Red and Black Action Coalition Tendency of SP-USA

[thriller]

A buddy of mine asked me to post this on RevLeft, so that's what I'm doing. For any further questions/interest in the RBAC, feel free to PM me

RED AND BLACK ACTION COALITION TENDENCY OF THE SP-USA


The RBAC aims to disrupt and dismantle any and all forms of the two party system to engage in methods of non-violent direct action and to act accordingly when met with aggressive police action.
Standing on corners and marching with signs is not what the RBAC is intended for. It is intended for acts of civil disobedience and putting comrades in the line of risking arrest.


For to long the Socialist Party has been to quite when it comes to street demonstrations. The RABC is an active street action tendency for the basis to show the two party system that we will no longer be quite and that we are ready to act in a revolutionary manner to take back the power of the two party system and place it in the hands of the People. That statement of principles of the SP-USA states that, “We support militant working class struggles independent of the capitalist two party system. To represent socialist alternatives” It also states that we are a radical revolutionary organization.


Part 1


The RBAC will hold fast to this as being more active in the streets by:




Being resistant to police and military oppression and aggression
By building coalitions within community action projects and any and all Anti-Imperialist, Anti-Capitalist, Anti-War, Anti-Racist, Anti-Fascist, Pro-LGBTQ, and All Anarchist, Anarchist-Communist, Anarchist-Syndicalist, Militant Trade Unionists, Communists, and Libertarian Socialists.





Obstruction of any and all forms of the Capitalist system i.e. IMF/World Bank, WTO, G20/G8, NAFTA, GATT, FTAA, as well as any and all Republican and Democratic National Conventions, Racist and fascist organizations and hate groups,
To maintain a militant stance and resistance on behalf of Class Struggle
To Bring the Class War to a full on reality rather than just a word or a thought, or a theory but a mobile action that reclaims our streets our communities and our countries under the no border policy where all men women are indeed created equal
The use of any and all forms of Direct Action!



Part 2.


The RBAC Also aims to be an advocate for building a strong community by:




Organizing a soup kitchen at a local church or community center
Engaging in a Needle exchange program and a list of rehabilitation and methadone clinics.
To engage and become a strong advocate in any and all forms of Mutual Aid





Starting a literacy and after school programs, tutors, free daycare and basic community relations.
Distributing Condoms and information where to be tested for HIV, STD's, and AIDS
To build community gardens
To engage in Community block parties
Workshops and Educate on how to police your neighborhoods
To be a strong opposition to gangs drug dealers that rip apart communities and to educate them on fighting the power that oppresses and not to be the oppressor
To be an advocate for community alliances and volunteering in the name of the RBAC Tendency of the SP-USA at, community centers, rape crisis centers, soup kitchens and any other community based functions.
Building a radical community space / drop in centers (a.k.a .Socialist based Infoshops)
To hold weekly movie nights for the local communities as away for people to meet and engage in basic conversation.






The RABC No Bullshit Policy
Under no circumstances will gossip and or talk sabotage of other party members be tolerated. The RBAC Tendency is here for actions succeeding where other revolutionary tendencies have failed. This is everyone's revolution not a revolution for a selected few but for everyone. We have to be stand in solidarity! No *****ing, complaining or in party fighting will be allowed within this tendency however, civilized conversation and debate will be accepted but tendency members will treat others tendency members and party members with the up most respect and dignity. Tendencies tend to fall apart due to aggression of members. This tendency is stands for attacking the capitalist system and any other system that exploits and oppresses all people. One can look at virtually any organization or tendency in existence today and quickly see that its total effectiveness is in fact only the sum of its parts; the public activity of the RBAC, can be expressed best by the actions of its individual members who "by participating in it, give it life". This basic concept, that an organization can only exist by the actions that members take in its name, should seem obvious to anyone, as it is hardly a revolutionary way of looking at the makeup of a group. However, it is certainly a helpful perspective from which to view the potential of autonomous cells that is beginning to grow and create levels of influence. This is a time of action not sabotage from within the organization. If we want to succeed we have to be unified in solidarity with all members of the tendency and of the SP-USA.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This Tendency is open to all aggressive revolutionaries and passive revolutionaries who are in good standing with the SP-USA. There will be no chair person to this tendency. Every member of this tendency will have an equal say and voting will be placed on a consensus basis. There are actions of the RBAC that everyone can partake in. Like Bobby Sands once said,
“Everyone has there own particular part to play. No part is to great or too small to do something”.
The RBAC will be the force of any and all Revolutionary actions and will claim responsibility for every action The RBAC takes part in. The Time is now Comrades the time for change and the time for an end to Capitalism, Imperialism, Racism, and the Fascist state of the USA.


