What is leftist ineffectiveness and how do we fight it?

[Lenina Rosenweg]

What is leftist ineffectiveness and how do we fight it?

Sorry for resurrecting this particular meme, I couldn't resist. Its obvious that the current crisis of capitalism is far from a traditional business cycle recession. Although capitalism itself thrives on crisis, its apparent that capitalism is in a cul de sac. Capitalists can only maintain their levels of profitability by continuing to lower living standards of working people. It can only get worse, much worse, until there's some sort of final blow out, a mass devalorization like in the period from 1914-1945.

There are working class fightbacks-Greece, France, etc. Unfortunately not much will be accomplished without organizations to provide some leadership and directions to the worker's movements. This is lacking.

Anti-capitalist organizations are not effective and are not providing leadership at a time when its badly needed.This seems to be the fault of both MLs and Trots.


The French NPA appears to be tailing events, not leading them. The RFC project in Italy appears to have flopped.PSOL in Brazil has not been effective. In Greece the KKE, while an important working class organization, has proved to be overly sectarian. Syriaza is dominated by post- modernist Eurocommunists.Die Linke has compromised with neo-liberalism.


In Asia the Maoist strategy has reached a dead end. Because of unique historical reasons peasant based movements could take power in Cuba, Vietnam, and China.In the current period this is no longer possible. Guevarist or Maoist movements have been languishing for decades, usually led by urban intellectuals, the "class of '68". They haven't gotten anywhere.

The Chinese neo-Maoists appear to be "urban Maoists", essentially reformists. "Get the revisionists out, clean up the CCP, and everything will be okay". Maoism does not have a theory for the failure of Maoism.

Prachanda is terrified of angering India, China and the IMF and the World Bank. The only progressive thing he's done is abolish the monarchy.

What do we do? The world may be entering a period like post WWI, when capitalism wobbled. Without leadership, will we be forced to repeat "the same old shit"?

[Bright Banana Beard]

C'mon! We must stick with Marx's holy quotation:

"The emancipation of the working class can only be achieved by the working class itself."

It is the only way it will works! :mad: /s

[Nolan]

C'mon! We must stick with Marx's holy quotation:

"The emancipation of the working class can only be achieved by the working class itself."

It is the only way it will works! :mad: /s



Shut up you stalinist hoxhaite troll bastard. I am sick of your antics. Everyone knows Krondstat would have had a happy ending had the sailors gotten their way.


On a more serious note, the left is in a tough position right now. The conditions for a comeback are there, but the people aren't. All we seem to have at the moment are sell-outs, reformists, compromisers, and stale movements like FARC and EZLN. There are a lot of good organizations out there, but the bad ones seem to float to the top.

[lines]

I think we have to be focused on achieving goals in the country we reside and focus on things in a national context and not concern ourselves too much with international matters unless we have made significant gains on the national level.

America is very brainwashed and shuns leftist thought to the extent where terms like socialist, communist, and anarchist are terms used to insult people.

We really have to focus on educating people about leftism and the way to do that is through propaganda. We have no access to the mainstream media and so we have to use the internet to make propaganda material.

The term propaganda is not a negative term it just refers to information promoting a particular political point of view. Everything politically oriented is propaganda.

There's very little we can achieve without first educating people, Americans don't even know what the term socialist or anarchist means. All they know is slogans they here.

So basically just make youtube videos about leftist causes and blogs. People aren't going to do anything unless their mentality changes.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

Gotta love those Hoxhaists!

I'm not an anarchist. There is a need for effective revolutionary leadership.An organization or movement can have influence far beyond its numbers. So far, its not there. Maybe this will develop in the course of world wide struggle but I'm not optimistic.

[Paulappaul]

stale movements like FARC and EZLN. There are a lot of good organizations out there, but the bad ones seem to float to the top. Maybe cause the "bad ones" are actually the good ones? Ever stop and think the EZLN has done more then any Communist Party In North America?


There are working class fightbacks-Greece, France, etc. Unfortunately not much will be accomplished without organizations to provide some leadership and directions to the worker's movements. This is lacking.Wow. You make it sound like these movements haven't done anything but piss around. Frankly, movements happening in Greece and France have had a major impact, and will continue to have a major impact.

