Why are all the LeftComs ICC'ers?

[Zanthorus]

This is something that's always seemed strange to me. It seems like a lot of the Left-Communists on this site that are in an organisation are in the ICC or some affiliated organisation. Why are there no members of the Internationalist Communist Tendency that post here, being probably the other big leftcom group? I've seen some of them post occasionally over at libcom (For some reason, libcom won't let me register, and I find it kinda annoying going on forums and being unable to reply, so this is purely based on threads found while searching libcom for something else).

[Os Cangaceiros]

(For some reason, libcom won't let me register, and I find it kinda annoying going on forums and being unable to reply, so this is purely based on threads found while searching libcom for something else).

Do you feel the burning desire to correct someone's (mis)interpretation of page 50, paragraph 2 of Grundrisse? ;)

[Devrim]

I think that there are three people from the ICC who post on this site, Myself, Leo, and very occasionally Alf.

Devrim

[Zanthorus]

Do you feel the burning desire to correct someone's (mis)interpretation of page 50, paragraph 2 of Grundrisse? ;)

hehe, not really. libcom just seems to have mildly more interesting discussions than Revleft, since everyone there is an infantile ultra-left of one sort or another :p

[zimmerwald1915]

I think that there are three people from the ICC who post on this site, Myself, Leo, and very occasionally Alf.

Devrim
Beltov and Samyasa are still around, though AFAIK they post even less often than Alf. Baboon still posts.

[Devrim]

Beltov and Samyasa are still around, though AFAIK they post even less often than Alf. Baboon still posts.

Baboon isn't a member either.

Devrim

[revolution inaction]

This is something that's always seemed strange to me. It seems like a lot of the Left-Communists on this site that are in an organisation are in the ICC or some affiliated organisation. Why are there no members of the Internationalist Communist Tendency that post here, being probably the other big leftcom group? I've seen some of them post occasionally over at libcom (For some reason, libcom won't let me register, and I find it kinda annoying going on forums and being unable to reply, so this is purely based on threads found while searching libcom for something else).

when you say it woun't let you register what is the problem that stops you?

[Zanthorus]

when you say it woun't let you register what is the problem that stops you?

I never get the confirmation e-mail. I've tried the request a new password business to see if that works, and it says it's sent something to my e-mail address, but nothing. And I don't have a junk mail folder to begin with.

[zimmerwald1915]

Baboon isn't a member either.

Devrim
Huh. Why did I think he was?

And Zanthorus, have you tried registering with a different username and email address?

[Zanthorus]

And Zanthorus, have you tried registering with a different username and email address?

Aha, that works :)

[gorillafuck]

I think that there are three people from the ICC who post on this site, Myself, Leo, and very occasionally Alf.

Devrim
Maldoror.

[zimmerwald1915]

Maldoror.
Pretty sure he is/used to be a sympathizer.

Glad to hear it, Zanthorus. Some sites don't let you re-register with the same username and a different email, and there was of course, your problem with not getting the reactivation emails for your old account, so it's often just better to drop it all and start from scratch.

[Devrim]

MaldororPretty sure he is/used to be a sympathizer.

I don't think he is a member, but I am not 100% sure. I know he has written for our press in America.

Devrim

[zimmerwald1915]

I don't think he is a member, but I am not 100% sure. I know he has written for our press in America.

Devrim
Yeah, but then again, so have I, and the American paper perforce has to have at least some articles by sympathizers, due to the size of the section.

His article was the Mexican drug-war one, right? Because I remember that article being described as by a sympathizer.

[Devrim]

Yeah, but then again, so have I, and the American paper perforce has to have at least some articles by sympathizers, due to the size of the section.

His article was the Mexican drug-war one, right? Because I remember that article being described as by a sympathizer.

I think so. The US section virtually collapsed as you probably know.

Devrim

[zimmerwald1915]

I think so. The US section virtually collapsed as you probably know.

Devrim
Well, the US section had three people in it when I first became interested in the ICC, so the parlous state of affairs now seems almost normal.

