factions

[Nobody]

I know in that Stalinist do not believe in factions, but where does this start to kick in? Is it ok to disagree until a vote is taken, then you tow the party line? Or is it asmused you will always agree with the ruling/only faction? How is it decided?

Thanks in advance

[Cassius Clay]

Exactly. There should be the up most debate and suggestions of alternatives and a long (ish) disscussion. The decision that the majority decided upon then should be respected by the minority and then the will of the majority can be carried out. Even then there should be criticism and debate. I'm not talking about forming a 'group' and factions on a particular issue, not only is it pathectic but in many cases in can be counter-revolutionary. Rather criticism of party officials should not only be allowed it should be encouranged, if the particular party official/member is right then he or she will be proved to be if visa versa then so be it.

Really I cannot see the need to 'form factions', you will have your chance to put your point of view across. Only if you lose surely the democratic thing to do is accept the will of the majority.


Wow I managed to do that post without mentioning Stalin or Trotsky's name. Doh! :angry:

[Nobody]

Thanks Cassius, that's what I thought, but have always wondered about that, had to run it by someone who knows more about it then myself.

cheers lads

[commie kg]

Originally posted by Cassius [email protected] 23 2003, 09:53 AM
Exactly. There should be the up most debate and suggestions of alternatives and a long (ish) disscussion. The decision that the majority decided upon then should be respected by the minority and then the will of the majority can be carried out. Even then there should be criticism and debate. I'm not talking about forming a 'group' and factions on a particular issue, not only is it pathectic but in many cases in can be counter-revolutionary. Rather criticism of party officials should not only be allowed it should be encouranged, if the particular party official/member is right then he or she will be proved to be if visa versa then so be it.

Really I cannot see the need to 'form factions', you will have your chance to put your point of view across. Only if you lose surely the democratic thing to do is accept the will of the majority.


Wow I managed to do that post without mentioning Stalin or Trotsky's name. Doh! :angry:
That's one of the more sensible posts by any of the Stalinists here.

If I were a Stalinist, I would wholeheartedly agree! :D

[redstar2000]

That's one of the more sensible posts by any of the Stalinists here.

Not so fast.

Even then there should be criticism and debate. I'm not talking about forming a 'group' and factions on a particular issue, not only is it pathetic but in many cases in can be counter-revolutionary. Rather criticism of party officials should not only be allowed it should be encouraged, if the particular party official/member is right then he or she will be proved to be, if vice versa then so be it.

The purpose of criticism of the party line, of the leadership, etc. is to effect a change. How does this take place?

Consider the "good" Leninist-Stalinist who observes that the party's current line--supporting the Labour Party, for example--is an act of monumental stupidity as well as counter-revolutionary capitulation to the capitalist class.

She writes a thoughtful and well-reasoned critique of this policy. What does she do with it?

She can mail it to the leadership, of course...the people who are actually responsible for this gross blunder. Are they likely to be receptive? You think so? :lol:

But if she circulates her document to the membership--assuming that such an act is even practical--what happens?

She will be accused of "forming a faction" and find herself summarily expelled faster than she can say "democratic centralism". :o

Or worse: the leadership could decide to "make an example" of her. A special conference could be called consisting of delegates hand-picked by the leadership...which would then proceed to discuss and adopt a report "convicting" her of not only factionalism, indiscipline, petty bourgeois individualism and ultra-leftism but also sexual depravity, moral turpitude, and being a paid agent of the police.

This "report" would be circulated throughout the party and to all its allies, published in the party press and on its website, etc.

And most people would probably take all that at "face value"--very few would have sufficient political sophistication to realize what had actually happened.

As a result of this experience, it's possible that she might become a real "ultra-leftist"...that's Leninspeak for real communist. But the historical record suggests a gloomier outcome: most of the people who encounter "democratic centralist" practice either quit politics altogether or, from a sense of outrage, become conservatives or even reactionaries.

Sad, but true. I've seen it with my own eyes.

http://www.sawu.org/redgreenleft/YaBBImages/smoking.gif
___________________________

U.S. GET OUT OF IRAQ NOW!
___________________________

"...a disgusting and frightening website"
The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.sawu.org/redstar2000)
A site about communist ideas

[commie kg]

I never even thought of that, but it seems reasonable.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Gee whiz redstar, you could make a film about that post....it had intrigue, mystery, drama, action, betrayal and irony....blah blah blah....


All you need to do now is secure Johnny Depp and you're on your way pops.

[redstar2000]

Well, it would be a "low budget" production...would you consider the role of "General Secretary"?

For a percentage of the gross, of course.

http://www.sawu.org/redgreenleft/YaBBImages/smoking.gif
___________________________

U.S. GET OUT OF IRAQ NOW!
___________________________

"...a disgusting and frightening website"
The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.sawu.org/redstar2000)
A site about communist ideas

[Cassius Clay]

Yes I was on the edge of my seat. The only problem is it's full of if's and maybe's. I dont want to seem as if I'm blwoing my own trumpet so to speak but it would seem that redstar is using my pacific example. Never mind that I've talked to the National treasurer of the party regarding this and as still refered to as 'comrade'. But also that the way you go about trying to 'bring a change' is through debating and criticising your opponents line before a vote is taken. It does tend to help.

[redstar2000]

Never mind that I've talked to the National treasurer of the party regarding this and am still referred to as 'comrade'

That's because you were just *****ing. *****ing is ok. Soldiers always ***** about something.

If you really want to be a part of the excitement of "democratic centralism", you have to do what my example did: write up a really thoughtful critique of the party's line and circulate it to the membership (or as many as you can reach). Do this a couple of months before the party congress. Include a draft resolution to change the party's line.

And then enjoy the fireworks. :D

http://www.sawu.org/redgreenleft/YaBBImages/smoking.gif
___________________________

U.S. GET OUT OF IRAQ NOW!
___________________________

"...a disgusting and frightening website"
The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.sawu.org/redstar2000)
A site about communist ideas

[Vinny Rafarino]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2003, 01:17 PM
Well, it would be a "low budget" production...would you consider the role of "General Secretary"?

For a percentage of the gross, of course.

http://www.sawu.org/redgreenleft/YaBBImages/smoking.gif
___________________________

U.S. GET OUT OF IRAQ NOW!
___________________________

"...a disgusting and frightening website"
The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.sawu.org/redstar2000)
A site about communist ideas
No thanks, net points or no deal.