May 68 created spontaneously, the biggest Wildcat Mass Strike in History. That's saying something. It wasn't on the part of Communist Parties or Socialist Parties. The effects of this have kept the movement alive, its given millions of workers practical experience of which to pass to their children.

More then anything, what has happened in Greece has shifted power to the working class. The struggle has taught them how to fight, how to resist. When their government or Private sector makes a poor decision the working class can organize fast and effectively.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

Maybe cause the "bad ones" are actually the good ones? Ever stop and think the EZLN has done more then any Communist Party In North America?

Wow. You make it sound like these movements haven't done anything but piss around. Frankly, movements happening in Greece and France have had a major impact, and will continue to have a major impact.

May 68 created spontaneously, the biggest Wildcat Mass Strike in History. That's saying something. It wasn't on the part of Communist Parties or Socialist Parties. The effects of this have kept the movement alive, its given millions of workers practical experience of which to pass to their children.

More then anything, what has happened in Greece has shifted power to the working class. The struggle has taught them how to fight, how to resist. When their government or Private sector makes a poor decision the working class can organize fast and effectively.

Okay but we can say that, in terms of working class interests the gov'ts and private sectors will always make poor decisions, almost by definition. The working class and the ruling classes have opposing interests.

France '68 came close to a socialist revolution. a working class takeover of society. It failed, largely due to sabotage of the CP and we got 30 years of neo-liberalism and then Sarkozy.

So far the rulers of France and Greece haven't backed down from their austerity measures, as far as I know.We need to push the struggles forward so they don't fail or become diverted like Chile, France 68, Portugal 74, etc.

There are revolutionary left formations but I'm concerned they are not doing anything, not providing the direction that is needed. The working class needs to go on the offensive.

[Paulappaul]

Okay but we can say that, in terms of working class interests the gov'ts and private sectors will always make poor decisions

From our perspective yes, not from the majority of the working class.


The working class and the ruling classes have opposing interests.

Those of which not conciseness to the Proletarian in America and much of the world.



So far the rulers of France and Greece haven't backed down from their austerity measures

They've backed down from alot and have made alot of changes. The good thing about Greece is that even with the Reforms things aren't quite at a standstill.


There are revolutionary left formations but I'm concerned they are not doing anything, not providing the direction that is needed. The working class needs to go on the offensive.

What's the "offensive"?

[KC]

France '68 came close to a socialist revolution. a working class takeover of society. It failed, largely due to sabotage of the CP and we got 30 years of neo-liberalism and then Sarkozy.Well the problem with the French revolutionary parties is the same as anywhere else: they've fractured into so many small splinter groups with monolithic "party lines" that define their existence and are thus isolated from one another in these petty little groups.

Most socialist groups also go to actions and try to spout their own particular assertions about it instead of engaging with the people actually involved in the action. They talk too much and don't know how to listen.

One must first listen to the people carrying out the action and learn from them, and then develop your plan of action from that.

This is impossible to do when one is a member of an organization who professes to be right about every position they take, especially when they have less than 100 members.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

From our perspective yes, not from the majority of the working class.


What's the "offensive"?

To go beyond the class collaborationism of union leaders, a tendency which is universal. Beyond that, to put it bluntly, workers forming councils capable of seizing control at the point of production and contesting state power.

At this stage the task of revolutionary organizations is to increase the level of class consciousness.The ruling class and the working class have opposing interests. As class consciousness rises, people will see this.

I admit I may not be as fully informed as I should be, I am extremely busy. There are positive signs but overall I don't see the radical left adequately doing its job.

[black magick hustla]

Well the problem with the French revolutionary parties is the same as anywhere else: they've fractured into so many small splinter groups with monolithic "party lines" that define their existence and are thus isolated from one another in these petty little groups.

