How Revolutionary can you be?

[Boy Named Crow]

I hope this is in the right forum...

Basically - following a discussion on Fair Trade pro's and con's in another part of the board; I wanted to ask you all your opinion on this:

How revolutionary can you be before you begin isolating yourself entirely?

Please don't mistake this post as an anti left post because it is far from it - only something I've been considering.

It stems from a number of discussions I've had with leftists both on and off this board, who seem always to be waiting for that perfect solution to the worlds problems and denouncing any positive efforts that fall short of the great expectation.

I must admit - that in some ways it is one of my irritations with some leftist politics (by that I mean party politics) - the sectarianism that seems almost commonplace. Like no one wants to show support.

I am both new to this board and reletively speaking in terms of some of you guys - new to leftist theory/politics.

I would love to know your opinions on this. I only hope that no one wages a war of words here or continues a debate about Fair Trade with me. I'm asking because I want to learn from you all. :)

[Black Sheep]

Basically - following a discussion on Fair Trade pro's and con's in another part of the board; I wanted to ask you all your opinion on this:

How revolutionary can you be before you begin isolating yourself entirely?


I am 84,5 % revolutionary at this moment.:rolleyes:


I must admit - that in some ways it is one of my irritations with some leftist politics (by that I mean party politics) - the sectarianism that seems almost commonplace. Like no one wants to show support.
To what? I dont rlly get it. :confused:
The line cross between reformism and revolutionary struggle can be quite thin. The key is to struggle for short-term gains pf the working class without losing sight,propagandizing and striving towards the ultimate goal.

For that you have to separate yourself with reformist left, but being constantly in contact with them.The followers of reformism are just still stuck in the status quo chains of capitalism, it is a leap forward that needs to be taken.

[Boy Named Crow]

Now you see I like what you've said there about "short term gains" because this is what my whole debate was previously about. Those people who refuse to support those attempts for short term gains because they are not "the solution".

Sorry if my writing is vague in places. A sign of uncertainty I guess haha!

My irritation is with the sectarian in fighting in leftist politics that seems to take up more time and energy that could be used in defeating a common enemy. I guess I just find it frustrating.

It would be almost comic really if it wasn't so tragic.

I think I need to read up more on reformism and the difference between the two. Might help clarify things.

[MikeSC]

I'll join in! I'm, maybe, 20% revolutionary up to yet :(

I don't think everyone can be a revolutionary. I don't even think it's desirable. Leftists working within the mainstream can be valuable, they can subtly foster a sort of paradigm shift (like the post-war Labour party did for a short time) that aids genuine revolution, makes it less of a leap.

[punisa]

I'll join in! I'm, maybe, 20% revolutionary up to yet :(

I don't think everyone can be a revolutionary. I don't even think it's desirable. Leftists working within the mainstream can be valuable, they can subtly foster a sort of paradigm shift (like the post-war Labour party did for a short time) that aids genuine revolution, makes it less of a leap.

Exactly MikeSC, I agree with you and with what other members said about short term gains.
Majority of other members will disagree I believe, and I can't say that I understand it... I guess I am a socialist, but I don't consider myself a radical.

Many lefties like to spit all over any small steps that are aligned with our ideology, we all want the end of capitalism. The problem with some is that they wanna see it end tomorrow :confused:

For example, when in a certain country universal healthcare for all is introduced, many will just say "bah, but it aint socialism". They fail to see that bringing the revolution is much easier in a society that already has certain social aspects implemented. Why in the world would anyone wanna start from scratch?

Another more controversial example: Bono Vox from Irish band U2 speaks openly about clearing debt for third world countries. He is getting this message across and had proven to many that this is neceseary and to burden these nations with foreign debt is pure evil.
Yes, the guy has mansions and enjoys private jets and luxory.
But if you take into account his doings and all, he'll still be more hated by the lefties then for example rich stars who couldnt care less, like Britney Spears or whatever.

[ZeroNowhere]

666% revolutionary, I'd say.


For example, when in a certain country universal healthcare for all is introduced, many will just say "bah, but it aint socialism". They fail to see that bringing the revolution is much easier in a society that already has certain social aspects implemented
Shit. So the bourgeoisie are a bunch of idiots, then, I suppose?


