Quick, before I read any more Avakian!

[Mr. Contradiction]

OK, so I just read this talk by the Bob on his website and it seemed really informative and was leading me in a really good direction thought-wise.

I noticed though, that he is the butt of a lot of jokes around here (the poem was really bad, I fully admit :crying:), as though he were not worth taking seriously. Is there something really obvious about him that I am missing? What is the usual criticism of the RCP?

[Blackscare]

Well he's the most active promoter of the cult of personality alive right now, I think. That's the main thing, no one claims that he's an idiot or that he doesn't make some decent points (hard not to, considering the volume of shit he has written), but the RCP is literally a political cult.

[StalinFanboy]

Apart from the personality cult, he is sort of a wiener. he like... kicked a cop back in the 60s or something and then fled the country.

he also wrote this thing about how MLM is more radical than anarchism cause anarchism is more conservative and not as radical as MLM.

That was a paraphrase but there was seriously a couple lines in there that amounted to that

[The Idler]

Apart from LaRoucheists, the RCP is probably the most cult-like party on the left. Bob Avakian is even written by name into the constitution of the party. Someone said the RCP will look like this when Avakian dies someday.
5zYsUqAYg6c

[RED DAVE]

Ask any RCPer what kind of work they're doing in the working class. They always answer with stuff about community organizing and the like.

No Maoist group in the US, including the RCP, which has its origins in Maoism, has ever had a presence in the working class that lasted any period of time, nor have they systematically worked, over a period of time, to establish one.

RED DAVE

[The Douche]

Ask any RCPer what kind of work they're doing in the working class. They always answer with stuff about community organizing and the like.

No Maoist group in the US, including the RCP, which has its origins in Maoism, has ever had a presence in the working class that lasted any period of time, nor have they systematically worked, over a period of time, to establish one.

RED DAVE


Take notice! The working class does not have/participate/live in communities!


:lol:

[RED DAVE]

Take notice! The working class does not have/participate/live in communities!Take notice: community organizing in the absence of a mass movement, especially in the absence of an actie labor movement, ends up as social work. The Panthers found that out the hard way. Free breakfast programs do not a revolution make, nor are they the start of one.

Again, no Maoist group in the US, including the RCP, has ever engaged in sustained work inside the working class. there have been a few short-lived attempts, and some work by committed individuals, but this was not sustained.

RED DAVE

[syndicat]

Avakian says that after the sort of revolution he advocates there will be management and state hierarchies for many, many years, perhaps for generations. This is apologetics for a bureaucratic class regime.

I doubt the RCP does actual mass organizing in the community. I think of mass organizing as the building of mass organizations, such as a tenants union or enviro justice organization. Tenant self-organization to duke it out with landlords isn't "social work," dave.

[Mr. Contradiction]

Well then, I'm glad I asked. Man, following these organizations gets discouraging mighty fast.

[The Douche]

Take notice: community organizing in the absence of a mass movement, especially in the absence of an actie labor movement, ends up as social work. The Panthers found that out the hard way. Free breakfast programs do not a revolution make, nor are they the start of one.

Again, no Maoist group in the US, including the RCP, has ever engaged in sustained work inside the working class. there have been a few short-lived attempts, and some work by committed individuals, but this was not sustained.

RED DAVE

I stand corrected, the past 100 or so years has clearly demonstrated how effective it is for communists to enter into the labor movement and "build for revolution".

It didn't work before? Ah, fuck it, lets just keep trying the same thing over and over again.

Bro, aren't you an old head? Haven't you see the trotskyist movement utilizing the same tactics for the past 30 or so years you've been active? Have you seen any success from it? Then why are you so religiously opposed to other methods of organizing?

[Sixiang]

Avakian makes some good points and is definitely smart about a few things, but a few things the RCP says, as already mentioned, are questionable. And there is definitely that cult thing going on. The only sort of activity I am aware of them doing is that they have bookstores around the country in big cities.

My brother had personal run-in with RCP members. He went to their bookstore in Chicago with a friend a year ago or so. While looking around, the RCP members there came up to them and started talking to them. My brother is a nondescript leftist and his friend is an anarchist. They were being polite and were saying that the store was a cool idea and so forth. Then all of a sudden these people started talking to them about how great and fantastic their leader was. My brother said "They kept talking about some Bob guy." I knew right away that it was Avakian. To quote my brother again, "I thought they were gonna take us to the back and have us drink some kool-aid or something." Needless to say, they were a little weirded out and took off pretty quickly. True, funny, and weird story.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

CMoney:


I stand corrected, the past 100 or so years has clearly demonstrated how effective it is for communists to enter into the labor movement and "build for revolution".

It worked quite well in the 1930s, and it will work now in Wisconsin (and Ohio, and ...).

But, if you want revolution from below, there is no other viable option.

[The Douche]

CMoney:



It worked quite well in the 1930s, and it will work now in Wisconsin (and Ohio, and ...).

But, if you want revolution from below, there is no other viable option.

Oh it worked in the 1930s? Is that why I live in a socialist country now? Is that why I live in a country with such a vibrant communist movement? Is that why the labor movement is a stallwart deffender of socialism?