Everyone speaks of revolution yet no one is acting on it. Talk is cheap when it comes to lighting the flame of revolutionary action. The RBAC is ready to light the flame of revolution. Talk without action produces no results, standing on street corners waving signs and shaking fists is not bringing fourth revolutionary means and tactics. Getting active building coalitions, and fighting back begins the revolution. Lets' start today! Lets organize for the sake of true liberty freedom peace and social justice.
Join us in making history you have nothing to lose but your chains!!!
The Red and Black Action Coalition Tendency of the SP-USA

[Kassad]

Isn't this in opposition to the revolutionary tendency of the party that has been working to take back the reins from the social-democratic leaders? I'm not a member and can't say I know much about the party's internal workings aside from what I've been able to read, but unless there have been other internal changes within the party, what is the point of this new tendency?

[Q]

I like the parts about alternative culture. The insurrectionary stuff is silly though, imho.

[bricolage]

Red and [insert anarchy word] action...
No Bullshit...
Sounds familiar, no?

[thriller]

Isn't this in opposition to the revolutionary tendency of the party that has been working to take back the reins from the social-democratic leaders? I'm not a member and can't say I know much about the party's internal workings aside from what I've been able to read, but unless there have been other internal changes within the party, what is the point of this new tendency?

I wouldn't say it's 'in opposition', more of an alternative for people who feel that the RUG tendency isn't getting the job done.

[theblackmask]

Red and [insert anarchy word] action...
No Bullshit...
Sounds familiar, no?

My thoughts exactly.

[thriller]

Red and [insert anarchy word] action...
No Bullshit...
Sounds familiar, no?

Although I didn't write or come up with the RBAC, what am I missing here? lol

[Die Neue Zeit]

I like the parts about alternative culture.

Let's examine the alternative culture a bit more critically, though:


1. Organizing a soup kitchen at a local church or community center

Hold it right there! Why soup kitchens and not food pantries and food and clothing banks? (http://www.revleft.com/vb/socio-political-organizations-t144396/index.html) Food pantries and food and clothing banks are aimed at the working poor, while soup kitchens aren't.


3. To engage and become a strong advocate in any and all forms of Mutual Aid

Cultural societies of all kinds, sports and other recreational clubs, funeral homes, etc.


1. Starting a literacy and after school programs, tutors, free daycare and basic community relations.
2. Distributing Condoms and information where to be tested for HIV, STD's, and AIDS

Good so far, but:


7. To be an advocate for community alliances and volunteering in the name of the RBAC Tendency of the SP-USA at, community centers, rape crisis centers, soup kitchens and any other community based functions.

RBAC members should promote the party itself, not their own tendency. The party comes first.

[Zanthorus]

Although I didn't write or come up with the RBAC, what am I missing here? lol

The reference is to the Red and Anarchist Action Network, which also has it's own 'No Bullshit' policy (http://www.redanarchist.org/texts/autpub/praxis/2/nobullshit.html).

[The Douche]

Years ago, there was an anarchist(ish) tendency in the SP called the "Direct Action Tendency", I was on the steering comittee for that tendency, the SP shut us down undemocratically, can't wait to see what happens this time.:rolleyes:

If you could let me know who is organizing this tendency I'd love to talk to them, this sounds like its existing on almost the exact same basis as the DAT.

