Why isn't there a Left Communist political party in America?

[cowslayer]

I am tying to find a good party to join.

I tend to think of myself of the Left Communist persuasion and I am saddened to find that there is no party representing the tenants of Left Communism.

I think I will end up joining the PSL even though they are not LC, they are one of the most active parties in the USA and they have not been infested with Social Democrats and other moderate liberals.

[Q]

There is a section of the ICC in the US (http://en.internationalism.org/inter.htm).

[#FF0000]

The ICC has a branch in NYC.

http://en.internationalism.org/contact/postal

EDIT: Q beat me to it and I don't like him at all because of it. We're going to fight now. >:|

[Widerstand]

There's left comm groups almost everywhere in the (Western?) world. They're just pretty obscure and you probably never heard of them.

[Q]

EDIT: Q beat me to it and I don't like him at all because of it. We're going to fight now. >:|

I'm just better than you :cool:

[BIG BROTHER]

I am tying to find a good party to join.

I tend to think of myself of the Left Communist persuasion and I am saddened to find that there is no party representing the tenants of Left Communism.

I think I will end up joining the PSL even though they are not LC, they are one of the most active parties in the USA and they have not been infested with Social Democrats and other moderate liberals.

You might want to look over at their politics throughly before doing it. I have the feeling that you might not agree with their positions on Cuba and China.

Left communism is not exactly big on the revolutionary movement(i dont meant it as an attack) so in a country were the reovolutionary movement has been constantly repressed and attacked its no surprise is hard to find a left-communist party.

[theblackmask]

Because the revolution is not a party affair.

[TC]

left communism is not meaningfully organized in the real life activist scene - the popularity of left communism (along with transhumanism) on revleft is not reflective or indicative of the popularity in the movement.

You can find both anarchist groups and non-anti-revisionist, non-trotskyist, non-eurocom groups like the PSL though.

Take a hard look at the PSL's actual analysis on cuba and china (hint, they are not pro-chinese the way they are pro-cuban) instead of dogmatically deciding what you think before hand.

[black magick hustla]

left communism is absolutely tiny and insignificant. its a misnomer to say it is not "organized" though. the icc exists in many countries as a centralized international organization. not long ago there was an international latin american conference in mexico with elements from all around latin america. i encourage you to contact the american section in [email protected]

left communism is not about activism and building a mass party though. so you wont hear as much about them as the swp or the psl. left communism participate in the class terrain, (rather than feminism, nationalism, lgbt issues, etc)- needless to say, the icc appeared in the daily mall though LOL

http://en.internationalism.org/icconline/2010/11/daily-mail

[Os Cangaceiros]

For what it's worth (probably not much) the ICT has a P.O. box address (http://www.leftcom.org/en/about-us) in Indiana.

[Rusty Shackleford]

Note this, if you do not like the PSL's political line or ideology, you can still act as a "friend of the PSL" and do work with us if you still want to organize or do political work.


theres always a candidacy period to see if you fit the party and the party fits you as well.


----------------------------------edited out----------------------------------------------

[Aurora]

as for left-com groups, the ICC and the CWI i think. isnt the CWI somewhere in CA too? or is it just euro?
The CWI is Trotskyist not Left-Communist its US section is Socialist Alternative.
http://www.socialistalternative.org/

The International Communist Tendency who are left-communist has a US and Canada section here http://www.leftcom.org/en/about-us/iwg

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

The CWI? The CWI is a Trotskyist international (originating from a break with Grant's Militant group). Their US section is Socialist Alternative.

The OP would have to elaborate on what exactly they mean by "left communist" before I could recommend anything, but there are some others who have not been mentioned.

Edit: Anarion beat me to the punch.

[Rusty Shackleford]

my mistake :blushing:

forget i said anything about the CWI


so...

many...

abbreviations...

[cowslayer]

I have looked at the ICC for awhile now and also purchased some of their magazines and publications at a local alternative book store.

On their website, I tried to join but on the page there is a very long description on what it means to be a member but no instructions on how to actually join.

[Devrim]

left communism is not meaningfully organized in the real life activist scene - the popularity of left communism (along with transhumanism) on revleft is not reflective or indicative of the popularity in the movement.

Left communists are of course politically organised. TC is right to point out though that its 'popularity' on RevLeft is "not reflective or indicative of the popularity in the movement", whatever 'the movement' is.