You know whats gonna happen in Wisconsin and Ohio? Those laws are gonna pass, austerity will prevail, worker's rights will be smashed, and everybody will go home and forget about these protests.

[Os Cangaceiros]

You know whats gonna happen in Wisconsin and Ohio? Those laws are gonna pass, austerity will prevail, worker's rights will be smashed, and everybody will go home and forget about these protests.

How do you know that.

I mean, yeah, there's a good chance, probably even a likely one, that the bill is going through. But the idea that people will collectively go "Aw, shucks" and just shuffle home seems like a specious argument. It could just make people angry.

[mosfeld]

He's a very good writer, used to be a central figure in the Maoist movement and his role (and the RCP in general) in organizing genuine Maoists under RIM was a great victory. I highly recommend reading Avakian's works before the "New Synthesis" revisionist garbage was introduced, which is a simply put disgusting treachery and a complete rupture from Maoism.

EDIT: Here are some very good RCP, USA writings (though not specifically from Avakian):

Notes Toward an Analysis of the Soviet Bourgeoisie (http://www.bannedthought.net/USSR/RCP-Docs/Wolff-Davis-1984.pdf)
Soviet Union: Socialist or Social-Imperialist? (http://www.bannedthought.net/USSR/RCP-Docs/SovietUnion-Debate1983.pdf) (the last two articles in this book)
Vietnam: Miscarriage of the Revolution (http://www.bannedthought.net/Vietnam/Foreign/Vietnam-Miscarriage-1979.pdf)
Guevara, Debray, and Armed Revisionism (http://www.bannedthought.net/Cuba-Che/Guevara/Guevara-Debray-Wolff.pdf)

And here's some criticism of RCP, USA
The Decline of the RCP (http://ia700407.us.archive.org/3/items/TheDeclineOfTheRcp/ORUvsRCP.pdf)
Our position on the Revolutionary Communist Party’s new line in its Manifesto and Constitution (http://www.sholajawid.org/english/main_english/ourposition151010.html) (from Afghani Maoists)

[Blackscare]

Oh it worked in the 1930s? Is that why I live in a socialist country now? Is that why I live in a country with such a vibrant communist movement? Is that why the labor movement is a stallwart deffender of socialism?

You know whats gonna happen in Wisconsin and Ohio? Those laws are gonna pass, austerity will prevail, worker's rights will be smashed, and everybody will go home and forget about these protests.

I guess the answer is to live in squats and hand out free organic soup at protests.


It may not have succeeded in the thirties, but it came a lot closer than anything anarchists have ever done in this country.

If you don't want to involve yourself in the labor movement, then feel free, but know that you don't even have the potential to gain the ear of a wide range of the working class. Revolutions can't be made, obviously, but the structures and party needs to be in place to insure the proper outcome when it does happen. This is the fundamental problem that people have understanding Leninism, it's not (as one person on this board put it) an effort to agitate until 51% of people support us and we can magically have some a-historical revolution. It's to build the vehicle for socialist revolution when a revolutionary time comes about.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

CMoney:


Oh it worked in the 1930s? Is that why I live in a socialist country now?

In addition to what BS has posted: If that's your argument, then nothing works, and we might as well give up.

I would also add that the 1930s saw massive waves of unionisation (and commensurate victories against the bosses), much of which was motivated by grass-roots socialists.


Is that why I live in a country with such a vibrant communist movement? Is that why the labor movement is a stallwart deffender of socialism?

The communist and socialist movement was physically destroyed by the US ruling class. That does not mean it was futile to build in the working class.

[The Douche]

How do you know that.


I don't know it. I only know what the result of all the other mass activism I've seen in my life was, and I only know what the history of labor is in the US, and elsewhere.


I guess the answer is to live in squats and hand out free organic soup at protests.



I haven't made any of these stupid, broad insults. I have never lived in a squat (for more than a night anyways) and never handed out soup at a protest, you know what I have done? Real life political work, haven't you, by your own admission just now started to seek out real world political work? You shouldn't be throwing rocks from your glass house dude.


It may not have succeeded in the thirties, but it came a lot closer than anything anarchists have ever done in this country.



Except that the anarchist movement was massively involved in the labor movement in the 30s. Do you even know the history of the tactics you're trying to defend? IWW much? Haymarket? Fuck off hahaha.


If you don't want to involve yourself in the labor movement, then feel free, but know that you don't even have the potential to gain the ear of a wide range of the working class. Revolutions can't be made, obviously, but the structures and party needs to be in place to insure the proper outcome when it does happen. This is the fundamental problem that people have understanding Leninism, it's not (as one person on this board put it) an effort to agitate until 51% of people support us and we can magically have some a-historical revolution. It's to build the vehicle for socialist revolution when a revolutionary time comes about.

And this is the problem with posters like Red Dave, and the problem with jumping to conclusions. You assume that because I see the labor movement as a dead end in respect to creating a revolutionary situation, that I 1) have no interest in workplace struggle and 2)don't support workplace struggle/organizing.

The reality is that I believe we should organize everywhere that we can around every issue that we can, be it police brutality, rent, working conditions, schooling etc. But people like Red Dave will attack anything that isn't textbook entryism into a workers movement which hasn't had revolutionary potential in over 50 years.


So please, in the future refrain from painting caricatures of people, there are more effective ways of arguing.

