just pointing out that you like to talk shit and pretend you know things, but when it comes to you DOING something, you do fuck all. You're a manager in a fucking coffee shop and a canvasser for a tenants union (this is doubtful cause you haven't mentioned them in a while, so maybe you got bored of it), but you go on like you're a champion of the workers. You enjoy smelling your own farts ans going on long diatribes because it gives you a dopamine boost. I'm here to call you out on your bullshit. Deal with it.
Useless comments. Anon gives an insightful effort post and your response contributes nothing. Not a single organization that currently exists in North America has the means, structure, and theory of change to be worthy of being considered a credible organ of revolutionary struggle. As such, make a case for your own if it is, become the change we need to see, or stop being an armchair critic. Simple as. Address the substance of the post or stop bitching.>>1072377>subversion, assassination, arrest, infiltration, ideological degeneration, dogmatism, infighting
To add on to this post, this is why a harassment grievance process is an absolutely essential necessity within 21st century organizing, to hold corrupt and abusive members accountable as well as to function as the means in which interpersonal conflicts that emerge within formations, whether organic or *instigated*, are able to be resolved. I cannot stress this enough, comrades need to try to create one within your org, or work towards building the capacity to have one as soon as one can. Political education about trauma and reactionary abusive practices must be spread far and wide for mass literacy, as it is an essential part of the interpersonal interaction with comrades, with workers, and recognizing who are our enemies when engaging with the local political landscape.
His name is Sage, says so right there above the post. He's got a password to protect the username and everything.>or stop being an armchair critic
Writing bullshit is revolutionary activity, but calling out bullshit is being an "armchair critic"? lol
>>1072668>His name is Sage, says so right there above the post
I don't care. Address his ideas.>calling out bullshit
Idc about your beef with them. Address the ideas in their post or stop shitting up the thread.
sounds like it
you're such a loser lmaoo
>>1072671>Address the ideas <prove a negative tier
What ideas? He hasn't said anything, and what he has said is so colossally stupid that it cannot be responded to within the post character limit.
>act so as that your actions are not detectable. Your ideas not known. Your leadership not known.>act so as that your actions are not detectable
Then you haven't fucking done anything, have you?>Your ideas are not known.
That's not a communist party, that's a cult.>Leadership is not known.
LOL> 2 the relationship of a hidden communist party to these organisations
""""""""hidden communist party""""""" this is so fucking retarded that I don't know how to even respond. What's the point of a communist party if it's hidden. Sage doesn't even know what communism is LMAO.>how can there be democracy within a hidden paty? Democracy of which the proletariat have a say? Not possible.
hahahahah>Though, if the relationship of the party agents<"party agents must also be ninjas" - Sage, probably >is simply to be within the mass movements, pushing them forward, and collecting the perspectives of proletarians within them,
Ah ok, they "simply be" in movements, but then also "push" movements forward, just like that. >Collecting perspectives of proletarians within them
"Hello sir, may I have your opinions? I am an agent of the party" Or wait, people mustn't know they are talking to the agents, right? >the party leadership can begin to become informed of the wants and needs of the masses and answer to them.
Even in his "ideal" formulation he still has to have the "party leadership" in an ivory tower, completely removed from the masses, waiting on "agents" to bring them "proletarian perspectives" so they can "answer to them" like gods.
YWNBAC. get fucked Sage.
Someone's DEFINITELY mad
>>1072686>I won't address the post>addresses it
>>1072691>gets rekt>ur mad! ur mad!>>1072693
I addressed a few select parts, not the whole post. Are you defending him because you thought his ideas were good and now you're embarrassed? Don't be, just learn from it and move on.
No one's defending him. I'm saying I wouldn't work with either of you cause you're undisciplined at the least.
>>1072702>I'm saying I wouldn't work with either of you
ok, and? what does that have to do with anything?
ok, I am saying you're correct but the right course of action is to ignore those sort of comments.
Kek, seethe and cope lord doesn’t know how the bolshevik party came into being lmao. Motivation to make big again soon.
Not an argument.>>1072686
Even though your "arguments" are in bad faith, and some can barely be called arguments anyways, they are better than randomly sperging out over someone's ideas in a post because of a trip. Good improvement anon. Your points regarding commie leadership potentially being isolated from the masses in exchange for security is a good one.
To continue, I will first address the type of organising that must be conducted on the mass level, before linking this into the activities that must be conducted by the clandestine party.
To begin, in lieu of an all out militarised structure, such as in Cuba, it must be established that mass organisations of various types have historically been the vehicle by which revolutionary politics have otherwise been conducted. In many other instances, the mass organisations have ended up forming the militarised structures. Even in Cuba, the work of the Guerrilla core was to create a mass Guerrilla front. For the purposes of this section however, we will assume we are talking about non military responses to capitalism.