Left communist groups are tiny today. I think that there are two members of one left communist organisation who regularly post on RevLeft, myself and Leo, so I wouldn't even say it is 'popular' here either.


I tend to think of myself of the Left Communist persuasion and I am saddened to find that there is no party representing the tenants of Left Communism.

There is no left communist 'party' anywhere in the world. Of course there are organisations, but we think that the party is an organisation that corresponds to a particular level of the class struggle, not something that can be simply declared by tiny groups.


On their website, I tried to join but on the page there is a very long description on what it means to be a member but no instructions on how to actually join.

I think that the first step is to get in touch with us. You could write to us directly, or perhaps contact 'Malador' on here by PM.


I think I will end up joining the PSL even though they are not LC, they are one of the most active parties in the USA and they have not been infested with Social Democrats and other moderate liberals.

I think that you should take some time to consider what your politics are. There is a huge difference between left communism and 'parties' like the PSL, who we would consider a deeply anti-working class organisation, witness them cavorting with the head of the Iranian state as just one example.

Devrim

[Aurora]

I have looked at the ICC for awhile now and also purchased some of their magazines and publications at a local alternative book store.

On their website, I tried to join but on the page there is a very long description on what it means to be a member but no instructions on how to actually join.

Well if there is a local branch nearby you could contact it and inquire about membership and if there isn't then what would be the purpose in joining really?

Anyway if you can't find a contact number then perhaps you should pm one of the ICCers on this site iirc there's Devrim, Leo, Alf and Nicco Rossi

[Niccolò Rossi]

I think that the first step is to get in touch with us. You could write to us directly, or perhaps contact 'Malador' on here by PM

This is worth repeating. Joining a Left Communist organisation has nothing in common to joining a Trotskyist, Stalinist or 'Multi-Tendency' party. You don't just passively fill out a little slip of paper to join and then (depending on the level of opportunism of the group) go through some test or probation period. This is because unlike these groups left communists do not see the revolution as the culmination of a process of recruitment.

As unbelievable as it is, left communists are people! Write to them! Discuss things. Raise questions. Share opinions.

It doesn't matter whether they have a section in your state or even in your country. Two years ago I first started writing to left communist groups internationally. Within a month I was meeting comrades from France. Later from Germany. Almost a year ago now I attended the ICC's pan-asian conference held in Delhi. Now, from having no contacts outside the internet, I'm now a member of a nation-wide network of internationalist communists. We are having our second bi-annual meeting tommorow including comrades from interstate and a representative of the ICC from Britain.

Joining (if you choose to do this, and that's a big if) isn't something do passively. Jump in there and get talking to people. I promise we won't bite!

Nic.

[Niccolò Rossi]

Anyway if you can't find a contact number then perhaps you should pm one of the ICCers on this site iirc there's Devrim, Leo, Alf and Nicco Rossi

For the record, I'm not actually a member of the ICC. I have a number of political disagreements (although nothing that falls outside basic principles) and reservations about the ICC that I won't go into here.

Of course, anyone is free to PM me! I used MSN and Skype and chat to a couple of revlefters amongst other political contacts. I know people, who people, who know people. Contacts are very handy, let me tell you that.

Nic.

[ExUnoDisceOmnes]

check out the APL and... Theres always the option of CPUSA (shudder)

[Rusty Shackleford]

check out the APL and... Theres always the option of CPUSA (shudder)
APL and Left-comm doesnt go together very well :laugh:

and CP-USA? :rolleyes:

[Bilan]

left communism is not meaningfully organized in the real life activist scene - the popularity of left communism (along with transhumanism) on revleft is not reflective or indicative of the popularity in the movement.

You can find both anarchist groups and non-anti-revisionist, non-trotskyist, non-eurocom groups like the PSL though.

Take a hard look at the PSL's actual analysis on cuba and china (hint, they are not pro-chinese the way they are pro-cuban) instead of dogmatically deciding what you think before hand.

Listen to the privileged law student. They know better.

[manic expression]

Listen to the privileged law student. They know better.
Yes, novel idea. Marx was a philosophy graduate student, therefore we should not listen to Marx. Genius. Have you considered doing speaking tours?

[HEAD ICE]

I will repeat what has already been said, but the left communist "movement" is very small, especially in the United States. The ICC is really small in the USA, i've even heard it described that it "collapsed." Maldoror has said that the ICC's Mexican section is their second largest, and I assume their UK and French sections are up there too.