[the last donut of the night]

Ask any RCPer what kind of work they're doing in the working class. They always answer with stuff about community organizing and the like.

No Maoist group in the US, including the RCP, which has its origins in Maoism, has ever had a presence in the working class that lasted any period of time, nor have they systematically worked, over a period of time, to establish one.

RED DAVE

god it just gets tiring, dave

[RED DAVE]

god it just gets tiring, daveYeah, I know.

Listening to all that Maoist bullshit with nothing to back it. It's worse than "Deal/No Deal." It's like "Avakian/No Avakian" or "Mao/No Mao."

RED DAVE

[The Douche]

Yeah, I know.

Listening to all that Maoist bullshit with nothing to back it. It's worse than "Deal/No Deal." It's like "Avakian/No Avakian" or "Mao/No Mao."

RED DAVE

You don't have to a Maoist to be bored to death by your dogmatism.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I don't know it. I only know what the result of all the other mass activism I've seen in my life was, and I only know what the history of labor is in the US, and elsewhere.

Well, there's a few ways to look at that. One way is to say that "We're not living in a socialist country right now, therefore all of the mobilizations and struggles were for naught." That's the position that Nih-Com and (some) anarchists take. I don't agree with that, though.

As far as whether or not the labor movement remains viable: I think it still does. Not because I'm a "prole fetishist", like some people on this site, or because I don't know the long history of betrayal of rank-and-file members by union leadership in the United States, but because I can't see any other force in society capable of shutting everything down and stopping the system from working entirely. That's not to say that other projects aren't worthwhile/satisfying, but as far as communism as a macro project goes...yeah, I think that only the organized working class can achieve that.

The exact method of achieving that is of course open to considerable debate and speculation.

[RED DAVE]

I stand corrected, the past 100 or so years has clearly demonstrated how effective it is for communists to enter into the labor movement and "build for revolution".It is the only tactic that has ever worked. In every decade of the 20th and the beginnings of this century, Leftists have either recruited from the labor movement or entered the movement and worked from within.


It didn't work before? Ah, fuck it, lets just keep trying the same thing over and over again.It has worked before; the Socialist, Communist, Anarchist and Trotskyist movements have all had significant affects on the US labor movement and through it on the working class.


Bro, aren't you an old head?One of the oldest. My bones have grown weary and my head grey in the struggle. :D


Haven't you see the trotskyist movement utilizing the same tactics for the past 30 or so years you've been active?And been part of them. And the only toehold the Left has right now in the labor movement is a result of those tatics.


Have you seen any success from it?Yes. The fact that there are still rank-and-file movements in the labor movement and even an occasional "progressive" leader is a result of this. And it still goes on.


Then why are you so religiously opposed to other methods of organizing?I am for any method that works. However, in my experience, which since you brought it up, goes back over half a century, I have never seen a community organizing project that, in the absence of an active connection to a larger movement (labor, civil rights, antiwar) has ever gone any way except into social work or dissolution after burning a lot of good people out.

RED DAVE

[RED DAVE]

You don't have to a Maoist to be bored to death by your dogmatism.You also don't need to be one to have no concept of Marxism.

If you think that community organizing, in and of itself, without connection to a larger movement, as practiced, say, by the RCP, is a good tactic, please explain why, with some examples.

ETA: Quotes from Chairman Bob. Try to find the words "labor" or "working class" on these precious words.

http://revcom.us/a/189/BA_quotes-en.html

http://i54.tinypic.com/11h8efk.jpg

Young Bobby

RED DAVE

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Explosive:


but because I can't see any other force in society capable of shutting everything down and stopping the system from working entirely. That's not to say that other projects aren't worthwhile/satisfying, but as far as communism as a macro project goes...yeah, I think that only the organized working class can achieve that.

Well, as we have seen in Egypt, the massive strike waves a few years ago prepared the ground for the recent protests, which protests then fed back into even more strikes over the last two weeks.

The two can feed off each other.

[Remember how student protests in France, in 1968, sparked off one of the biggest general strikes in European history.]

And, as we have also seen, the resistance in Wisconsn is taking inspiration from Egypt, too.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I'd also like to point out that a lot of what's commonly passed off as "new trends" in anarchism (esp. autonomous and insurrectionary currents) aren't really "new" at all...they've been around for a while, since the time of Galleani and Emile Armand at least. The same kind of tactics that the "post-left" talks about today could be seen in another form in the rhetoric of all sorts of radicals who wanted to create intentional communities in the USA during the 19th century. What did they accomplish? We're still living in capitalism.

I think the line of "we're still living in capitalism, therefore X tactic has failed" negates all of communism/anarchism, really.

