Historical significance of left communists?

[Das war einmal]

I was reading through Herman Gorter's reply on Lenin's 'Left communism: an infantile disorder' and while I do acknowledge the fact that Lenin made a mistake to compare conditions of the working class and peasantry in Russia with those in Western- Europe, I find it hard to believe that Gorter (and his comrades like Pannekoek) thought that working together (or attempting) to work together with labour unions or other left parliamentary parties is some sort of betrayal. I agree that the working class needs to take on responsibility themselves.

But the tragic fact is that, till today, the (western) working class have not build up a movement or party or anything else to lead them. Not like how Gorter or Pannekoek mentioned it.

Which brings me to the next point, Gorter and his comrades back up their facts with their experience in the second international. Well, if we are to assume that this is a valid point, history also proves that till now, leftist communism has proven to be completely insignificant.

This open letter to Lenin was written in 1920. 90 years later, we have nothing to prove the historical significance of this movement, while on the other hand (contradicting Gorter) the movement of the Third International, was a recognised threat to the capitalists.

[RotStern]

This thread.

[Das war einmal]

For the record:

This is the original text by Lenin: http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/lwc/index.htm

And this the reply by Herman Gorter, left communist: http://www.marxists.org/archive/gorter/1920/open-letter/index.htm

[Das war einmal]

Anybody?

[manic expression]

The posts so far have summarized the historical significance of left communists, because no such thing exists.

[ls]

Gorter doesn't say "left-communism is going to be really big" as you make out. He simply says that opportunism is rife and that it needs to stop, he is saying that the conditions Lenin outlined in "left-wing communism: an infantile disorder" will lead to definite failure. History has proven him right.. show me the revolution in Western Europe, the USA or any of the other imperialist heavyweights.

The USA, Canada, Germany, France, England, Italy, Holland, Hungary, Russia, "Transcaucasia" and many other places came their closest to revolution when the struggle was "left-wing communist" in nature.

This is bearing in mind that the emancipation of the workers in the great Empires of that age and now, the modern imperialist, mostly Western countries will make revolution a thousand times easier in oppressed countries.

Even now, the few places where left-communism has a fairly big following, or where otherwise internationalist mass organisations of other ideologies exist, there is a valid struggle going on. Examples of directly left-communist involvement recently might be mass strikes in Italy, Turkey, Spain, Greece, the UK and so on, they are biggest in Italy right now with several parties, there's a lot of organizations that do not hold themselves as "left communist" but are extremely close in ideology if you ask me, with a big enough following.

You can see left-communists as being super utopian whatevers who have no relevancy if you want, but just think how building an organic workers' revolution of whatever "ideology" without the use of opportunistic tactics works and how long it takes. It has proven possible before and (you can point to Greece where mass internationalist action happened) it will happen again, it might not be overnight like you unreasonably expect, but it has more than proven itself as able to provide the workers with a revolution.

[Niccolò Rossi]

I was reading through Herman Gorter's reply on Lenin's 'Left communism: an infantile disorder'

It's good to hear that you are interested in engaging with left communism more deeply than merely reading Lenin's critique. This is more than can be said for the vast majority of 'Marxist-Leninists' on this forum!


Europe, I find it hard to believe that Gorter (and his comrades like Pannekoek) thought that working together (or attempting) to work together with labour unions or other left parliamentary parties is some sort of betrayal.

What do you find hard to believe about it exactly?


But the tragic fact is that, till today, the (western) working class have not build up a movement or party or anything else to lead them. Not like how Gorter or Pannekoek mentioned it.

Could you clardify by what you mean by this? What did Gorter and Pannekoek have to say on this question in your understanding?


Well, if we are to assume that this is a valid point, history also proves that till now, leftist communism has proven to be completely insignificant.

This open letter to Lenin was written in 1920. 90 years later, we have nothing to prove the historical significance of this movement, while on the other hand (contradicting Gorter) the movement of the Third International, was a recognised threat to the capitalists.

There are a couple of issues here. Firstly, the claim that left communism 'has proven to be completely insignificant' is untrue. The Communist Left has a rich and very important history, notably in the nations where the working class acomplished or came closest to revolution: in Germany, the Netherlands, Russia and Italy.

More than this, the Communist International at one point did indeed pose the greatest threat to the capitalist world order ever witnessed, on this we agree. Where our positions diverge is that the communist left correctly identified the betrayal of the Communist International and it's transformation from the leadership of the revolutionary working class into a tool subverviant to the interests of Russian capital.

[Delegado J]

Left communism is noble and has more to do with libertarian socialism/syndicalism than leninism. But self-described Left communist movements haven't really been too successful in the past (if you discard syndicalist actions).

Rosa Luxemburg was a good left communist. I agree with more of what she stood for than Lenin.

[Devrim]

The Communist Left has a rich and very important history, notably in the nations where the working class acomplished or came closest to revolution: in Germany, the Netherlands, Russia and Italy.

I wouldn't really include the Netherlands in that list. It didn't come that close to a revolution. I think the left was strong there more as a reflection of ins closeness to Germany.

Devrim

[Devrim]

Left communism is noble and has more to do with libertarian socialism/syndicalism than leninism. But self-described Left communist movements haven't really been too successful in the past (if you discard syndicalist actions).

In the revolution period in the two Western countries that came closest to revolution, Germany and Italy, the left was the majority of their communist parties.

Devrim