[Die Neue Zeit]

IIRC, DAT was shut down because a number of members were not party members. RBAC had better be careful in who's let into the tendency.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

This shit needs a proofreading. Hard. You should get someone, in the spirit of mutual aid, to go over this. I'd even go so far as to say it needs a total rewrite - it's pretty clumsy.
I like the idea, but it's slooooooopy. I think it's unforutunate that it's being put out into the world in this state. Really, there's gotta be somebody in yr tendency who's better with words than this.

RBACTSPUSA LIKE A MOTHERFUCKER?

[thriller]

RBAC members should promote the party itself, not their own tendency. The party comes first.

Well that's your opinion. Some us choose to promote the working class as a whole before a certain political party.

[thriller]

This shit needs a proofreading. Hard. You should get someone, in the spirit of mutual aid, to go over this. I'd even go so far as to say it needs a total rewrite - it's pretty clumsy.
I like the idea, but it's slooooooopy. I think it's unforutunate that it's being put out into the world in this state. Really, there's gotta be somebody in yr tendency who's better with words than this.

RBACTSPUSA LIKE A MOTHERFUCKER?

lol, I was actually going to proof it, but since I didn't write it, think of it, or help organize it, felt it wasn't my place to do so. But I will let them know haha.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Well that's your opinion. Some us choose to promote the working class as a whole before a certain political party.

What's the point in expending resources for mutual aid when you can't get political support in return? I mean, people paying dues to the party and such?

[thriller]

What's the point in expending resources for mutual aid when you can't get political support in return? I mean, people paying dues to the party and such?

I'm all for getting more people in the party. However it's not like the SP-USA is going to get a majority in congress or win a presidential race. Also promoting the RBAC is good because it can reach out to more anarchist/syndicalist minded people. If we get people who want to join the RBAC, then they have to join SP-USA. If we just promoted SP-USA, some people may not join because they don't know there are revolutionaries along with reformists. As far using resources to help people w/o getting political support in return, I think people should help others because it's the right thing to do. If someone was freezing outside my house and needed a warm place to sleep, I wouldn't shun them away because they were a Republican. I think that is one of our strengths. I know there are Republicans AND Democrats who would refuse to help leftists. I don't know anyone of the SP-USA who would do the same.

(If I didn't understand you're question, sorry, kind of beat today)

[Die Neue Zeit]

I'm all for getting more people in the party. However it's not like the SP-USA is going to get a majority in congress or win a presidential race. Also promoting the RBAC is good because it can reach out to more anarchist/syndicalist minded people. If we get people who want to join the RBAC, then they have to join SP-USA. If we just promoted SP-USA, some people may not join because they don't know there are revolutionaries along with reformists. As far using resources to help people w/o getting political support in return, I think people should help others because it's the right thing to do. If someone was freezing outside my house and needed a warm place to sleep, I wouldn't shun them away because they were a Republican. I think that is one of our strengths. I know there are Republicans AND Democrats who would refuse to help leftists. I don't know anyone of the SP-USA who would do the same.

(If I didn't understand you're question, sorry, kind of beat today)

No worries. I wanted to point out two extremes. You can only go so far with respect to providing "warm places to sleep for Republicans."

It's important to get political support so that the dues flowing in can be used not just for electoral campaigns, or not just for organizing mass spoilage campaigns in contempt for the electoral system, but for keeping the mutual aid going and compounding its growth. I should note, in case I wasn't clear earlier, that by "political support" I don't mean people "registering" themselves as Socialists and then voting for the party.

Moreover, I honestly think there are better names than RBAC. Socialist Solidarity, for example, is a good means of promoting both mutual aid and party recruitment.

[graymouser]

I was in the SPUSA during the time when the Direct Action Tendency operated, and I thought of it as basically a wrecking operation by anarchists. I don't see this as being much different, unless it's simply infantile ultraleftism. You're never going to build a mass movement if one of your priorities is to get people to risk arrest.