.

that criticism is not new and tbh that has to do more with the state of the class than "hardheaded" leftists". in revolutionary situations, class lines become much clearer and some groups dissappear and some of them grow exponentially

[Ele'ill]

I don't think we've discovered the offensive tactic yet- Certainly not in the States. Far more people would rather aggressively fight against worker originated organization than take part in it. On top of this they're seeing the idea of unions being the root of corruption rather than the individual unions. There are pockets of promise and moments of success but there seems to be a mentality of 'each organization needs to be the one that does it' rather than 'let's network now to get shit done'. Perhaps because the organizations (in the states) are privileged and acting on a vertical or top down method of support rather than joint struggle sharing common interests from the get-go.

I don't know.

In regards to sectarian battles- why wouldn't the smaller organizations try giving other similar branch ideologies support- is there that much ego involved here? Are things not bad enough yet? I mean it's either going to work or it's going to fail- as I've said before if it fails we can only learn from it-

It seems as though we're failing before we're even trying and that's unacceptable.

[KC]

that criticism is not new and tbh that has to do more with the state of the class than "hardheaded" leftists". in revolutionary situations, class lines become much clearer and some groups dissappear and some of them grow exponentially

This is a cop out. The left has been largely the same throughout the past 100 years in the States, regardless of the "state of the class". The problem comes in the rigidity of organizational form, although it has obviously developed further as the years have gone by.

[black magick hustla]

This is a cop out. The left has been largely the same throughout the past 100 years in the States, regardless of the "state of the class". The problem comes in the rigidity of organizational form, although it has obviously developed further as the years have gone by.

not really. the US is a horrible example because the class here is very weak in comparison to other industralized nations. but the fall of communist organizations concided in general with the general fall of other communist organizations throughout the world. besides i dont want to do anythinfg with the fuckin "left" or whatever that means

[KC]

not really.

Yes really. Study the movement throughout the first half of the 20th century.

[Wanted Man]

C'mon! We must stick with Marx's holy quotation:

"The emancipation of the working class can only be achieved by the working class itself."

It is the only way it will works! :mad: /s


What's wrong with that quotation?

[revolution inaction]

If you don't have something intelligent to say, then shut the fuck up. American communist parties were very important in the labor movement which got the working class to where it is today. That's better than a group which isn't even socialist but is upheld as such.

the amarican working class is far weaker and less capable of engaging in struggle than in was at the start of the 20th century, i wouldn't have blamed that all on the communist parties but you can if you like.

[Paulappaul]

American communist parties were very important in the labor movement which got the working class to where it is today. That's better than a group which isn't even socialist but is upheld as such.

Oh yes - very important. Very important in tying the labor movement to the dismal failure that was the USSR, providing ammo for the American Right, discrediting everything even remotely related to Anti-Capitalism in American thought, and generally contributing to the fall of American organized labor and the rise of New Leftist Liberalism. Please - go try and take credit for shit Stalinists didn't accomplish elsewhere. While armchair revolutionaries like yourself are jerking off over pictures of Hoxha, the Zapatistas are actually working to liberate themselves from Capitalism :)

[Nolan]

Oh yes - very important. Very important in tying the labor movement to the dismal failure that was the USSR, providing ammo for the American Right, discrediting everything even remotely related to Anti-Capitalism in American thought, and generally contributing to the fall of American organized labor and the rise of New Leftist Liberalism. Please - go try and take credit for shit Stalinists didn't accomplish elsewhere. While armchair revolutionaries like yourself are jerking off over pictures of Hoxha, the Zapatistas are actually working to liberate themselves from Capitalism :)

Yeah, anarchists were only portrayed as lunatic terrorists with bombs and labor was only stigmatized after Stalin was leader. I'm sure if anarchism were in the drivers seat somehow, capitalism wouldn't have gone into defensive mode and the labor movement wouldn't have been attacked. :rolleyes:

As for "providing ammo" to the right, you remember those words the next time some anarchist bloc pointlessly vandalizes anything in sight.

The EZLN is not an anarchist, Marxist, or socialist group. It is first and foremost an indigenous rights group, and it would probably cease to exist if things like NAFTA were done away with.

Like I said, say intelligent things or shut up.

[Comrade_Stalin]

What is leftist ineffectiveness and how do we fight it?