The ICT has an affiliate group in the US and Canada called the Internationalist Workers Group, though I think they are more "active" in Canada. In the UK their affiliate is the CWO which has been around for quite sometime. In Italy their affiliate is the Internationalist Communist Party (though they refer to themselves in public and in there literature as Battaglia Comunista). I think this is the oldest left communist organization in existence and they are quite large in relation to the left communist "movement." For instance BC has been very active recently in the education cuts in Italy, where they have done things like have a table with all their literature and wave their flag around. I hope that will make the PSL real proud.

[ComradeAV]

check out the APL and... Theres always the option of CPUSA (shudder)
If you are stating that the APL is a left communist party, you are incorrect. The APL is a marxist-leninist party that follows the line of Marx-engels-lenin-stalin-hoxha. They are highly against left communism, they consider it to be ultra-leftism. As for CPUSA I 100% agree with you, they are a disgrace and beyond just revisionism, they have become a twin brother of the democratic party .

[Nolan]

check out the APL and... Theres always the option of CPUSA (shudder)

You do know the APL is an anti-revisionist Marxist-Leninist (STALINIST :ohmy:) party, right?

The CPUSA is a social democrat organization.

[chegitz guevara]

We have a few left communists in the SPUSA, but we are not a left communist organization.

[apawllo]

WSM/WSP apparently has membership across the country.

[sabotage]

Can anyone give me a list of actually existing Left Com/Council Com/Ultra-Left groups that do exist in the US (or North America more generally)

Is it really just ICC and IP in New York, and ICT in Kentucky???

Please chime in! :thumbup1:

[Devrim]

Can anyone give me a list of actually existing Left Com/Council Com/Ultra-Left groups that do exist in the US (or North America more generally)

Is it really just ICC and IP in New York, and ICT in Kentucky???

It isn't something that I know much about, but if you are talking about international groups then the answer to your question is yes, though I don't think the membership is quite that restricted. There are of course other 'local' groups such as IDP in San Francisco.

Devrim

[Zanthorus]

WSM/WSP apparently has membership across the country.

The World Socialist Movement is not Left-Communist. The Socialist Party of Great Britain, the originator of the WSM trend, was a split from the Second International in 1904. Their basic political line is that everything short of full-on communism with free-access distribution is 'reformism' and the goal of socialists is merely to propagandise for this goal. Eventually we will supposedly have convinced enough people through this propagandising that we will be able to peacefully vote in socialism. This not only has nothing to do with the historical Communist Left, it has nothing to do in general with Marxism, for which Communism is not an ideal to which reality must conform, but the real movement emanating from the proletariat's social conditions of existence. The SPGB itself has called the ICC a Leninist organisation in the past (I think they may also have referred to the ICT as such. Or that might just have been an exchange between the ICT an an individual SPGB member).

[Blackscare]

You might want to look over at their politics throughly before doing it. I have the feeling that you might not agree with their positions on Cuba and China.

I really wish people stopped with this line of argument. Analysis of Cuba and China is much less important than any positive work a group does at this juncture, IMO. Just get into a group that's vibrant and active in the struggle, we're nowhere near a revolution at this point so the fact that they're Leninist does not matter in practical terms, and their position on China has never been and will never be relevant in a concrete way.

[Devrim]

I really wish people stopped with this line of argument. Analysis of Cuba and China is much less important than any positive work a group does at this juncture, IMO. Just get into a group that's vibrant and active in the struggle, we're nowhere near a revolution at this point so the fact that they're Leninist does not matter in practical terms, and their position on China has never been and will never be relevant in a concrete way.

It is not the most crucial line of argument in every day struggles. However, it is not as if it is totally unimportant. Left communists believe in an internationally centralized party. At the moment there are massive workers struggles in China. Our organisation, the ICC, doesn't have a section in China yet, and I feel that we would be pretty unlikely ever to develop one if we told workers in struggle in China that "actually, we don't support you, we support you state as the PSL do.

To put it in more concrete terms in the Turkish section of the over the years ICC we have done work with and have had discussions with people from Iran. It is our next door neighbor, pretty much like an organisation in the USA developing contacts with Canadian socialists. To be honest I couldn't look Iranian workers in the face after the state massacres there last year, and say that "actually the leaders of our organisation are running around at dinner parties with the state president of Iran, as the PSL did. In my personal opinion these people are anti-working class scum.

It is more than that though. Political positions aren't chosen eclectically, but tend to come as part of a package. they are all interconnected. Organisations like the PSL haven't just made a mistake on Iran, but everything else they say is OK. This is just a reflection of their general political outlook.