As is stated above, the proletariat have 2 advantages over the bourgeoise, their numerical superiority, and their position within the chain of production, which is essential, compared to the bourgeoise position, which is superfluous.
As stated above also, the contradiction within these advantages is that, due the number and variety of proletarians, very often it is difficult to get them to act as one, in favour of their class interest. Very often, identity struggles, the limiting factors of an economy and this resource allocation, as well as perceptions of differences in productive position can lead to differences in aims between sections of the proletariat.
Further, the proletariat have been the subject of entrenched bourgeoise ideological harassment for hundreds of years. Thus, many of them do not believe the socialist struggle to be correct, and of those that do, although they believe it correct, many believe in it cannot be won. Of those that do believe it is correct and can be won, many lack the skills to realize victory.
The purpose of mass organisations then, is to rectify these problems, to unify the working class into decision making bodies, that is, to organise them. A truism, so, in order to be unified decision making bodies, they must develop protocols for assessing issues, when to take action, how to take action, as well as meta protocols for the longevity of the union itself.
Once protocols have been developed, they can then act decisively in the resistance to their conditions, that is, to mobilise them.
What many groups or parties get wrong, is in thinking that mobilisation comes before organisation, or is an end in itself. In fact, mobilisation is effectively useless, if it cannot be purposeful, directly so, tactical, in that the state of play is deeply considered in order to fulfil the purpose, and sustainable, so that the strategy can have the longevity it needs. It is easy to mobilise hundreds for a march to the town centre. It is all together a different task, to mobilise 100 people, to tactically advantageous positions, over and over again until victory.
A mass organisation then, a union, or a mutual aid outfit, has to form itself in such a way that all of these criteria can be met.
Chiefly, to be a unifying force, the organisation must focus on issues that are widely felt, and present a viable solution to the problem, as well as the means to defeat it.
Only with these features can an organisation hope win over people who are beaten down, distrustful, and have heard it all before.
In order to do this, the chief focus of any organisation, should be in the first instance to understand which issues affect the people within its remit, and how they can be solved.
The people generally best placed to talk about their own issues, are those effected by the issue, Therefore, the organisation must be in direct contact with these people, and crucially, must not only include them in the process of formulating actions, but they must be able to take a leading role in it.
The people will largely only trust a body they are not forced to join, if they feel they have some control over it. Further, if they do have some level of control, they are far more likely to engage with it, to put time and effort into it.
Therefore, it is not with some lofty liberal idea of "DEMOCRACY" that we go about including the working class in the decisions which effect them, but of a material need. If your mass organisation has no followers, it is not mass and with nobody to organise, disorganised therefore. Easy to organise a bare square of concrete.
The evidence is written all over the labour movement, the more disconnected the union becomes from its membership, the less engagement they have, the worse it fairs, and the susceptible it becomes to elite capture.
Baring this in mind however, is again the contradiction in organising, the contradiction on the contradiction, for, while the proletariat must feel ownership, they must also in fact be organised. Equally to having no members meaning you have no organisation, if those members never act in a unified way, neither can they be said to be within an organisation.
Further, some of the proletariat are more engaged in the struggle for whatever reason, and are more willing to expend time and effort organising the masses. Therefore, the union itself will have leadership, and must have leadership.
Indeed, a large amount of union literature focuses on the idea of developing leadership. Developing leadership again requires the potential leader to feel they are in control or at least have an influence on what is going on.
The leader must feel this to the extent that they are willing to bring people along with them.
Indeed, we may think of a large part of the process of organising as developing the consciousness of promising individuals, so that they too can in turn develop consciousness.
The message here is again the same, in order to develop consciousness, it is not enough to be in the union, but they must also struggle with the union and learn from it. In order that they will do this, again, they must have a stake in the decision making process.
A large part of developing organisational consciousness is passing down skills. Being part of an organisation and influential within it requires skills, how do we set up a discussion which includes as broad a perspective as possible, while keeping structure to that discussion, and from that discussion drawing tangible conclusions to act upon? Such facilitation is a skill. There are innumerable skills required to organise. Not least either , charm, tact, the ability be compromising and self critical, you must be a good communicator. That is leaving aside astute tactical awareness, etc.
The outfit must be member lead.
When it comes to deciding upon actions, those actions we must take into account:
what is the goal of the specific action? How will this action help to achieve our goal ?Can the action feasibly do this? Who holds the power in the situation, how do they wield it? Who are their allies, who are our allies? What further action can be taken in the future towards our goal if this action is unsuccessful? Do we have the resources to conduct this action? How will this action affect the broader organisation?