Sorry for resurrecting this particular meme, I couldn't resist. Its obvious that the current crisis of capitalism is far from a traditional business cycle recession. Although capitalism itself thrives on crisis, its apparent that capitalism is in a cul de sac. Capitalists can only maintain their levels of profitability by continuing to lower living standards of working people. It can only get worse, much worse, until there's some sort of final blow out, a mass devalorization like in the period from 1914-1945.

There are working class fightbacks-Greece, France, etc. Unfortunately not much will be accomplished without organizations to provide some leadership and directions to the worker's movements. This is lacking.

Anti-capitalist organizations are not effective and are not providing leadership at a time when its badly needed.This seems to be the fault of both MLs and Trots.


The French NPA appears to be tailing events, not leading them. The RFC project in Italy appears to have flopped.PSOL in Brazil has not been effective. In Greece the KKE, while an important working class organization, has proved to be overly sectarian. Syriaza is dominated by post- modernist Eurocommunists.Die Linke has compromised with neo-liberalism.


In Asia the Maoist strategy has reached a dead end. Because of unique historical reasons peasant based movements could take power in Cuba, Vietnam, and China.In the current period this is no longer possible. Guevarist or Maoist movements have been languishing for decades, usually led by urban intellectuals, the "class of '68". They haven't gotten anywhere.

The Chinese neo-Maoists appear to be "urban Maoists", essentially reformists. "Get the revisionists out, clean up the CCP, and everything will be okay". Maoism does not have a theory for the failure of Maoism.

Prachanda is terrified of angering India, China and the IMF and the World Bank. The only progressive thing he's done is abolish the monarchy.

What do we do? The world may be entering a period like post WWI, when capitalism wobbled. Without leadership, will we be forced to repeat "the same old shit"?


It been a long time sense we ever had a man like Lenin, and that our problem.

[Paulappaul]

Yeah, anarchists were only portrayed as lunatic terrorists with bombs and labor was only stigmatized after Stalin was leader. I'm sure if anarchism were in the drivers seat somehow, capitalism wouldn't have gone into defensive mode and the labor movement wouldn't have been attacked. :rolleyes:

As for "providing ammo" to the right, you remember those words the next time some anarchist bloc pointlessly vandalizes anything in sight.

The EZLN is not an anarchist, Marxist, or socialist group. It is first and foremost an indigenous rights group, and it would probably cease to exist if things like NAFTA were done away with.

Like I said, say intelligent things or shut up.

I hope for your sake the revolution doesn't require basic logic or rudimentary reading skills, because judging by your response I'd say you're quite lacking in both respects. Pray tell, how is a tirade about Anarchism suppose to discredit a movement that YOU say isn't Anarchist in the first place? Or was that pathetic display intended to insult me - someone who isn't even an Anarchist? Great job pal, thats just the kind of "successful" tactics I'd expect from a braindead adherent of a failed and backward approach to Socialism.

And while we're explaining the obvious to the mentally deficient such as yourself, lets talk about the subject of this thread - LEFTIST ineffectiveness. Even if one adopts the position that the EZLN isn't Socialist, Anarchist, the fact remains that they still are on the Left and therefore fair game in comparing the effectiveness of approaches. So lets do some comparision shall we:

Stalinism:

Tens of millions of innocent people dead as a result of economic blunders, famine, and political oppression.

Empirical proof of every accusation and fear mongering tactic of the Right.

A complete and total failure to make headway in the United States.

A built in support base of a few thousand slow-witted armchair professors who "organize the revolution" in between masturbation breaks on their computer.

Vs.

EZLN:

Establishing a democratic and largely classless society without having to you, you know, kill workers, kill socialists, kill dissidents, and kill children, and kill Leftism.

Successfully organizing and sustaining an Anti-Capitalist society in the heart of an antagonistic Capitalist nation.

Re-energizing the Left while establishing an international fanbase of countless people

Providing empirical proof that Socialism doesn't necessarily involve following the sorry theories of a handful of history's most stupid and hypocritical revolutionaries or the complete obliteration of everything that remotely resembles freedom.