[bricolage]

And, as we have also seen, the resistance in Wisconsn is taking inspiration from Egypt, too.
I think this point is being over-exaggerated.
Evidently there have been placards and such like expressing solidarity with Egyptian demonstrators, and reciprocal ones in Egypt but that seems to be where it ends. If you are looking at protesters in Bahrain, Libya now it makes sense to say that they are taking inspiration from those Egypt in the same way Egyptians took inspiration from Tunisians. In this way it would be fair enough to say countries the revolts have spread to would not be experiencing these revolts if the initial ones had not taken place. However in Wisconsin I have every reason to believe these demonstrations would be happening regardless of what has happened in Egypt. Unlike the events in North Africa/the Middle East there was a definite and specific spark to what is happening in Wisconsin/Ohio, meaning the movement so to speak is a lot more focussed around a specific issue. I'm not denying it will rapidly expand beyond that but the events that happened in Tunisia, Egypt and so forth began as a lot more unclear, vague and flexible. The American stuff now would be going on even if nothing had ever happened in Egypt so I mean what other inspiration is there, using twitter? lots of people congregating in the same place? camps? We all know these have happened in many places many times before, even if the media might like to draw spurious links. It's the same as on the last student demonstration in the UK everyone talked about it being inspired by Egypt but then these things were happening long before anything happened there. Sure some people went to the Egyptian embassy but that's not inspiration. Maybe we are talking about a vague sense of 'they showed it can be done!' but then I'm not sure that's really the case either, people will resist because they have to and because it is inevitable, maybe they got hyped up by watching AL Jazeera live streams but I doubt it's that prevalent. A lot of this seems to be leftists making everything seem like 'one big movement', it's not and the sort of links people like to imagine just aren't there.

[The Douche]

Well, there's a few ways to look at that. One way is to say that "We're not living in a socialist country right now, therefore all of the mobilizations and struggles were for naught." That's the position that Nih-Com and (some) anarchists take. I don't agree with that, though.



I think the actual position is "those were failures, how do we learn from them", not that they were "for naught".


That's not to say that other projects aren't worthwhile/satisfying, but as far as communism as a macro project goes...yeah, I think that only the organized working class can achieve that.


I would like to think that the vast majority of posters here know that and agree with it. What I'm saying is that organized labor is not synonomous or the only way the achieve the necessary organization of the working class.


It is the only tactic that has ever worked. In every decade of the 20th and the beginnings of this century, Leftists have either recruited from the labor movement or entered the movement and worked from within.


I know of no successful communist revolutions thus far, but I know of many instances where "workers organizations" (i.e. unions and workers parties) have recuperated the struggle and shold the workers, and the revolution down the river.


It has worked before; the Socialist, Communist, Anarchist and Trotskyist movements have all had significant affects on the US labor movement and through it on the working class.


There is no arguement about the positive effect that revolutionaries have had on the labor movement, and thereby on the conditions of the working class. What I'm saying though, is that they labor movement is an agent of recuperation, not of revolution. I think its good to get better day to day conditions (since as a member of the working class, and I mean that, I am not a student, not a part-time worker or anything like that, I experience the fruits of those gains), but I don't think that leads to, or even can lead to revolution. Unions are a tool for negotiation, yes, even revolutionary unions are. And they will negotiate the revolution away just as quickly as they will settle a contract with your boss. That is the lesson I have learned from studying history and from growing up in a union family.


And been part of them. And the only toehold the Left has right now in the labor movement is a result of those tatics.

Right, a toe hold in an institution which I consider (based on my study of history) to be useless in the context of revolution.


Yes. The fact that there are still rank-and-file movements in the labor movement and even an occasional "progressive" leader is a result of this. And it still goes on.



And what happens when people in unions today openly organize and seek positions within the union as communists? And what happens when they advocate communist politics...even without calling them that? So they must always struggle towards reform and negotiation, which leads to recuperation.


in the absence of an active connection to a larger movement (labor, civil rights, antiwar) has ever gone any way except into social work or dissolution after burning a lot of good people out.



I happen to think that these things are always connected. I'm curious, what kind of community organizing do you think I'm talking about? I'm certainly not talking about heading out to the local soup kitchen to handle a ladle for a few hours a day.


I think the line of "we're still living in capitalism, therefore X tactic has failed" negates all of communism/anarchism, really.

To suggest that we should not evaluate historical attempts/failures and why they failed is lunacy. We have to be honest with ourselves if we're going to move forward.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I think the actual position is "those were failures, how do we learn from them", not that they were "for naught".


We are no closer now to rest, to freedom, to communism than they [previous generations] were, their sacrifice has bought us nothing, what they did counted for nothing, we have inherited nothing, we work as they worked, we make as they made, we are paid as they were paid. We do not possess either our acts or the world that conditions us, just as they owned nothing of their lives.

That's mostly what I was refering to by "for naught".


I would like to think that the vast majority of posters here know that and agree with it. What I'm saying is that organized labor is not synonomous or the only way the achieve the necessary organization of the working class.

What would you suggest as an alternative? I believe that modern unions are a sham, too, so I'm curious.


To suggest that we should not evaluate historical attempts/failures and why they failed is lunacy.

that's not even what I meant broseph

[The Douche]

That's mostly what I was refering to by "for naught".


Ah ok, I feel like thats more an attempt to explain why they give no support to any previous attempts at communism as opposed to thinking they should be ignored or whatever. I think I just misinterpretted what you meant though.


What would you suggest as an alternative? I believe that modern unions are a sham, too, so I'm curious.



Sadly, I really don't know. I know I prefer to organize around issues that immediately effect me and mine, and to have a larger network for support and communication in our struggles. But the reality is that my life has become much more insular, and limited, so I would certainly not claim to have the answers.


that's not even what I meant broseph

:thumbup1:

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Bricolage:


I think this point is being over-exaggerated.