Devrim

[Devrim]

We have a few left communists in the SPUSA, but we are not a left communist organization.

You would really have to ask what sort of left communist you had in the SPUSA, a party which entires basis is the anti-thesis of everything that left communists believe.

Devrim

[Salyut]

WSM/WSP apparently has membership across the country.

Aside from having historic ties to the SPC - I know and have heard very little about the American chapter. I'm going to assume it is smaller then our own party however. The ICC/ICT/etc are probably bigger and more influential.


Eventually we will supposedly have convinced enough people through this propagandising that we will be able to peacefully vote in socialism.


What many groups can’t stand about the Socialist Party is that we do not advocate violence and therefore cannot offer a practical programme of activity based on it. We are just not exciting enough for them, and thus we are labelled as sterile or ‘theoretical’ (this being a term of abuse, naturally). But we are not Quakers, and do not rule out the need for violence under all circumstances. We simply argue that it is quite possible, and highly desirable, for a large majority to establish socialism without bloodshed. The more violence is involved, the more likely the revolution is to fail outright, or be blown sideways into a new minority dictatorship.

I'm not a sectarian and I do think you have valid points, but I don't really believe I can match you in a debate (other comrades would be able to - but I seem to be all alone here) - as much as I would like to. :( If I tried I would probably end up looking like an idiot.

[Lacrimi de Chiciură]

It is not the most crucial line of argument in every day struggles. However, it is not as if it is totally unimportant. Left communists believe in an internationally centralized party. At the moment there are massive workers struggles in China. Our organisation, the ICC, doesn't have a section in China yet, and I feel that we would be pretty unlikely ever to develop one if we told workers in struggle in China that "actually, we don't support you, we support you state as the PSL do.

To put it in more concrete terms in the Turkish section of the over the years ICC we have done work with and have had discussions with people from Iran. It is our next door neighbor, pretty much like an organisation in the USA developing contacts with Canadian socialists. To be honest I couldn't look Iranian workers in the face after the state massacres there last year, and say that "actually the leaders of our organisation are running around at dinner parties with the state president of Iran, as the PSL did. In my personal opinion these people are anti-working class scum.

It is more than that though. Political positions aren't chosen eclectically, but tend to come as part of a package. they are all interconnected. Organisations like the PSL haven't just made a mistake on Iran, but everything else they say is OK. This is just a reflection of their general political outlook.

Devrim

When did PSL leaders "run around at dinner parties" with the president of Iran?

As I recall, the PSL's position on Iran isn't pro-Ahmadinejad, but anti-imperialist.

[Devrim]

When did PSL leaders "run around at dinner parties" with the president of Iran?

The 'run a round at dinner parties' was a bit of rhetorical flourish, but they certainly did meet with them:

http://www.fightbacknews.org/2010/9/23/us-progressives-meet-iranian-president-mahmoud-ahmadinejad


As I recall, the PSL's position on Iran isn't pro-Ahmadinejad, but anti-imperialist.

I don't really care what sort of rhetoric they use to justify their support for the Iranian state.

Devrim

[zimmerwald1915]

As I recall, the PSL's position on Iran isn't pro-Ahmadinejad, but anti-imperialist.
No it isn't. It's anti-particular-imperialist, under the theory that imperialism can be divided up and ascribed to a few states. Ahmadinejad is disliked by the US, therefore he must be supported. This ignores his place in the class politics of Iran, and Iran's place in the strategies of resurgent Russian and growing Chinese imperialism, and Iran's own ambitions. Unfortunately for the PSL, the United States' foreign policy is not the be all and end all of imperialism.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Aside from having historic ties to the SPC

F*** the SPC for its label! :cursing:

[Salyut]

F*** the SPC for its label! :cursing:

wat

[Die Neue Zeit]

If they were the World Socialist Party of Canada, I'd be less pissed.

[Salyut]

If they were the World Socialist Party of Canada, I'd be less pissed.

Name got grandfathered in. :cool:

[Lacrimi de Chiciură]

The 'run a round at dinner parties' was a bit of rhetorical flourish, but they certainly did meet with them:

http://www.fightbacknews.org/2010/9/23/us-progressives-meet-iranian-president-mahmoud-ahmadinejad



I don't really care what sort of rhetoric they use to justify their support for the Iranian state.