Sorry but no amount of historical revisionism, scapegoating the "bourgeois academia", or making half-assed attacks on other Socialists is going to change the fact that a handful of peasants managed to accomplish a lot more in a few decades than a century of "successful" organizing and tyrannical rule under asshats like yourself could and ever will.

[Amphictyonis]

Leftist ineffectiveness in America in part is born of the relation we socialists have with liberals. A rather incestuous and counterproductive relationship. Also, hardly anyone in the US even understand the basics of Marxism/anarchism. This is another problem. We need a simplified and unified working class theory, both a critique of capitalism (Marx) and an in depth critique of the nature of the state/hierarchy (anarchists). Something to be repeated, like a mantra. Something accurate and real.

Many people know there's something wrong with the world but don't understand the mechanics, they can't "see the matrix" so they blame all manner of things for their position in life, for the stress, the mind numbing repetitiveness of work under the division of labor - the worry of being evicted or being able to feed kids, dying in your home from a disease thats curable (for lack of medical insurance) or loosing your job for taking a couple days off to live life or not producing fast enough. Life doesn't have to be that way but it is for millions of people.

Here in the US these people have no voice. No cable TV sitcom, no radio show, no hollywood producer making films in their name. In America what we see or the picture painted is one of material abundance and joy. "The streets are paved with gold". There are no problems with the system, it's the fault of the people who are lazy, or ignorant, or dope heads etc.

The MEDIA in the US has managed to create a false reality. This false reality isn't 100% false though. There are millions and millions of Americans enjoying rather comfortable lives. Not the working poor mind you but the middle class. I don't think the left will have any substantive power until the middle class becomes the working poor. Basically, we need to see declining material conditions.

EDIT: Ya, Stalin didn't really help either, or the manner in which the bourgeois MEDIA uses him.

[WeAreReborn]

Leftist ineffectiveness in America in part is born of the relation we socialists have with liberals. A rather incestuous and counterproductive relationship. Also, hardly anyone in the US even understand the basics of Marxism/anarchism. This is another problem. We need a simplified and unified working class theory, both a critique of capitalism (Marx) and an in depth critique of the nature of the state/hierarchy (anarchists). Something to be repeated, like a mantra. Something accurate and real.

Many people know there's something wrong with the world but don't understand the mechanics, they can't "see the matrix" so they blame all manner of things for their position in life, for the stress, the mind numbing repetitiveness of work under the division of labor - the worry of being evicted or being able to feed kids, dying in your home from a disease thats curable (for lack of medical insurance) or loosing your job for taking a couple days off to live life or not producing fast enough. Life doesn't have to be that way but it is for millions of people.

Here in the US these people have no voice. No cable TV sitcom, no radio show, no hollywood producer making films in their name. In America what we see or the picture painted is one of material abundance and joy. "The streets are paved with gold". There are no problems with the system, it's the fault of the people who are lazy, or ignorant, or dope heads etc.

The MEDIA in the US has managed to create a false reality. This false reality isn't 100% false though. There are millions and millions of Americans enjoying rather comfortable lives. Not the working poor mind you but the middle class. I don't think the left will have any substantive power until the middle class becomes the working poor. Basically, we need to see declining material conditions.

EDIT: Ya, Stalin didn't really help either, or the manner in which the bourgeois MEDIA uses him.
I agree with your analysis but I shall elaborate a little by adding some of my ideas.

I also think that since America is extremely globalized, it causes poverty to other countries instead of its own. Because of this, they just cover it up with false media stories and since it isn't in the general American people's backyard it doesn't matter. It isn't at all like the industrial revolution when it caused domestic mass poverty. This is the fundamental problem when it comes to people advocating poverty. They add nationalistic ideas so if it happens to South America, or any other non-Western European country, it doesn't matter.

The whole problem as well is that America was founded on "freedom". Though it is clearly the wrong way to obtain freedom and liberty, people use it to cling onto. What this means it that people think it can be fixed or brought back to American roots. They feel Communism and Socialism is anti-American, despite the fact that is the only true form of freedom, therefore they oppose. It is inevitably mass feeling of nationalism and ignorance.