May I beg to differ?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/02/20/946753/-Wisconsin-Egypt:-Our-Awakening

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2025006&postcount=53

http://www.stevenspointjournal.com/article/20110217/SPJ06/102170346/Letter-Wisconsin-Egypt-more-alike-than-not

http://twitpic.com/40w4aa

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-lux/egypt-wisconsin-and-the-f_b_825185.html

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/02/wisconsin-middle-east-midwest

http://www.alternet.org/economy/149942/is_wisconsin_our_egypt_15,000_protest_off-the-wall_right-wing_governor's_policies/

http://jdeanicite.typepad.com/i_cite/2011/02/my-entry.html

But there are scores of other links I could post.

And here is what one of the organisers is saying:


The success of a grass-roots uprising in Egypt in toppling strongman Hosni Mubarak was a source of inspiration for many of those who brainstormed Tuesday in Madison about resistance to attacks on U.S. workers in several states.

It helped fire a passionate expression of solidarity by Bryan Pfeifer, an organizer of part-time faculty at Wayne State University in Detroit. "We are calling on people from throughout the Midwest to descend on Madison and make a stand. We did not create the economic crisis and we are not going to pay for it," he declared to cheers and applause.

"Fight like an Egyptian"

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2025641&postcount=79

[Wanted Man]

OK, so I just read this talk by the Bob on his website and it seemed really informative and was leading me in a really good direction thought-wise.

I noticed though, that he is the butt of a lot of jokes around here (the poem was really bad, I fully admit :crying:), as though he were not worth taking seriously. Is there something really obvious about him that I am missing? What is the usual criticism of the RCP?

Don't let other people tell you what not to read.

[Mr. Contradiction]

He's a very good writer, used to be a central figure in the Maoist movement and his role (and the RCP in general) in organizing genuine Maoists under RIM was a great victory. I highly recommend reading Avakian's works before the "New Synthesis" revisionist garbage was introduced, which is a simply put disgusting treachery and a complete rupture from Maoism.

EDIT: Here are some very good RCP, USA writings (though not specifically from Avakian):

[links removed]

And here's some criticism of RCP, USA

[links removed]


@mosfeld: That was all very helpful, thank you.
---------


What exactly is fighting like an Egyptian? If the past week or two has been any indication it seems to mean: fight until you win a few concessions from the people in power in your country, and then return to business as usual.

[Os Cangaceiros]

What exactly is fighting like an Egyptian? If the past week or two has been any indication it seems to mean: fight until you win a few concessions from the people in power in your country, and then return to business as usual.

Absolutely, if by "return to business as usual" you mean "continuing demonstrations (the last which was held on Friday) and strike actions". :rolleyes:

http://www.eurasiareview.com/world-news/africa/egypt-strikes-continue-as-politcal-reform-begins-17022011/

[S.Artesian]

Oh it worked in the 1930s? Is that why I live in a socialist country now? Is that why I live in a country with such a vibrant communist movement? Is that why the labor movement is a stallwart deffender of socialism?

You know whats gonna happen in Wisconsin and Ohio? Those laws are gonna pass, austerity will prevail, worker's rights will be smashed, and everybody will go home and forget about these protests.

The laws might pass, austerity will prevail for as long as capital requires it or until capital is overthrown, workers' rights will definitely be attacked but not definitely smashed without a fight, and nobody is going to go home and simply forget about these protests.

The issue about organizing is simply that community organizing of a community as a community has zero potential for leading to widespread revolutionary struggle against the ruling class. Capitalism does not create a ruling community, it creates a ruling class. The power of that class is in maintaining the social condition of labor; labor as wage-labor. Breaking the power of that class depends on the overthrowing of that social relation of wage-labor by the laborers themselves.

That's why, no matter how long the record of defeats, the struggle is reengaged on those "old" terms-- because accumulation continues along that enduring social relation.

Not to put too fine a point on it..............

[S.Artesian]

I think this point is being over-exaggerated.
Evidently there have been placards and such like expressing solidarity with Egyptian demonstrators, and reciprocal ones in Egypt but that seems to be where it ends. If you are looking at protesters in Bahrain, Libya now it makes sense to say that they are taking inspiration from those Egypt in the same way Egyptians took inspiration from Tunisians. In this way it would be fair enough to say countries the revolts have spread to would not be experiencing these revolts if the initial ones had not taken place. However in Wisconsin I have every reason to believe these demonstrations would be happening regardless of what has happened in Egypt. Unlike the events in North Africa/the Middle East there was a definite and specific spark to what is happening in Wisconsin/Ohio, meaning the movement so to speak is a lot more focussed around a specific issue. I'm not denying it will rapidly expand beyond that but the events that happened in Tunisia, Egypt and so forth began as a lot more unclear, vague and flexible. The American stuff now would be going on even if nothing had ever happened in Egypt so I mean what other inspiration is there, using twitter? lots of people congregating in the same place? camps? We all know these have happened in many places many times before, even if the media might like to draw spurious links. It's the same as on the last student demonstration in the UK everyone talked about it being inspired by Egypt but then these things were happening long before anything happened there. Sure some people went to the Egyptian embassy but that's not inspiration. Maybe we are talking about a vague sense of 'they showed it can be done!' but then I'm not sure that's really the case either, people will resist because they have to and because it is inevitable, maybe they got hyped up by watching AL Jazeera live streams but I doubt it's that prevalent. A lot of this seems to be leftists making everything seem like 'one big movement', it's not and the sort of links people like to imagine just aren't there.