Bono Vox from Irish band U2 speaks openly about clearing debt for third world countries. He is getting this message across and had proven to many that this is neceseary and to burden these nations with foreign debt is pure evil.
Well, I'd be a lot more sympathetic to his cause if U2 didn't suck, and he wasn't pursuing a cause hopeless except with strings attached (as the cutting and restructuring of debt so far has shown: there's an SAP included). Oh, what the hell, hopeless in general. Ah well, let's have a pop concert and worship Brown and Blair, that'll change things. Though Live Aid, other than being a crappy concert with crappy bands and a bunch of people with good intentions and bad tastes in music waving an icepick at a hurricane (and, predictably, poverty's got worse, and the number dying from poverty has increased since that concert), was merely part of a protest for an 'improved' capitalism. As it is, it's rather useless saying, "Oh, what the hell, these people are never going to become socialists anyways, let's just get them to do something which is, even for a palliative, pretty crappy", or, even stranger, "Let's fight in struggles based around the idea that G8 is kind and willing to help the poor, and somehow people will become radicalized by it", regardless of the fact that the nature of these struggles inherently perpetuates the myth that capitalism can be reformed with 'better politicians', more 'generosity', buying unfair trade (hell, they're certainly not 'fair', 'slightly fairer' at best) goods, etc. Oh course, we could use it to point out that these things are ultimately ineffectual, as many have claimed, but in the end we're either lying, saying that something didn't work though we expected it to, when we didn't, or plainly dishonest, saying that something is useless (as the protests to get G8 to change their mind are), and then running around supporting it. Hell, the reformists aren't going to miss us, let them fight their own battles, for whatever good it may do, we can do more exciting things, like eating broccoli.


Why in the world would anyone wanna start from scratch?
Um, that's implying that we want healthcare to be paid for by the capitalist state, and therefore this is a step towards socialism somehow. We don't. Whether or not it is beneficial is another question: I'm not against it (though, of course, the fairness of capitalism is always more fair to capital), but I'm sure that the reformists can put up far stronger arguments for it than we could, so we should stop being patronizing towards them and let them do their shit.


Yes, the guy has mansions and enjoys private jets and luxory.
But if you take into account his doings and all, he'll still be more hated by the lefties then for example rich stars who couldnt care less, like Britney Spears or whatever.
Mainly because Spears fans generally stop being such after a bit, while U2 fans stay as such for ages.

[F9]

Trashed off-topic "percentage" posts, please keep on topic.

Fuserg9:star:

[punisa]

666% revolutionary, I'd say.


Shit. So the bourgeoisie are a bunch of idiots, then, I suppose?


Well, I'd be a lot more sympathetic to his cause if U2 didn't suck, and he wasn't pursuing a cause hopeless except with strings attached (as the cutting and restructuring of debt so far has shown: there's an SAP included). Oh, what the hell, hopeless in general. Ah well, let's have a pop concert and worship Brown and Blair, that'll change things. Though Live Aid, other than being a crappy concert with crappy bands and a bunch of people with good intentions and bad tastes in music waving an icepick at a hurricane (and, predictably, poverty's got worse, and the number dying from poverty has increased since that concert), was merely part of a protest for an 'improved' capitalism. As it is, it's rather useless saying, "Oh, what the hell, these people are never going to become socialists anyways, let's just get them to do something which is, even for a palliative, pretty crappy", or, even stranger, "Let's fight in struggles based around the idea that G8 is kind and willing to help the poor, and somehow people will become radicalized by it", regardless of the fact that the nature of these struggles inherently perpetuates the myth that capitalism can be reformed with 'better politicians', more 'generosity', buying unfair trade (hell, they're certainly not 'fair', 'slightly fairer' at best) goods, etc. Oh course, we could use it to point out that these things are ultimately ineffectual, as many have claimed, but in the end we're either lying, saying that something didn't work though we expected it to, when we didn't, or plainly dishonest, saying that something is useless (as the protests to get G8 to change their mind are), and then running around supporting it. Hell, the reformists aren't going to miss us, let them fight their own battles, for whatever good it may do, we can do more exciting things, like eating broccoli.


Um, that's implying that we want healthcare to be paid for by the capitalist state, and therefore this is a step towards socialism somehow. We don't. Whether or not it is beneficial is another question: I'm not against it (though, of course, the fairness of capitalism is always more fair to capital), but I'm sure that the reformists can put up far stronger arguments for it than we could, so we should stop being patronizing towards them and let them do their shit.


Mainly because Spears fans generally stop being such after a bit, while U2 fans stay as such for ages.

Thanks for confirming my theory ZeroNowhere:thumbup1:

[JimmyJazz]

How revolutionary can you be before you begin isolating yourself entirely?

Please don't mistake this post as an anti left post because it is far from it - only something I've been considering.

It stems from a number of discussions I've had with leftists both on and off this board, who seem always to be waiting for that perfect solution to the worlds problems and denouncing any positive efforts that fall short of the great expectation.