I agree with your statement about portraying the poor as useless junkies or dropouts etc. The media doesn't focus on the REASON why SOME poor people have to resort such means. Instead they blame them and make them look as if they are the problem. But hey if anything Capitalism couldn't exist without poor people. This technique is also the same that racists used to excuse the fact that they enslaved the blacks for so long. Like that excuse you learned about saying, "If we let them go they won't work" or "They are naturally lazy." or "They don't know how to work for themselves", ignoring the fact that they survived just fine without slavery. This is pretty much the same bullshit excuses when it comes to poverty.

These are the main reasons why America is doomed to reactionary Capitalistic views. The only real changes you can expect will have to come after a great political enlightenment. Lets hope it comes sooner then later.

[red cat]

In Asia the Maoist strategy has reached a dead end. Because of unique historical reasons peasant based movements could take power in Cuba, Vietnam, and China.In the current period this is no longer possible. Guevarist or Maoist movements have been languishing for decades, usually led by urban intellectuals, the "class of '68". They haven't gotten anywhere.

The Chinese neo-Maoists appear to be "urban Maoists", essentially reformists. "Get the revisionists out, clean up the CCP, and everything will be okay". Maoism does not have a theory for the failure of Maoism.

Prachanda is terrified of angering India, China and the IMF and the World Bank. The only progressive thing he's done is abolish the monarchy.

What do we do? The world may be entering a period like post WWI, when capitalism wobbled. Without leadership, will we be forced to repeat "the same old shit"?

Please do not comment on the Asian struggles until you know enough about them. In South Asia, Maoism is the only communist tendency present in the field. At least I don't see any dead end for Maoism here. It has been growing since the 80s and continues to advance every moment.

May be you can criticize your comrades in the Indian CWI for never doing anything useful etc, but not the Maoists. They are doing all what is possible right now.

[Ele'ill]

It been a long time sense we ever had a man like Lenin, and that our problem.

So you're suggesting that leftist technocratic science forces should genetically recreate Lenin.

The question is what will happen when all he wants to do is work all day and hit the pubs in the evenings?

Perhaps what we need instead is for things to get a lot worse.

[Communist]

.

Stop spamming and all else, stay on topic or warnings will result.
Thank you.

.

[KC]

A unified party does not require a "unified theory" as it is imagined in the modern - i.e. the sectist - sense. For example, one does not require a resolution between the theories of "state capitalism" and "deformed workers state" in order for their respective advocates to join together into a united party.

Theory's motive force is through praxis, and praxis through struggle. Theoretical development thus comes out of the political struggle between different factions within a united party structure that serves not only as a "battleground" (for lack of a better term) on which the theoretical struggle can be fought, but also as a direct developer of theory itself, through its connection with revolutionary practice.

When theory is not connected with praxis, and when theoretical struggle through the medium of the party is not possible, dogma develops. Theory stagnates along with the organizational stagnation. The connection is obviously a dialectical one, and thus they both degenerate as a whole.

This is why the left is organizationally and theoretically bankrupt for the most part today.

The question we need to address is how to turn this around.

[MarxSchmarx]

Many people know there's something wrong with the world but don't understand the mechanics, they can't "see the matrix" so they blame all manner of things for their position in life, for the stress, the mind numbing repetitiveness of work under the division of labor - the worry of being evicted or being able to feed kids, dying in your home from a disease thats curable (for lack of medical insurance) or loosing your job for taking a couple days off to live life or not producing fast enough. Life doesn't have to be that way but it is for millions of people.

Here in the US these people have no voice. No cable TV sitcom, no radio show, no hollywood producer making films in their name. In America what we see or the picture painted is one of material abundance and joy. "The streets are paved with gold". There are no problems with the system, it's the fault of the people who are lazy, or ignorant, or dope heads etc.

The MEDIA in the US has managed to create a false reality. This false reality isn't 100% false though. There are millions and millions of Americans enjoying rather comfortable lives. Not the working poor mind you but the middle class. I don't think the left will have any substantive power until the middle class becomes the working poor. Basically, we need to see declining material conditions.