What I find amusing is that people take the boilerplate about "democratic revolutions" in the SPUSA Statement of Principles to mean that the SP is supposed to be some kind of revolutionary party. This is old social democratic stuff, and to the people who originally wrote it, it was more likely to mean revolutions against Soviet-style communism than a socialist revolution. Because the party is tiny (with no serious institutional or personal ties to the labor or social movements) and has failed to create a new generation with solid old-school social democratic politics, young revolutionaries mistaking this language for advocacy of a socialist revolution have been relatively successful in pushing the SP leftward, but in a jagged and often ultraleft way.

I also think it's quite funny that people are trying to pull anarchists into a party whose main activity has always been elections. I used to kid around with friends that we should make "The Anarchist Party: Because We Can." But why would any serious anarchist be part of the Socialist Party? I mean, even the classic Wobbly songs knew well enough to bash the SP.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Because the party is tiny (with no serious institutional or personal ties to the labor or social movements)

It can start by limiting the voting membership to those with a clear worker-class background. Trotskyists focus too much on union work as a means of having "organic links" with mere labour movements.

[graymouser]

It can start by limiting the voting membership to those with a clear worker-class background.
This is a demagogic maneuver without any particular value. While a party should try to have a largely proletarian composition - which has occurred in parties with really excellent politics, and ones with really bad politics at different times in history - this does not bestow on it some special wisdom, or give it the kind of connections I am talking about. The US Socialist Workers Party had a largely worker composition during and after World War II, and while it did some heroic work in that period, it couldn't stop the devastating effects of McCarthyism. Yet today, all the voting members of the grotesque remnant of the SWP are manual workers - or work for the party, mostly at Pathfinder Press - and it has not a shred of its former democracy or any relevant connections to the class.


Trotskyists focus too much on union work as a means of having "organic links" with mere labour movements.
When there are other organs of the working class as a class, i.e. soviets, we can talk about them. But until then I don't expect any such organs except for the unions, and perhaps new bourgeois workers' parties.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Excuse me for striving to emulate the pre-war SPD, which maintained its workers-only voting membership policy and didn't have unions affiliate (i.e., "organic links") until the 1900s. Oh yeah, and you didn't need to mention soviets and provoke another statement of my opposition to workers councils except those formed within Party-Movements as purely Party organizations.

[graymouser]

Excuse me for striving to emulate the pre-war SPD, which maintained its workers-only voting membership policy and didn't have unions affiliate (i.e., "organic links") until the 1900s.
None of which prevented the SPD from becoming a party of class traitors.


Oh yeah, and you didn't need to mention soviets and provoke another statement of my opposition to workers councils except those formed within Party-Movements as purely Party organizations.
This forum isn't about you, believe it or not, and your opposition to soviets means nothing to me. And you have yet to show what organic connections to the working class the party could have aside from having a tiny number of workers in it.

[tracher999]

nice keep going nice work

[thriller]

I was in the SPUSA during the time when the Direct Action Tendency operated, and I thought of it as basically a wrecking operation by anarchists. I don't see this as being much different, unless it's simply infantile ultraleftism. You're never going to build a mass movement if one of your priorities is to get people to risk arrest.


Right, because the revolution will be totally legal...



What I find amusing is that people take the boilerplate about "democratic revolutions" in the SPUSA Statement of Principles to mean that the SP is supposed to be some kind of revolutionary party. This is old social democratic stuff, and to the people who originally wrote it, it was more likely to mean revolutions against Soviet-style communism than a socialist revolution. Because the party is tiny (with no serious institutional or personal ties to the labor or social movements) and has failed to create a new generation with solid old-school social democratic politics, young revolutionaries mistaking this language for advocacy of a socialist revolution have been relatively successful in pushing the SP leftward, but in a jagged and often ultraleft way.

If this was the old social democrat stuff, why would Debs leave the SOCIAL DEMOCRAT party (which he started) to form the SP? See in the SP we have this crazy notion where people can actually think for themselves (that's where multi-tendency comes in [I know it's hard for Trots to think for themselves without a figure head telling them what to do]). "Young revolutionaries mistaking the language"? You were obviously not in the SP for very long. I know 70 year old members who are revolutionaries. Let's not use ageism shall we?