But this struggle is "inspired" by the same economic conflicts, the same conflict between private property and the needs of social reproduction that has triggered the struggle in Egypt. That's the point.

[StalinFanboy]

The laws might pass, austerity will prevail for as long as capital requires it or until capital is overthrown, workers' rights will definitely be attacked but not definitely smashed without a fight, and nobody is going to go home and simply forget about these protests.

The issue about organizing is simply that community organizing of a community as a community has zero potential for leading to widespread revolutionary struggle against the ruling class. Capitalism does not create a ruling community, it creates a ruling class. The power of that class is in maintaining the social condition of labor; labor as wage-labor. Breaking the power of that class depends on the overthrowing of that social relation of wage-labor by the laborers themselves.

That's why, no matter how long the record of defeats, the struggle is reengaged on those "old" terms-- because accumulation continues along that enduring social relation.

Not to put too fine a point on it..............

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the mentality behind "community" organizing is to try to build a base of support for class struggle.

[thriller]

Ran into the RCP in Madison this weekend. They wanted to interview me because I had a red flag. Here were my answers "Yes I have heard of Bob. No, I havn't read anything of his lately. Is he still hiding in France?"

[Mr. Contradiction]

Absolutely, if by "return to business as usual" you mean "continuing demonstrations (the last which was held on Friday) and strike actions". :rolleyes:

[link removed]


I stand corrected. Another well-meaning person has been brought down by a shift in US media news cycle. Or, to be less charitable to myself, I should pay better attention.

Although I maintain that Wisconsin calling itself Egypt seems a bit disingenuous.

[bricolage]

But this struggle is "inspired" by the same economic conflicts, the same conflict between private property and the needs of social reproduction that has triggered the struggle in Egypt. That's the point.
Well by that logic surely every struggle that takes place ever is inspired by every other struggle? The idea of Winsonsin being inspired by Egypt is about demonstrators in one place being inspired by those in another, this might be a small element to it but I think it's more the case that people were forced in resisting by the material conditions they face and the attacks upon them. What Rosa does is post links to placards (which I already mentioned) and blogs claiming inspiration which I don't think really speak for anyone on the ground.

[The Douche]

The laws might pass, austerity will prevail for as long as capital requires it or until capital is overthrown, workers' rights will definitely be attacked but not definitely smashed without a fight, and nobody is going to go home and simply forget about these protests.

The issue about organizing is simply that community organizing of a community as a community has zero potential for leading to widespread revolutionary struggle against the ruling class. Capitalism does not create a ruling community, it creates a ruling class. The power of that class is in maintaining the social condition of labor; labor as wage-labor. Breaking the power of that class depends on the overthrowing of that social relation of wage-labor by the laborers themselves.

That's why, no matter how long the record of defeats, the struggle is reengaged on those "old" terms-- because accumulation continues along that enduring social relation.

Not to put too fine a point on it..............

Youre missing the point here.


I want to see why people think unions/the labor movement is the only way to advance the struggle. Thats the case that Dave so often makes, though maybe, I will say, they could just be my interpretation cause of his constsant talk about unions/labor.



People who attack "community organizing" (an undefined term in the context of this discussion) often do so on the premise that they are attacking liberal institutions like soup kitchens a charity, that is not what communists mean when they talk about community organizing, I would think that would be obvious, but you know what happens when you assume...

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

MR C:


What exactly is fighting like an Egyptian? If the past week or two has been any indication it seems to mean: fight until you win a few concessions from the people in power in your country, and then return to business as usual.

If you want to be pedantic, why not ask "OK, if we are to fight like an Egyptian, which one do we copy?"

May I suggest you nip over to Wisconsin and ask your question there --- since they are the one's who are using it?

To my mind it means "Figth the Power".

Anyway, you are ignoring the countless strikes that have broken out -- we are only a whisker away from workers' councils in Egypt:


Egypt: Strike wave deepens the revolution and threatens the power of capital

by Simon Assaf

Egypt is in the grip of a huge strike wave that marks a sudden and dramatic deepening of the revolution. Tens of thousands of workers have walked out of offices, factories, textile mills, ports, hospitals, schools and universities across the country. Even police officers are demonstrating.

These strikes erupted in direct defiance of the army’s call for workers to end strikes, sit-ins and demonstrations.

They have the potential not only to transform Egyptian society, but also to threaten capitalism itself.

Hosni Mubarak dreamed of transforming Egypt’s economy into “the Tiger on the Nile”.

His government privatised state industries, kept wages low and slashed meagre social security provision in a drive to make Egypt a prime spot for global investment.

Foreign and Egyptian companies made huge fortunes on the back of low wages, terrible working conditions and the suppression of trade unions.

All the world’s economic powers bought a stake in Mubarak’s Egypt. Now their interests are under threat.

Egyptian workers have huge potential power. Some 8 percent of the world’s seaborne trade passes through the Suez Canal.