This isn't unique to America, and the situation you describe is rather common throughout the industrialized world - the "middle class" is, despite its shrinking numbers, a sizable entity, and on the whole as a class is more than content with its creature comforts.

What is striking rather is the fact that outside of a few pockets (e.g., the universities, a few working class neighborhoods here and there) an organized left has almost no hegemonic presence outside the middle class. Even if a large minority of people are what are called "middle class" in the global north, and even if only say 30% of the population in any given country is amenable to radical change, we should be doing better. This is especially true in America, but the situation isn't much better elsewhere in the global north. Why this is is hard to say; after all, it is not too hard to understand why middle-class people with fairly cushy jobs, relative job security, and eager to enjoy their evenings and weekends, don't take us seriously. What is less clear is why people unemployed, temping, living paycheck to paycheck, over-skilled, hell even homeless don't care enough to join us. There is no excuse why, if the unemployment rate is between 7-15%, we shouldn't be getting 7-15% of the population involved in our organizing. Some of this blame can be placed on the media, and rightfully so, but not all of it.

One short term solution would be for leftist organizations to create alternative institutions that people can take advantage of - for example, food pantries, free clinics, those kinds of things. This isn't an original idea - it's been brought up here before. There is also the need for leftists to learn from mainstream "community organizers", get involved in on the ground campaigns even if they are reformist (like voter registration or nimby type stuff), and of course we need to seriously assess the energy that's being thrown in to intra-left bickering.

[People's War]

1. Leftist ineffectiveness is the divisions and battles within socialism - between communism and social democracy, and between branches of communism such as Stalinism vs Trotskyism.
2. It is resolved simply - by uniting under the banner of revolution against capitalism, and overthrowing it.

[4 Leaf Clover]

Sectarianism claims a lot of guilt for left ineffectiveness.

[CAleftist]

This isn't unique to America, and the situation you describe is rather common throughout the industrialized world - the "middle class" is, despite its shrinking numbers, a sizable entity, and on the whole as a class is more than content with its creature comforts.

What is striking rather is the fact that outside of a few pockets (e.g., the universities, a few working class neighborhoods here and there) an organized left has almost no hegemonic presence outside the middle class. Even if a large minority of people are what are called "middle class" in the global north, and even if only say 30% of the population in any given country is amenable to radical change, we should be doing better. This is especially true in America, but the situation isn't much better elsewhere in the global north. Why this is is hard to say; after all, it is not too hard to understand why middle-class people with fairly cushy jobs, relative job security, and eager to enjoy their evenings and weekends, don't take us seriously. What is less clear is why people unemployed, temping, living paycheck to paycheck, over-skilled, hell even homeless don't care enough to join us. There is no excuse why, if the unemployment rate is between 7-15%, we shouldn't be getting 7-15% of the population involved in our organizing. Some of this blame can be placed on the media, and rightfully so, but not all of it.

One short term solution would be for leftist organizations to create alternative institutions that people can take advantage of - for example, food pantries, free clinics, those kinds of things. This isn't an original idea - it's been brought up here before. There is also the need for leftists to learn from mainstream "community organizers", get involved in on the ground campaigns even if they are reformist (like voter registration or nimby type stuff), and of course we need to seriously assess the energy that's being thrown in to intra-left bickering.

Well, some of the blame can be placed on the media sure, but I think one of the big problems is centuries of slavery and racism and xenophobia-the idea that WASPs are somehow superior to ethnic Catholics, blacks, Latinos, Asians, Native Americans, etc.

This idea has been used by the ruling class in America to keep the working class fighting amongst themselves.

Also, through evangelical religious indoctrination, poor people in America have been told that their personal salvation is more important than their material status. This confuses the issue of class further.

The last thing the ruling class in America wants is a unified working class. So they do everything they can to divide the working class into antagonistic factions. THAT is why there is little class consciousness in America.