Devrim

Meeting with someone does not mean supporting him. Can you show some PSL statement that is actually pro-Ahmadinejad? When the US corporate media was playing up the "Green Revolution" they simply pointed out the pro-US interests behind that movement, but where did they ever say that Ahmadinejad should be supported? Why would socialists support a capitalist theocracy, and even if they were to do that, ultimately the PSL has no significant influence on events in Iran, BUT, the US ruling class is actively threatening war with Iran that would cost many innocent lives, therefore class conscious workers in the US play the role of responding to these threats. Your characterization of the PSL's "taking sides" in the conflict is the same idealistic logic as George Bush's "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."

[Devrim]

Your characterization of the PSL's "taking sides" in the conflict is the same idealistic logic as George Bush's "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."

I don't really think so at all. In fact I think that the PSL's version is exactly the opposite side of the coin of what Bush said. They take the side of states that are against the US in the name of some sort of so-called anti-imperialism.

I am saying something completely different in that it is not a question of taking sides between two capitalist states, but of looking to the working class.


ultimately the PSL has no significant influence on events in Iran, BUT, the US ruling class is actively threatening war with Iran that would cost many innocent lives, therefore class conscious workers in the US play the role of responding to these threats.

Opposing the war does not mean you have to support Iran.


Why would socialists support a capitalist theocracy,

Because they have no idea what class politics means?


Meeting with someone does not mean supporting him. Can you show some PSL statement that is actually pro-Ahmadinejad? When the US corporate media was playing up the "Green Revolution" they simply pointed out the pro-US interests behind that movement, but where did they ever say that Ahmadinejad should be supported?

You can look up their statements yourself. Do you think it is normal for people who are socialists to meet with the heads of capitalist states?

Devrim

[manic expression]

I don't really think so at all. In fact I think that the PSL's version is exactly the opposite side of the coin of what Bush said.
How terrible we disagree with him. :rolleyes: Don't let the fact that this position predates the Bush doctrine and the Bush administration (both of them, IIRC) get in the way of your little rant.


I am saying something completely different in that it is not a question of taking sides between two capitalist states, but of looking to the working class.Promoting the defeat, frustration or impediment of American imperialism is looking to the working class. Are you honestly trying to tell us that Iran poses an equal threat to the workers of the world (as in Latin America, Asia, Africa, Europe, etc.) as the United States? If not, then it's quite easy to see how the frustration of US imperialist ambitions is in the interest of the proletariat. Again, US imperialism presents the most clear obstacle to working-class progress, and so it is only natural that we recognize this when confronting such issues.


You can look up their statements yourself. Do you think it is normal for people who are socialists to meet with the heads of capitalist states?So if meeting with heads of capitalist states is always wrong, is sending letters of clear support better? Just ask Marx and the First International about the letter they sent to Lincoln. Perhaps you should lecture them from your pulpit, too.

In the end, though, your insistence that meeting with a group means giving it full support is as thick as your idea that every capitalist state is exactly the same.

[MarxistMan]

I THINK THAT THE ONLY HOPE AND LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL IN USA IS THE LOWER CLASS AND THE EXTREME POORS !!



I think that the biggest problem of USA is the middle class. The thing is that most Oligarchic-Republics like USA, Mexico, Europe, etc. have 3 major economic classes (Upper, Middle and Lower). Of the 3 major classes, 2 are oppressor, exploiter, and anti-change class, and only the lower-class like low-wage workers, the homeless, the desperate americans who can't even sleep at night because they are scared, affraid and stressed by their monthly bills, and the people who because they are so economically limited live an abnormal life, like not being able to get married, single frustrated people, the unemployed, the elderly and the americans rejected, and totally alienated from participating in the money, wealth and pleasures of America.

But like i said the upper-class like Donald Trump, Rockefellers and millionaires we all know are an oppressor class and we almost don't have physical contact with them. Because they are off-limits to the average joes.

However the real middle class (doctors, lawyers, small business owners and people who earn between 75,000 and 200,000 dollars a year) a year), and who drive luxury vehicles, who eat at Olive Garden, Charlies Restaurants, Luxury buffets, who go out to have fun to operas, who have economic security for the future of their children, and who enjoy perfect health, are also oppressors, an enemy class, and who might be nice people, friendly, and have social kills and are not personally angry and evil.