I should heed your advice, since there are some many successful Trot-style communist governments around the... ohh wait... never mind.


I also think it's quite funny that people are trying to pull anarchists into a party whose main activity has always been elections. I used to kid around with friends that we should make "The Anarchist Party: Because We Can." But why would any serious anarchist be part of the Socialist Party? I mean, even the classic Wobbly songs knew well enough to bash the SP

Right! Because solidarity and uniting the left is stupid! (That's sarcasm in case your Central Executive Committee didn't inform you yet).

[chegitz guevara]

Actually, GreyMouser knows a lot of what s/he is talking about.

My guess is that the people who originally wrote the Statement of Principles meant taking power via the ballot box, but because it is vaguely phrased, we commies and anarchists are free to reinterpret it our own way (revolution is the ultimate democratic act).

The old SPA was a mix of social democratic and revolutionary tendencies. That came to a head following the Russian Revolution, and those who wanted to follow the Bolshevik line, who had won an overwhelming majority of the delegates, were not allowed to be seated at the 1919 convention. Following an expulsion and a split, most of the revolutionaries went to form two communist parties, which were then forced to merge in 1921 (I think). Debs only stayed with the SPA because his health was broken by prison and he withdrew from politics (under the care of a quack).

[graymouser]

Right, because the revolution will be totally legal...
Come the revolution, we will have the numbers to make it legal.

Seriously, though, we are talking about the difference between a tiny fringe movement trying to get people arrested - which is serious shit if you're a worker - and a mass movement taking power against the will of a government that is no longer legitimate. These things are not comparable.


If this was the old social democrat stuff, why would Debs leave the SOCIAL DEMOCRAT party (which he started) to form the SP?
He didn't. The Socialist Party of America was a fusion between the Social Democratic Party and the "Kangaroo" wing of the Socialist Labor Party, which objectively was its right wing. Before 1914, the labels "Social Democrat" and "Socialist" were pretty much equivalent, and a number of the SPA state parties actually called themselves "Social Democratic Party" out of deference to their formation in the old SDPA.

You really ought to study your party's history better. The SPA was quite openly social democratic after 1919, and the expulsion of the Trotskyists in 1937 was probably the last time there were serious, conscious revolutionaries in the party. Most of the left and ultra-left in the SPUSA today would've been run out of the SPA in its last 30 or so years of existence.


"Young revolutionaries mistaking the language"? You were obviously not in the SP for very long. I know 70 year old members who are revolutionaries. Let's not use ageism shall we?
I was in the SPUSA long enough to be on its National Committee (although my experiences there led to my quitting the Party very quickly), and I knew - and know - quite a lot of members, both young and old. Yeah, there are older members trying to use the language of the Statement of Principles against the old guard social democrats, but the phenomenon of a social democratic party being hoisted by its own petard is quite amusing to someone who's studied the history of socialist movements in the US.


Right! Because solidarity and uniting the left is stupid! (That's sarcasm in case your Central Executive Committee didn't inform you yet).
I have a central executive committee? That's funny, I didn't even know I was in a group these days. Could you tell me who it is? Jeez, I probably owe back dues or something.

But on a serious note, I have nothing against unity if it's principled unity. With anarchists and other groups where there are serious differences, principled unity can only mean a united front, where different organizations work together toward agreed common ends. Trying to force everyone into the same "party" (though I'm still not sure how you intend to get anarchists into a political party, since they tend to oppose them on principle) means, at best, you get a least-common-denominator program. And that works when you need unity around a single issue, like ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but not as a program for a revolutionary party.

[The Douche]

I was in the SPUSA during the time when the Direct Action Tendency operated, and I thought of it as basically a wrecking operation by anarchists.

And your (and other party leaders') thoughts and opinions justify the undemocratic and unprincipled disbanding of the DAT?


You're never going to build a mass movement if one of your priorities is to get people to risk arrest.