[Devrim]

Well, the US section had three people in it when I first became interested in the ICC, so the parlous state of affairs now seems almost normal.

That is what I met by 'collapsed'.

Devrim

[Lenina Rosenweg]

I'm not sure if this is the best place to ask this but is decadence theory upheld by most other LC individuals or organizations? Is there a major difference between different theories of capitalist decadence?

Also I understand DT can be complex. As I understand one aspect of the ICC's version is that capitalism essentially reached the limit if its productive powers at the beginning of WWI. I may misunderstand this. Capitalism obviously greatly expanded since that time.

I don't know why I thought this but for some reason I assumed Zimmerwald was in the ICC.

The site is interesting. It needs pictures.

[Leo]

Pretty sure he is/used to be a sympathizer. I think he also wrote in the latest issue, and I really liked his article.


The site is interesting. It needs pictures. Indeed.

[Devrim]

I'm not sure if this is the best place to ask this but is decadence theory upheld by most other LC individuals or organizations? Is there a major difference between different theories of capitalist decadence?

I think that all Marxists have a theory of decadence. The idea of the rise and fall of modes of production is sort of intrinsic in the Marxist view of history. I think that the difference with the ICC's view of decadence is the interpretation put on it, and also the amount of emphasis that is put on it, which in my personal opinion too much.

Other left communist groups like the ICT have a theory of decadence also. It isn't an idea that the communist left invented though. If you go back to the third international and before, you will find it there.


The site is interesting. It needs pictures.

If you look at a sample page (http://tr.internationalism.org/ekaonline-2000s/ekaonline-2010/isciler-konfederasyonlarin-teshir-ve-tecrit-tehdidini-bosa-cikardi) from the Turkish section of the site, or the Turkish home page (http://tr.internationalism.org/), you will see pictures. I sometimes think that much of the ICC lacks a sense of aesthetics.

Devrim

[Il Medico]

Devrim and Leo are the only active posters who are actually members of the ICC. The rest of us are posers. (who they nicely call sympathizers :lol:)

[Zanthorus]

I'm not sure if this is the best place to ask this but is decadence theory upheld by most other LC individuals or organizations?

That depends. 'Decadence' theory is sort of a vague term, at a stretch it could be used to incorporate practically every theory which stresses that capitalism runs into objective limits of it's own creation, in which case Marxism would seem to be premised on a theory of 'decadence'. The theory which the ICC and the ICT trumpet around, however, seems to be predicated on a division of the history of capitalism into two seperate phases, one 'ascendent' and the other 'decadent'. I personally don't agree with the latter.


The idea of the rise and fall of modes of production is sort of intrinsic in the Marxist view of history.

I'm not sure what 'rise and fall' means, again, this is a very vague term, but if you mean this in the way in which the ICC uses it (All modes of production have two phases, ascendent and decadent), then it is a very interesting 'Marxist' view which can't be found in Marx.

[Devrim]

I'm not sure what 'rise and fall' means, again, this is a very vague term, but if you mean this in the way in which the ICC uses it (All modes of production have two phases, ascendent and decadent), then it is a very interesting 'Marxist' view which can't be found in Marx.

The idea that there is a period where the means of production are developing and then there is a point where the class relations becomes a fetter on the means of production. I rather think that it is.

Devrim

[Palingenisis]

If you look at a sample page (http://tr.internationalism.org/ekaonline-2000s/ekaonline-2010/isciler-konfederasyonlarin-teshir-ve-tecrit-tehdidini-bosa-cikardi) from the Turkish section of the site, or the Turkish home page (http://tr.internationalism.org/), you will see pictures. I sometimes think that much of the ICC lacks a sense of aesthetics.

Devrim

I think your logo is cool and actually rather Stalinogothic but it does kinda look like something from an add for a 70s gay sauna :laugh:

[Zanthorus]

Just like to point out I've replied to Devrim's last post here:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/theory-decadence-t141889/index.html