But at the voting booth they are traitors, counter-revolutionaries, anti-socialism, anti-change, and pro-imperialism, pro-free markets, pro-zionism, and pro-wars, at elections, the middle class yuppies show their true colors by casting their evil votes for blue dog Rockefeller-capitalist-Democrats, and Rockefeller Rotshchilds, Zionist Republicans like Bush, Clinton and Obama.

So again the middle class is one of the biggest impediments that we have in the USA so that we can see a real change in America and a hope for some day to have a real Humanist, anti-war, workers people's government, where the gold, oil and wealth of America would belong to all americans, not to the 5% oligarchic corporate fat cats.

So our only hope in USA is the lower classes and the extremely poors. So what we should do is to create a United Socialist Front composed of poor people, low income americans, low wage workers, and the oppressed sectors alienated from participating in the wealth of America like American Indians, poor blacks, poor whites and poor illegal workers.

.





I am tying to find a good party to join.

I tend to think of myself of the Left Communist persuasion and I am saddened to find that there is no party representing the tenants of Left Communism.

I think I will end up joining the PSL even though they are not LC, they are one of the most active parties in the USA and they have not been infested with Social Democrats and other moderate liberals.

[apawllo]

The World Socialist Movement is not Left-Communist. The Socialist Party of Great Britain, the originator of the WSM trend, was a split from the Second International in 1904. Their basic political line is that everything short of full-on communism with free-access distribution is 'reformism' and the goal of socialists is merely to propagandise for this goal. Eventually we will supposedly have convinced enough people through this propagandising that we will be able to peacefully vote in socialism. This not only has nothing to do with the historical Communist Left, it has nothing to do in general with Marxism, for which Communism is not an ideal to which reality must conform, but the real movement emanating from the proletariat's social conditions of existence. The SPGB itself has called the ICC a Leninist organisation in the past (I think they may also have referred to the ICT as such. Or that might just have been an exchange between the ICT an an individual SPGB member).

Fair enough. I obviously don't identify as left communist, but I've heard/seen it labeled as such on a few occasions.

[StalinFanboy]

How terrible we disagree with him. :rolleyes: Don't let the fact that this position predates the Bush doctrine and the Bush administration (both of them, IIRC) get in the way of your little rant.


He was pointing out that the logic behind the whole "you're either with us or the terrorists thing" is the same logic behind Leftist anti-Imperialism, it's just the opposing side of it.

[TC]

However the real middle class (doctors, lawyers, small business owners and people who earn between 75,000 and 200,000 dollars a year) a year)
.


For what its worth, lawyers are not doctors, typical lawyers who are not big firm associates earn much less than 75,000 a year. For trial lawyers who do real legal work 35-45k is more typical - it is really corporate counsel and big law paper pushers who earn high salaries.

Average/mean salaries for lawyers do not reflect the modal distribution of lawyers since a small number earn almost as much as entry level doctors :p.

You also have to consider that lawyers typically have educational debt loads of 120k-200k dollars after having more than seven years of post-secondary education, all of which is non-dischargable. Additionally while there are at least somewhat generous loan repayment options for federal loans for college/university and law school (if you don't mind paying off your loans until your mid fifties), federal loans are not available for the bar review courses that virtually all lawyers take after law school school so lawyers are burdened with private debt that must be repayed more quickly in addition to federal debt.

While most people would probably always consider lawyers middle class for cultural and educational reasons, most of my law school class (at a very good school) will be unlikely to manage a middle class lifestyle.



You are basically talking about a group of people who tend to have similar earning structure to public school teachers, but who unlike public school teachers, start earning in their mid to late 20s not early 20s, are burdened with vastly more debt, and don't get summers off or long winter vacations...and at least a sizable portion represent a bulwark against the worst abuses of the criminal [in]"justice" system, immigration enforcement, juvenile [in]"justice" - the people who get activists out of jail, get charges thrown out and challenge the increasing government creep against civil rights and work for unions to stop the worst abuses of corporations...and these are your oppressors and class enemies? Please.

[black magick hustla]

tbh its shitty that people throw ad hominen at law students idk i think sometimes we need sympathetic lawyers when the cops are hounding our asses. corporate lawyers are scum tho

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Class isn't determined by income.

[TC]

Class isn't determined by income.

The term class refers to many different concepts and there is no one clear marxist definition of the term and what features of class are relevant vary depending on what you're discussing. You can for example, divide class between employees and employers, or you could divide class between those who produce net surplus capital and those who consume net surplus capital (estimated either in terms of use value or in terms of exchange value or some other valuation) - but these two definitions of class will divide up the global population very different ways.