While I think some members of the DAT did have an arrest fetish (and this is not ok), it was a pretty boring accusation and not particularly accurate.

[Sam_b]

While I think some members of the DAT did have an arrest fetish (and this is not ok), it was a pretty boring accusation and not particularly accurate

The RBAC tendency statement explicitly says that "It is intended for acts of civil disobedience and putting comrades in the line of risking arrest". He's not talking about DAT here, but this tendency's proposal itself.

It's a pretty ridiculous proposal as well.

[graymouser]

And your (and other party leaders') thoughts and opinions justify the undemocratic and unprincipled disbanding of the DAT?
Well, that depends. Are you still beating your wife?

The DAT was an inside-outside operation by its own admission: it started recruiting nonmembers and as such ceased to be a "tendency" of the Socialist Party. What's particularly undemocratic and unprincipled about that?


While I think some members of the DAT did have an arrest fetish (and this is not ok), it was a pretty boring accusation and not particularly accurate.
It's true of the tendency this thread is about, which isn't the DAT. But really, the arrest fetishism is mostly for anarchist kids and old lefty liberals who brag about the times they've been arrested. People with lower paying jobs can't afford that shit.

[Die Neue Zeit]

As usual, leave it to revolutionary centrists to come to the rescue and criticize both arrest fetishes and legalism fetishes.

The tendency should turn mass passive resentment into mass political action of legal sorts where possible, of extra-legal and illegal ones like disobedience when necessary, and with the non-worker authorities themselves determining the level of peace or violence.

The party platform should state that the consistent, preferrably simultaneous, obviously complete, and especially lasting implementation of the listed demands – for the sake of not losing or losing again what has already been won – can only be achieved by class struggle of legal sorts where possible, of extra-legal and illegal ones like disobedience when necessary, and with the non-worker authorities themselves determining the level of peace or violence.

[revolution inaction]

if this is supposed to be an anarchist network/group within the socialist party its a really fucking stupid idea.

[The Douche]

Well, that depends. Are you still beating your wife?


I don't know who you think I am, but this accusation does not apply to me, as I don't hit my girlfriend, never have, and never have had a wife.


The DAT was an inside-outside operation by its own admission: it started recruiting nonmembers and as such ceased to be a "tendency" of the Socialist Party. What's particularly undemocratic and unprincipled about that?

I was one of those members, and contrary to your accusation I probably would've become an SP member, had I not seen the disgusting nature of politicians. (their nature being illustrated in the DAT drama) It is undemocratic because Pason just came along and said "fuck off the DAT doesn't exist anymore, its not recognized", and that was after trying to remove voting privileges from supporting members of the DAT, and when he realised he couldn't bully people in accepting his demands, he unilaterally shut down the tendency.


It's true of the tendency this thread is about, which isn't the DAT.

Thought this comment was directed at the DAT, sorry.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

I don't know who you think I am, but this accusation does not apply to me, as I don't hit my girlfriend, never have, and never have had a wife.

He was replying to your fallacy of many questions / loaded questions with one of his own.


Fallacy of many questions

* Fallacy of many questions or loaded question: groups more than one question in the form of a single question.
o Example

Argument: Have you stopped beating your wife?
Problem: A yes or no answer will still be an admission of guilt to beating your wife at some point. (See also Mu.)

o Also called Plurium Interrogationum and other terms

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy

[The Douche]

How the fuck is that an appropriate literary device?

[graymouser]

How the fuck is that an appropriate literary device?
It's actually a pretty standard response to loaded questions. If you look back, you were asking me whether an "undemocratic" and "unprincipled" action was justified.

As for the DAT itself, I think the fact that the leaders were out of the party working toward creating an independent group within a couple of months pretty much proved exactly what was going on.

[The Douche]

It's actually a pretty standard response to loaded questions. If you look back, you were asking me whether an "undemocratic" and "unprincipled" action was justified.

As for the DAT itself, I think the fact that the leaders were out of the party working toward creating an independent group within a couple of months pretty much proved exactly what was going on.