In the answering of these questions, the fledgling organisation will no doubt find that its goal is extremely broad, the action unlikely to achieve the goal, all the power in the enemies hands, resources are limited, and allies thin on the ground.
The goal then, must broken down, stage by stage into smaller, more achievable goals, which in turn will grow organisational capacity, to be able to complete larger goals.
It is necessary to do this because the workers must see that they are winning. If you can achieve small victories, people will start listening to you, once they do, they become engaged, once they are engaged, your resources have grown.
By all means, if by chance you genuinely feel you can make a big win with a decisive action, you should go for it, however, rarely for a small organisation is this the case.
You must be prepared to start small. The absolute key though, is to start small, with a clear and well laid out plan through which this small action will grow the organisation.
It is also imperative again, I say for the 10th time, to give people influence and control over the endeavour, but it must be matched with above. To develop a leader, or even an engaged member, it will often have to be coaxed out of them. As you incrementally develop the organisation, the organised must develop with it.
This section isn't done but I've been here for like half an hour so I'll continue later
no sexual relations
Party members should be briefed on trauma and abuse literacy as part of political education and/or onboarding to supplement a more general code of conduct that is established as the baseline decorum between each other.
This code of conduct should encourage solidarity, respect of boundaries, and assumption of good faith with grievances taken to the accountability process. >>1075183
Retarded. Will you prevent families from joining the party? There should systems of accountability along with mass abuse and trauma literacy for people to learn how to respect boundaries. Simple as.
churches have 'systems of accountability' that don't stop pastors buggering the children.
no, just wrong, the problem is they literally don't have systems of accountability and instead their crimes are covered up by others, even sometimes when it's taken to court the church will back them, and the communities will shame kids for speaking out against the men of god
people pretending to have something to seem more trustworthy does not give the lesson that that thing they pretend to have is always doomed to fail. Not saying this as a snappy critique, but it's smth i've had to learn after falling for that premise (and becoming an anarchist). Often ppl in power will just lie about what they do. It doesn't make the shit they lie about any worse, it just means u gotta look out for liars too.
Do workers organize for collective bargaining/demands at their workplaces, if not, why?
Based revcel chad
*Unbased cult incel
Lenin was a sex haver and was based. Folks just don't want to deal with the hard work of actually building resilient orgs so you guys ban stuff like anti-social, fringe weirdos. I for one, will follow the footsteps of great socialist sex havers like Marx, Engels, Kollantai, Luxemburg, and many more. Sex is fine. It is the social dynamics surrounding it in leftist interpersonal relationships that need change to make organizations stronger.
who, exactly? People ITT or in general?
At factories, mines, medical personal and so on where workers work close.
Pic - why not?
I've asked this question may be a year ago and curious if something changed.
>>1080226>Pic - why not?
While it's a good idea and I like it, I'm gonna be the devil's advocate here.
Because we don't have 2x trained people for every single position. It would take 10-20 years to transition to such a system because you'd have to recruit and train more people, which gets harder for professions that require a lot of schooling and training.
It'd also be a logistical nightmare, because now you have twice as many people to move, feed, house, etc. Cities would have to double in size, where are these people going to come from?
Thinking about it, I guess in the beginning of the transition most jobs would be in the transition itself, in construction, administration, logistics, manufacturing, feeding. You'd need armies of workers, which is based when thinking about it. It'd be a multi-decade project.
The implications of the undertaking is that it would be abandonment of the countryside and rural villages. Farms and stuff like that would remain, but nobody would live there. If the jobs double, the other people have to move from the villages to the cities. It'd be the complete urbanisation and proletarisation of a country.
I see >>1080226
more as a cover for the inevitable result that we just don't need that many people working at all.
It's like a stop-gap until enough consciousness is achieved and people go "Hol up, why does this job even exist?" and instead of trying to mutate it it just withers away.
Basically people have internalised work for the sake of work, rather than work for the needs of their community.
imma be real
i have no clue where you get most of this from so i'm just not gonna touch it
But seeing as per 2002 about 50% of US labor is literally producing nothing of value, actively destroying value, or just shuffling money around - there's basically no need for all the shit ur talking about. How long does it take to train someone, not talking about education but on the job training? A week to 6 months. Halve the hours, get rid of the bullshit literally no use value creating jobs (often just scams and protection rackets btw), immediately move those ppl who are mostly already concentrated in cities into productive jobs near where they already are, and just train them up. Sure there are lots of jobs that need actual education, and that'd take a while to get ppl educated up, so you're right there but if it takes 2 years to have it 80% down, 4 years to be like 90% down, and 8 years to have all productive jobs halved in hours - great.