Most people on revleft may profess a particular criteria for class membership but in reality they practice something like "i know it when i see it" and apply fairly tortured logic to make their preferred set of occupations into their preferred classes.

People are also not clear on how the social/cultural classes of liberal political discourse (such as "middle class and working class and upper middle class and 'rich') map onto marxist classes of proletarian, lumpenproleatrain, petite bourgeois, industrial bourgeois, commercial bourgeois, financial capitalist, etc.

Some things however are clear: the world is not made up of simply factory owners and machine operators, and any two class system is a gross oversimplification of socio-political reality. Classes are also not stagnent but evolving and change and what applied in Marx's time cannot be dogmatically applied cookie cutter style to the contemporary situation (one that varies in different places). Class is a messy concept no matter how neat a reductionistic version of psudo-marxism might make it out to be (and no, quoting polemics and pamphlets from great dead people where they were guilty of these errors for the sake of simplicity does not resolve the problem.)

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Classes are only "a messy concept" because that's how the exploiting classes want it, whether or not they present themselves as open enemies or "comrades."

Things have changed since Marx's time. Things have changed since I made my last post in this thread. The glass of water sitting on my desk is now empty. But capitalism still exists. It's still based on private property in the means of production and the exploitation of the proletariat for surplus value. And class is still determined by relation to the means of production.

[TC]

And relations to the means of production are complex and multi-faceted - what counts as the "means of production" is itself a complex question - and even single individuals may relate to the means of production in multiple ways giving rise to multiple overlaying interests. People also develop class interests based on power dynamics with other people many steps removed from the means of production and changes between those dynamics create changes in socio-economic interests evne when the person with the most direct relationship to the means of production at the end of the 'chain' has not themselves changed their relationship to the MoP. (this is for example, why the most vulgar reductionist analysis of gender relations and race relations fail).

Trying to simplify what isn't simple just makes for analysis that doesn't match reality.

[Niccolò Rossi]

You are basically talking about a group of people who tend to have similar earning structure to public school teachers, but who unlike public school teachers, start earning in their mid to late 20s not early 20s, are burdened with vastly more debt, and don't get summers off or long winter vacations...and at least a sizable portion represent a bulwark against the worst abuses of the criminal [in]"justice" system, immigration enforcement, juvenile [in]"justice" - the people who get activists out of jail, get charges thrown out and challenge the increasing government creep against civil rights and work for unions to stop the worst abuses of corporations...and these are your oppressors and class enemies? Please.

So are Starbucks barristas now part of the working class in your opinion? Remember the whole "LOL Starbucks workers union" thing, yeah...

Nic.

[southernmissfan]

So are Starbucks barristas now part of the working class in your opinion? Remember the whole "LOL Starbucks workers union" thing, yeah...

Nic.

Are you implying they aren't working class? I don't see how they are any different than the rest of the service industry.

[gorillafuck]

There's left comm groups almost everywhere in the (Western?) world. They're just pretty obscure and you probably never heard of them.
I actually don't think they're more prevalent in the west than elsewhere. The US branch is the ICC's smallest branch, apparently.

[Frosty Weasel]

Are you implying they aren't working class? I don't see how they are any different than the rest of the service industry. I assume it is because of the animosity towards the perceived Hipster subculture associated with Starbucks.

Either that or now we're playing favorites with jobs in a " _____ is not a real job compared to working in a coal mine" mindset.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Are you implying they aren't working class? I don't see how they are any different than the rest of the service industry.

TC used to say that service workers didn't belong to the working class.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/marx-engels-lenin-t62589/index.html?t=62589

http://www.revleft.com/vb/western-workers-not-t86391/index.html?

Not sure what her position is now, but that's what he was referring to.

[Bilan]

Yes, novel idea. Marx was a philosophy graduate student, therefore we should not listen to Marx. Genius. Have you considered doing speaking tours?

Ah, the old regress to Marx was 'this', Marx was 'that'. Your comparisons are as inane as your politics.
TC's characterisations of what is 'relevant' and 'irrelevant' to the working class are amusing because she is so absolutely separated from it - being a privileged law student. Being involved in your little circle jerks of Trots/Stalinfappers or whatever doesn't make you a spokesperson for the working class.

[Bilan]

Are you implying they aren't working class? I don't see how they are any different than the rest of the service industry.

It's something TC has said in the past. It's not Rossi's position.