"Educate" in "Educate, Agitate, Organize": what about Renaissance education?

[Die Neue Zeit]

Becoming a jack of all trades and a master of none is counterposed to mastering one and not being as knowledgeable in others.

Should the left, though, internally revive Renaissance education of sorts, which goes beyond this dichotomy?

It would be very difficult to be an appropriate master in all the fields suggested below, but the emerging result (perhaps from dedicated party schools) would be educated, professionalized aristoi ("the best") with enormous expert power as a base of power (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_(sociology)#Five_bases_of_power), especially in relation to political programs.

So, here are the suggested fields for an intensive degree or certification program:

1) Communications (ranging from making presentations to writing case studies)
2) Labour law
3) Labour history
4) Labour economics
5) Heterodox economics
6) Political economy
7) Democratic theory and general political science
8) Sociology
9) Marxism within #3 to #8

Qualification examinations beyond World Socialist Movement levels of difficulty could combine multiple-choice questions, short-answer questions (or longer questions, each consisting of a few short-answer questions), mathematical problems, and case studies.

[blake 3:17]

I can see the point about being jack of all trades and master of none.

I think part of our problem is that the radical Left here does have a lot of experts that are lousy at communication or are so embroiled within the academy or the labour bureaucracy that they're trapped.

My own biases would be towards the humanities, education, arts and the trades. I can see the need for these kinds of expertise. The Marxists I have the most in common with see the need to speak plainly, and can't seem to do it.

[Die Neue Zeit]

I have five major approaches to communication:

1) General oral communication (sometimes I slip up by using more complicated words, but more often I try to come up with the right words in the first place)
2) Oral and written presentations
3) E-mail and chat
4) Forum posts
5) General and programmatic theory writing

[Q]

I have five major approaches to communication:

1) General oral communication (sometimes I slip up by using more complicated words, but more often I try to come up with the right words in the first place)
2) Oral and written presentations
3) E-mail and chat
4) Forum posts
5) General and programmatic theory writing

If we keep to five subjects I would scrap 3 and 4 and replace them with "agitational article writing" (short, snappy, being effective in making a point) and "scientific article writing" (longer articles (3000+ words), referencing, research).

Anyway, I'm glad this thread gets started as I'm looking for a way to setup a curriculum for a studygroup myself. In the broadest outline I was thinking about:
1. A base introduction into Marxism, hitting all topics, but not delving too deep in any.
2. A casestudy of Marx and Engels texts.
3. A study into dialectics (Hegel and Engels).
4. Marxism after Marx and Engels and until WWI: studying (among other things) Lars Lih's Lenin Rediscovered.
5. The communist movement from 1914 to 1945: Revolution, defeat, fascism.
6. The post-WWII communist movement until 1991
7. The movement from 1991 to today.

This is not intended to be a mere historical examination, but to understand the processes and contexts of why Marxists put forward certain policies at certain times and learn the methods. In my idea this approach takes several years, depending on how often you meet.

Your idea follows a different approach, more focused on certain "base themes" and it does integrate well an idea I haven't fleshed out much yet: workshops that focus on teaching capabilities (not only communication, but also organising stuff, etc.).

I'll leave at that for now :)

[Queercommie Girl]

You should not forget the sociological aspects of Marxism, and the history of the struggles of oppressed minorities, such as black people, women and queer people. They are a fundamental and integral part of any genuine socialist movement.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ That's covered in the sociology courses of the degree/certification program.


If we keep to five subjects I would scrap 3 and 4 and replace them with "agitational article writing" (short, snappy, being effective in making a point) and "scientific article writing" (longer articles (3000+ words), referencing, research).

Wouldn't that be covered in the Communications segment of the Renaissance degree or certification?

One course could cover the "persuasive" research paper, another on PowerPoint, another on memos and letters, and another on journalism in articles (factual reporting as well as properly expressing an opinion).


In my idea this approach takes several years, depending on how often you meet.

Mine too.


2. A casestudy of Marx and Engels texts.

I don't see the applicability of the case study method to mere texts.

Case studies regarding labour history could involve drafting an alternate program at some point in real-life history, like drafting a better program than the Eisenach program (which was critiqued only by Bakunin).

The bulk of case studies set in contemporary settings should consist of drafting political programs and/or making strategic management recommendations.


Your idea follows a different approach, more focused on certain "base themes" and it does integrate well an idea I haven't fleshed out much yet: workshops that focus on teaching capabilities (not only communication, but also organising stuff, etc.).