But honestly it's maybe better as a slogan because if working class power could push through such a wild demand/restructuring of the economy, then we'd have the power to stop paying in wages at all. But as a transitional measure this is absolutely necessary, as one of the early actions taken under the DotP.
What i'd love to see is an accounting of what we'd save if production was planned based on need rather than market fads and guesswork since so much shit is just destroyed when no one buys it or the style changes or no one has money to buy it, and adding that with the amount of real use values capitalists use up or make unavailable (afaik their capital can be disregarded since if theyre not using it for their consumption, then it's being used to direct production and in an oblique way is directing the consumption (negatively) of the workers exploited to make the profit and so it can basically poof into thin air and nothing is lost to the accounting of real production) - and then the rest is pretty accounted for i think in the simplistic accountings of unproductive labor that people have done, since withholding capital and keeping consumption from happening and using capital to poorly direct production are bundled up in unproductive labor already… i think. If anyone can sort of "check my math" there or knows about studies looking at the FULL costs of capitalism on society, i'd love to hear it. Cause while the US could cut labor in half and both produce and consume the same amount in a vacuum (or like, international stasis), equalizing consumption and productivity and labor internationally to me is just a wild card since idk how much it'd negate the ability to lower hours and keep consumption up.
Any book or research paper recs?
Are you asking what their day to day consists of, or what they have accomplished?
go to meetings, talk about stuff. have speakers talk about things. go to protests for various lost causes. possibly sell newspapers or hand out flyers
>>1107498>the cell is falling apart
Sorry to hear the foko-bro :(
But such is the nature of ecological or organic style structures.
Go solo for a bit, just listen and watch until you feel more energised again.
I'm seeing posters in the main street for at least two different orgs. Much better than commercial garbage.
There's a snake in your group
, missed rhyming opportunity
bump because good trhtread that needs 2be scene
Responding as per the request of >>1193066
So it's important to keep in mind that a lot of the Left in the U.S. is fractured, isolated, and recovering from both the fall of the USSR and decades of red-baiting. So, a lot of parties and orgs are just getting back off their feet. I think Kaiserreich for HoI IV has unironically turned some gamers into Wobblies (hey, if they're socialists I don't fucking care what does it) and I believe the FRSO is recovering after a brief bit of state-sponsored terror.
So I can mostly only speak about the CPUSA.
For one, most
activity seems to be based around clubs. State and local ones. In SoCal there's a bulletin we use to coordinate things and keep us aware of what's going on in a given district; labor struggles, meetings, so on.
On a smaller scale, districts tend to form clubs. Basically, groups of geographically close comrades cooperate on a given project. Sometimes its public gardens, other times its mutual aid. I know some that distribute clean clothes, blankets, food, and water to the homeless while handing out Party Pamphlets. Sometimes groups of artistically minded people form art collectives and host public galleries based on a theme, like anti-colonial struggles or feminism.
When workers are struggling to unionize (as was the case of the ALU) we try to assist where possible, distributing food and water and pamphlets on the benefits of union organizing. We'll attend protests and poor people's campaigns. Basically, we're there to help the proletariat.
As for election season, sometimes we get involved phone banking for candidates, or even do things like involve ourselves in the Bernie campaign; namely because it gives us a chance to learn from experience what a campaign is actually like, as well as talk to people, forge connections, and maybe even radicalize a few.
>inb4 DEMOCRAT SHILL
Back in '08 an older Comrade apparently was phone banking for Obama. One of the numbers he called, I think it was in West Virginia, the guy hears Obama's name and he huffs:<"Lemme get this straight, do you want it to be the White House or the Black House?!"
The Older Comrade responded with:>"Well would you rather live in the poor house or live alongside the Black House?"
Anyways apparently they talked for a while about the importance of economic policy, how it matters more than race, so on.
Maybe it didn't change the guy's view, but it at least gave our Comrade some idea of what to expect. Some argument. Some way to reach out to people.
As it stands, the party's growth has been healthy, its funds are stabilizing. Right now we're trying to branch out into the electoral arena, though that's easier said than done.
If I have some free time, I'll try to talk about practical organizing, putting ideas into reality, so on.
Friendly greetings from the Communist Party of Cuba to the CPUSA; figure it would go here.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0drW8pfPO-8
go back to langley, fed
I wish I made fed bux.
>>1193598>"Well would you rather live in the poor house or live alongside the Black House?"
Too bad he ended up in the poor house anyways because 0bama cared more about bailing out the FIRE sector.
Unique IPs: 152