Whatever, like I said, I had no intention of working to form some new organization when I joined the DAT, and had the DAT not been wrecked I would probably be an SPer today.

But now I probably couldn't even join the SP if I wanted to, Pason doesn't like me.

[thriller]

Come the revolution, we will have the numbers to make it legal.

Seriously, though, we are talking about the difference between a tiny fringe movement trying to get people arrested - which is serious shit if you're a worker - and a mass movement taking power against the will of a government that is no longer legitimate. These things are not comparable.


He didn't. The Socialist Party of America was a fusion between the Social Democratic Party and the "Kangaroo" wing of the Socialist Labor Party, which objectively was its right wing. Before 1914, the labels "Social Democrat" and "Socialist" were pretty much equivalent, and a number of the SPA state parties actually called themselves "Social Democratic Party" out of deference to their formation in the old SDPA.

You really ought to study your party's history better. The SPA was quite openly social democratic after 1919, and the expulsion of the Trotskyists in 1937 was probably the last time there were serious, conscious revolutionaries in the party. Most of the left and ultra-left in the SPUSA today would've been run out of the SPA in its last 30 or so years of existence.


I was in the SPUSA long enough to be on its National Committee (although my experiences there led to my quitting the Party very quickly), and I knew - and know - quite a lot of members, both young and old. Yeah, there are older members trying to use the language of the Statement of Principles against the old guard social democrats, but the phenomenon of a social democratic party being hoisted by its own petard is quite amusing to someone who's studied the history of socialist movements in the US.


I have a central executive committee? That's funny, I didn't even know I was in a group these days. Could you tell me who it is? Jeez, I probably owe back dues or something.

But on a serious note, I have nothing against unity if it's principled unity. With anarchists and other groups where there are serious differences, principled unity can only mean a united front, where different organizations work together toward agreed common ends. Trying to force everyone into the same "party" (though I'm still not sure how you intend to get anarchists into a political party, since they tend to oppose them on principle) means, at best, you get a least-common-denominator program. And that works when you need unity around a single issue, like ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but not as a program for a revolutionary party.

In my (somewhat pathetic) attempt to promote unity among the left I resulted to sectarian bullshit. Maybe I shouldn't post on RevLeft when running on 45 minutes of sleep each day. I apologize for using your views, which are different from mine, as a way to criticize a simple post of yours. The real enemy is out there: the upper class, the bourgeoisie, not here on RevLeft.

[x371322]

In my (somewhat pathetic) attempt to promote unity among the left I resulted to sectarian bullshit... I apologize for using your views, which are different from mine, as a way to criticize a simple post of yours.

No it's cool. This is RevLeft. You can do that.

:lol:



Seriously though, I find myself wanting to like the idea of an anarchist tendency in the SP. At the same time I'm conflicted on the grounds of party membership, as that's something I've been drifting away from more and more.

At any rate, good luck with it!

[Die Neue Zeit]

An anarchist tendency should first and foremost reject any position or action that threatens to liquidate the party. Also, tendency members should probably call themselves Platformists, since this is the anarchist POV closest to their party work.

[blake 3:17]

Are you still beating your wife?

And other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the show?

Those were two of my dad's favourite oneliners.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. What defeats people most is a double confession.

[revolution inaction]

An anarchist tendency should first and foremost reject any position or action that threatens to liquidate the party. Also, tendency members should probably call themselves Platformists, since this is the anarchist POV closest to their party work.

they are not platforms, platformists support a specifically anarchist communist organisation

[Jose Gracchus]

Here's an idea, we could stop living in the 20s and people could come up with their own tendency (though presupposing they thought out its unique strategic, tactical, and analytical lines systemically and thoughtfully).

[invertedforest]

Ah, just what the SP needs- another tendency. There's the RUG, the Debs Tendency, the Inclusion Tendency, this one, and possibly one more? What's next, a dog walkers tendency? A "fans of Star Trek" tendency?

In an organization of 800 or so, with roughly 10% of its membership active, breaking down into groupings like this is almost laughable- but mostly just sad.