I'll leave at that for now :)

Workshops are a start, but this proposed Renaissance education should take at least as long as a typical degree program, and should be quite a bit more intensive than a degree program offered by a university (simply because of so much content).

[Die Neue Zeit]

As a temporary/transitory/"transitional" measure, the political program suggestion activity pertaining to the OP should have collectively the skills, knowledge, etc. needed to perform its tasks. Labour historians of the likes of Peter Rachleff, political economists of the likes of Paul Cockshott, and so on would be part of the political program suggestion activity, while overly philosophical hacks wouldn't be.

[Q]

Wouldn't that be covered in the Communications segment of the Renaissance degree or certification?
I guess that it could.


One course could cover the "persuasive" research paper, another on PowerPoint, another on memos and letters, and another on journalism in articles (factual reporting as well as properly expressing an opinion).



I don't see the applicability of the case study method to mere texts.

Case studies regarding labour history could involve drafting an alternate program at some point in real-life history, like drafting a better program than the Eisenach program (which was critiqued only by Bakunin).

The bulk of case studies set in contemporary settings should consist of drafting political programs and/or making strategic management recommendations.



Workshops are a start, but this proposed Renaissance education should take at least as long as a typical degree program, and should be quite a bit more intensive than a degree program offered by a university (simply because of so much content).
Well, you seem to reason from a point of view of a large party. My group here can't offer a "more intensive than a degree program offered by a university" type of course. We only have so much resources, certainly in the beginning.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Can the workshops be compatible with my temporary program committee measure (i.e., that group having a monopoly on program suggestions to a bigger party body, with program suggestions from the rank-and-file having to go through that group first)?

Some might scream "Elitism!" and "Bureaucratic Centralism!" - but it's just a tighter version of Die Linke's Program Commission.

[Q]

Can the workshops be compatible with my temporary program committee measure (i.e., that group having a monopoly on program suggestions to a bigger party body, with program suggestions from the rank-and-file having to go through that group first)?

Some might scream "Elitism!" and "Bureaucratic Centralism!" - but it's just a tighter version of Die Linke's Program Commission.
The workshops, in my view, would have to be organised by the leading comrades of the studygroup in cooperation with the particular specialist giving the workshop.

As for your "temporary program committee", how temporary is it? Is the result (a program) submitted for democratic review? Also, I don't really see the connection with the political education here.

[Die Neue Zeit]

The workshops, in my view, would have to be organised by the leading comrades of the studygroup in cooperation with the particular specialist giving the workshop.

As for your "temporary program committee", how temporary is it? Is the result (a program) submitted for democratic review? Also, I don't really see the connection with the political education here.

The result should always be submitted for democratic review / "congressional" approval or rejection / etc.

What I meant re. my OP and my transitory post is that there should be an intensive education curriculum for eligibility towards selection into the program body. For the moment, "the political program suggestion activity should have collectively" means that, eventually, each individual member of the program body must have all the qualifications specified in my OP or something along those lines.

[Again, a thing for bigger parties with bigger bureaucracies]

[Thirsty Crow]

I can see the point about being jack of all trades and master of none.

As far as I'm concerned, not only that I see a point to this proposition - I think it is very important, perhaps even essential.
If I were to generalize my want, desire and need - to understand the world around me, to understand how does it affect me and how in turn I may "change this world" - I would also be forced to conclude that "jack of all trades" approach is the most desirable for most people.
However, of course, Party education should also feed on the clearly expressed wants of people that would attend classes. Cooperation in the production of knowledge - or bust.

@DNZ: as far as your fields of interest are concerned, I would suggest adding "cultural history".

[Die Neue Zeit]

I should point out the relevance of this subject to a recent Politics thread:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/new-anti-capitalist-t144078/index.html


Fleury concludes that “new democracy” could emerge from “the appearance of qualified majorities in the public debate, be it of trade union officials, professors, and so on.”

She declares that opposition comes not from “the plebeians.” “That is finished,” she proclaims. “There aren’t ‘crowds,’ there aren’t ‘masses,’ there are educated and organized individuals who are a force for proposing policies.”


To twist Fleury's and Corcuff's words more to my liking:

He concludes that “new democracy” could emerge from “the appearance of qualified, working-class majorities in the public debate [...]”

He declares that opposition comes not from “spontaneism.” “That is finished,” he proclaims. “There aren’t spontaneous ‘crowds’/mobs, there aren’t spontaneist ‘masses,’ There are educated and organized workers who are a force for proposing working-class policies.”