[penguinfoot]

Successfully organizing and sustaining an Anti-Capitalist society in the heart of an antagonistic Capitalist nation

What's ironic is that you've just made a number of anti-Stalinist points, some of which are quite fair, and now you're saying that socialism or communism is in fact possible not only in one country but in the middle of the Mexican countryside, which puts you on the same side as the Stalinists when it comes to following Marx in recognizing that communism requires a highly developed productive apparatus to survive and that it is the outcome of a historical process.

[MarxSchmarx]

Well, some of the blame can be placed on the media sure, but I think one of the big problems is centuries of slavery and racism and xenophobia-the idea that WASPs are somehow superior to ethnic Catholics, blacks, Latinos, Asians, Native Americans, etc.

This idea has been used by the ruling class in America to keep the working class fighting amongst themselves.

Also, through evangelical religious indoctrination, poor people in America have been told that their personal salvation is more important than their material status. This confuses the issue of class further.

The last thing the ruling class in America wants is a unified working class. So they do everything they can to divide the working class into antagonistic factions. THAT is why there is little class consciousness in America.

The theory you describe works very well, I think, for explaining why there is no serious welfare state in America like their is in, say, Scandinavia.

I guess I just don't see leftist impotence as unique to America. As such the legacy of institutionalized racism in America is insufficient to explain the broader question of why no developed country has a truly muscular left that lives up to its name. Yes, there are OECD countries where the left is actually relatively vocal (Greece, to a lesser extent Spain and eastern Germany) but if you look at other Anglo-saxon countries, or relatively ethnically homogeneous industrialized democracies like Austria or South Korea, I don't think you see a very coherent or effective movement of real socialists. There may be more "class consciousness", but this is translated into votes for the liberal/reformist parties that are pretty mild. Every place has its tiny factions that split over the minutest details, and the situation is bad all around in the global north.

[Amphictyonis]

This isn't unique to America, and the situation you describe is rather common throughout the industrialized world - the "middle class" is, despite its shrinking numbers, a sizable entity, and on the whole as a class is more than content with its creature comforts.

What is striking rather is the fact that outside of a few pockets (e.g., the universities, a few working class neighborhoods here and there) an organized left has almost no hegemonic presence outside the middle class. Even if a large minority of people are what are called "middle class" in the global north, and even if only say 30% of the population in any given country is amenable to radical change, we should be doing better. This is especially true in America, but the situation isn't much better elsewhere in the global north. Why this is is hard to say; after all, it is not too hard to understand why middle-class people with fairly cushy jobs, relative job security, and eager to enjoy their evenings and weekends, don't take us seriously. What is less clear is why people unemployed, temping, living paycheck to paycheck, over-skilled, hell even homeless don't care enough to join us. There is no excuse why, if the unemployment rate is between 7-15%, we shouldn't be getting 7-15% of the population involved in our organizing. Some of this blame can be placed on the media, and rightfully so, but not all of it.

One short term solution would be for leftist organizations to create alternative institutions that people can take advantage of - for example, food pantries, free clinics, those kinds of things. This isn't an original idea - it's been brought up here before. There is also the need for leftists to learn from mainstream "community organizers", get involved in on the ground campaigns even if they are reformist (like voter registration or nimby type stuff), and of course we need to seriously assess the energy that's being thrown in to intra-left bickering.

During the end of the industrial revolution or early 20'th century socialism was actually taken seriously in the US. I agree bad material conditions doesn't automatically translate into class consciousness especially today with the hegemony capitalist culture enjoys.....in our past the bourgeois MEDIA system wasn't as powerful as it is today and revolutionaries were more dedicated than we are today. We lack the intensity workers/revolutionaries had in the early 20'th century.

Another problem is the nature of the service sector economy. At one time workers were concentrated in factories in cities, now workers are spread out across the nation with no solidarity even within the same companies.

Ideology is very important but I don't see our ideology catching on until the bourgeoisie really squeeze the service sector economy in the west. I'm not sure how much people are willing to take? We're going to get a feel very soon with all of the structural adjustments planned. If anything positive can come out of this current crisis it should be a opportunity for us to spread class consciousness on a meaningful scale. Thus far, in the US, I don't see it happening :(