The two cities at each end of the vital waterway, Suez and Port Said, were key centres of the uprising.

US interests are directly under threat. The largest chunk of US investment in Egypt is tied up in the petro-chemical industry, including the strategically vital SuMed pipeline that runs along the banks of the Suez Canal.

This pipeline carries 2.5 million barrels of oil a day.

It is part of a network that links Saudi Arabia’s new Red Sea oil terminals, built to bypass the unstable Persian Gulf.

The potential power of this movement also has a direct impact on Israel—which depends on Egypt for one quarter of its natural gas.

This gas is pumped to Israel along a pipeline that crosses the northern Sinai coast and

El-Arish, the biggest Egyptian city close to the Gaza Strip. It was here that rebels fought armed battles to drive out state security troops on the eve of Mubarak’s departure.

This strike wave drew its momentum from the decisive role played by organised workers.

The mass insurrectionary strikes which first erupted on Sunday 30 January—the so-called “day of normality”—were in direct response to attempts by regime thugs to crush the revolution in Tahrir Square.

Workers who walked out in solidarity with the “youth of Tahrir” also issued economic demands, many of them long-standing disputes over pay, conditions and bonuses.

Now they are demanding the sacking of bullying foremen, corrupt managers and bosses with ties to Mubarak’s ruling party.

This workers’ movement reaches into the heart of Egyptian society. The new working class organisations that have sprung up to represent tax collectors, bus workers, railway workers, teachers, airport staff, cabin crews, textile workers, street cleaners, hotel workers and so on, have the potential to change social relations in Egypt.

They could also transform the role of women.

Tens of thousands of women work in the giant textile mills in the Nile Delta. They live on poverty wages—despite operating advanced and modern mills that produce much prized luxury cotton for the US market.

These women were key to the dramatic wave of strikes and occupations in 2007. Now they are raising equal pay.

This strike wave is a deepening of a revolutionary process. The insurrectionary mass demonstrations destroyed the physical control of the state. Now the rule of capital itself is being challenged.

How these strikes will develop is uncertain, but the Egyptian revolution is full of surprises. It can go beyond simply deposing a tyrant to deposing a tyrannical system itself.

http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=23942

[S.Artesian]

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the mentality behind "community" organizing is to try to build a base of support for class struggle.

OK, you're wrong. Not the basis behind it at all. If anything, community organizing has been looked upon and utilized as a method to pre-empt and exclude class-conscious organization. Perhaps one of the more prominent practitioners of "community organizing" in the US was Saul Alinsky, who was quite explicit in his promotion of community organizing as a way to preclude class organization and as an effective barrier to communist organizing.

There's no doubt that among community organizers, such as sds or sncc, a radical consciousness developed, but it never morphed into anything resembling a class consciousness-- as the paths that sds, sncc, the panthers etc. took makes painfully clear. The Panthers got to the point of putting Huey's picture on a dollar bill, endorsing black capitalism, and attacking [ideologically] black industrial workers, talking about "bombing" the factories.

Community organizing corresponds to a lack of class consciousness, class perspective, class organization. Doesn't mean that the organized institutions of the workers, the trade union bureaucracies, etc. aren't responsible for that lack of class consciousness with their ingrained racism; their historical hostility to women workers; their abandonment of migratory, agricultural, and immigrant labor, etc. Those structures most definitely are responsible and are part of the attempt to integrate the labor movement into the mechanism of accumulation and away from class-wide organization.

It just means community organizing is not any viable alternative, threat, response.

And Avakian.... well I'm an old head too, old enough to have dealt with Avakian personally, and believe me, go ahead and read anything you want, but keep in mind Avakian is concerned first and foremost with enhancing the power and the cult of Bob Avakian.

[S.Artesian]

Youre missing the point here.


I want to see why people think unions/the labor movement is the only way to advance the struggle. Thats the case that Dave so often makes, though maybe, I will say, they could just be my interpretation cause of his constsant talk about unions/labor.



People who attack "community organizing" (an undefined term in the context of this discussion) often do so on the premise that they are attacking liberal institutions like soup kitchens a charity, that is not what communists mean when they talk about community organizing, I would think that would be obvious, but you know what happens when you assume...

No, I'm not missing the point... you're missing the point. Nobody said that unions are the only way to advance the struggle. But the struggle is a class struggle, and the only way to advance that is oppose the ruling class as a class by opposing its economic, social form of the organization of labor.

I did community organizing when I was [much] younger-- with sncc, with sclc in Chicago. It's a dead end, or worse, as you wind up going from some truly good people, good human beings, actually great people, leading the organizing efforts-- like John Lewis or Robert Moses to a.... Jesse Jackson, an Eldridge Cleaver.

[The Douche]

No, I'm not missing the point... you're missing the point. Nobody said that unions are the only way to advance the struggle. But the struggle is a class struggle, and the only way to advance that is oppose the ruling class as a class by opposing its economic, social form of the organization of labor.



Yeah yeah yeah, I still have never in my time as a communist come across a scrap of evidence that the labor movement has not been completely absorbed by capital. And you're still not making a case for the potential of organized labor/union movement!

You're saying that in order to destroy capital we must reorganize labor. But I am not saying otherwise!