I used to wonder this same thing. Specifically, how far left can you get before "normal" people no longer take your opinion seriously? You'd be surprised, though, it has much more to do with how you argue than it does to do with your core beliefs. If you are good at arguing, people generally will not care what your core beliefs are.

I've had a handful of discussions, including one memorable one about race, that I wince to think back on. And every time, it was because instead of effectively addressing the points being raised, I accidentally made it clear that I was arguing from a very ideological place.

If you want your opinion to be respected in political discussions with non-leftists, you have to think and argue like a lawyer. Some public defense lawyers may take the job because they are uber-liberal and believe that prisons should be abolished; but they won't get very many clients off the hook if they let this fact be known in the courthouse. While they are arguing, they put their ideology deep in the back of their mind. Then they try hard to beat the other guy using the facts of the case. That is how moderate people are swayed: by you busting out with greater facts, not by you presenting your overwhelminngly compelling ideology.

As a matter of fact, the biggest influence on me when I was starting out with leftist thought was a Marxist-Leninst lawyer. He didn't hide his ideology at all, but in any discussion/debate, he put it completely to one side and crushed the other guy with facts. And when you get in the habit of this, you'll find that it's extremely easy to out-fact most people, given that most people will engage in extended debates without ever presenting one single fact. If you just get one or two facts or statistics that help your case, you've usually already won. Being dispassionate most of the time is also a must, because for a lot of people, their biggest motivation in determining all their beliefs--political or otherwise--is to maintain an even keel in their lives. If you make them think that leftists are always angry people, they won't become a leftist for that reason alone (whether they realize this is their reason or not). Of course, a little well-timed anger, at a well-chosen target (basically, something that should even make moderates angry) can be effective. Again, just think of your audience as a jury.

And as far as sectarianism: since I've been on Revleft I've managed to learn the difference between a ton of different leftist factions (which is knowledge I wanted) without even slightly affiliating with any one of them (something I never wanted to do). It's easy to do that if you want to.

[brigadista]

"Revolution is a serious thing, the most serious thing about a revolutionary's life. When one commits oneself to the struggle, it must be for a lifetime" Angela Davis

but it is a tough road,,right now i am fending off "dinosaur" comments on a regular basis

[Oneironaut]

How revolutionary can you be before you begin isolating yourself entirely?

In all honesty, if you are a revolutionary you are going to feel isolated given the current conditions. You will almost always find yourself being the only one in a community arguing revolution. If a revolution does not quite suite your tastes, then you may not be in the right place.



It stems from a number of discussions I've had with leftists both on and off this board, who seem always to be waiting for that perfect solution to the worlds problems and denouncing any positive efforts that fall short of the great expectation.

I don't think any leftist denounces positive reformist efforts, but leftists do remain highly critical of such efforts. The problem with any positive reformist effort is that it is attempting to solve an issue which society itself creates. In other words, reformists will always be battling fundamental issues that will never be solved simply because the issue can't be solved without overturning the contradiction itself in society. This does not mean communists/anarchists are going to speak out against universal health care or higher wages in the workplace. It is quite the contrary, we are in favor of immediate gains that benefit the working class. However, we must always remain critical of such reformist objectives and educate our coworkers on why it is not enough. Reformist efforts can likewise be taken away in a blink of an eye. Look at civil rights in the United States after 9/11. Not to mention, how long have reformists had the opportunity to solve society's issues and how many issues have they solved? I would say none; the fundamental issues remain unchanged.


I must admit - that in some ways it is one of my irritations with some leftist politics (by that I mean party politics) - the sectarianism that seems almost commonplace. Like no one wants to show support.

You are not alone here my friend. I would say that most leftists agree that sectarianism runs rampant amongst our movement. However, I think this is due to one major issue: we haven't had an international proletarian movement to rally behind. With the lack of a powerful, concrete movement that we can lend our support to, we tend to be stuck in our theories. This movement however is growing as we speak due to the economic crisis and people are beginning to wipe the dust off their editions of Kapital and are opening up to new ideas. The opportunity is growing everyday as the crisis continues to speak to our friends, family, and coworkers about how we view the crisis and what can be done to resolve it.


I would love to know your opinions on this. I only hope that no one wages a war of words here or continues a debate about Fair Trade with me. I'm asking because I want to learn from you all. :)

Your question is a perfectly legitimate one and one that most of us have asked ourselves. What you need to ask yourself is how long have reformists been attempting to solve societal issues and how much success have they had at doing so. I would say the work that they have done could be accomplished more successfully overnight with a revolution.

On another note, we come here to RevLeft to debate our beliefs. This website provides us with contact with many leftists from different currents who we get to test our ideas against. Because of that, you will always see debate over what is the best way to go about revolution. That is why we come here.