It's a dead end, or worse, as you wind up going from some truly good people, good human beings, actually great people, leading the organizing efforts-- like John Lewis or Robert Moses to a.... Jesse Jackson, an Eldridge Cleaver.

I don't give a fuck about Saul Alinsky (I did struggle my way through his book though, to try and understand where progressives and liberals are coming from), ACORN, or my mom's church group. That is not the sort of "community organizing" that members of this board are talking about.

There are a lot, a whole lot of revolutionaries on here and in the real world who have come to the conclusion that the labor movement (the unions and the parties) have been assimilated by capital, and as such, we need to find a new way to build for revolution, often with a basis in their neighborhoods, cities, etc. And yes, that includes their workplaces, but it has nothing to do with, and is often in opposition to local 77whateverthefuck.

[S.Artesian]

And you're still not making a case for the potential of organized labor/union movement!

I don't have to make a case for that. I'm not making a case for the revolutonary potential of a union movement. Capitalism is making the case that it compels the bourgeoisie and the proletariat to move beyond the issue of "integration/disintegration" into classwide struggle for social power.

As for a labor movement not integrated into capitalism... I don't know what the fuck that means. Labor exists as wage-labor because capital exists as capital. If somebody wants to claim that there never was a time when workers in the US opposed capitalists as a class and organized and fought for the organization of workers in opposition to that class... well then that somebody is just ignorant of the history of class struggles in the US... and everywhere else in the now OECD countries.

There's the organization of black sugarcane workers after the Civil War; there's the struggles led by the IWW; there's the coal miners' struggles in West Virginia throughout the first half of the 20th century-- ever hear of Blair Mountain?

Then, there's always organization of migrant laborers in the fields of California. Not revolutionary enough for some? Tell you what, more potential for revolution than any community organizing by the Panthers.

[syndicat]

Yeah yeah yeah, I still have never in my time as a communist come across a scrap of evidence that the labor movement has not been completely absorbed by capital. And you're still not making a case for the potential of organized labor/union movement!


i think you fail to distinguish the different forms that unionism has taken historically...in different times and places. you look at the concervative American business unionism and you can't see how it could be a means to revolution...and it can't be.

Unionism derives from workers acting "in union" with each other in opposition to employers. Through militancy and collective activity and organizational strength, people develop a sense of their power to make changes and ultimately, if this process develops far enough, to get rid of the bosses altogether.

i distinguish between the "two souls" of unionism, unionism as professional service bureaucracies, and unionism as direct self-activity of workers in solidarity with each other, organized in ways they control.

Once workers have forced employers and the state to recognize and legalize unions, there have come to exist professionals of representation, whose prospects hinge on their power in the union organization and in mediation between workers and employers.

in revolutionary periods you find both forms of unionism present but the more grassroots, autonomous and rebel form of unionism comes to the fore, and it is thru this that workers do pose a challenge to the system. In the Russian revolution through things like the factory committee movement, which was a form of workshop unionism, and in 1919-20 in Italy, the revolutionary challenge that led to the massive occupation of most of the country's industries and almost to revolution had its spark in the grassroots shop stewards councils and assemblies built up by syndicalists and some socialists (such as Gramsci's group), or, again, the revolutionary syndicalist grassroots unionism that was the driving force of the revolution in spain in 1936-37.

if you think revoluton can happen without worker unionist organization (which isn't always called a "union"), point to a revolutionary situation where the workers weren't organized into unionist formations that were centers of class combat in that situation?

[NGNM85]

FREE BOB AVAKIAN!!!
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2008/01/27/free_bob_avakian/

[chegitz guevara]

I'm confused as to how anyone could consider Avakian to be a good writer. I've got two of his books, and without a doubt, they are among the worst books on Marxism in my rather extensive collection.

Avakian, at one time, had a good sense for politics. But he's completely disconnected from reality now.

[Kassad]

They're releasing a booklet of Avakian's quotations in April, in the same manner as Chairman Mao's Little Red Book. Any questions?

[chegitz guevara]

They're releasing a booklet of Avakian's quotations in April, in the same manner as Chairman Mao's Little Red Book. Any questions?
God, what a fucking joke.

[mosfeld]

That quotation book could've been useful at a certain time, taking into consideration that Bob Avakian is a veteran revolutionary and a well-educated Maoist who can talk about revolutionary communism in a language that the people understand. I've personally always had a hard time reading Marx and Engels. What actually made me exceptionally interested in Marxism was Raymond Lotta's speech "Socialism is far better than capitalism (...)", and from there on, other RCP,USA writings. Note that this was way before I became a Maoist.

However, considering Bob Avakian's recent political developments, and that of the RCP,USA., I think that this quotation book will most likely be used to promote his revisonist "New Synthesis", which is, in my opinion, a very negative development.

EDIT: Here is a link to Raymond Lotta's speech.

http://revcom.us/a/031/socialism-communism-better-capitalism-part7.htm

EDIT #2: I'd also like to remind people that you're posting in the Learning forum :)

[Mr. Contradiction]

I would have to agree about having difficulties with Marx. I've found as I begin reading seriously that I get more out of the writings that get me more 'fired up', that feel more straightforward. And I don't think it's a problem with the writing being 150 years old either; I used to find the US founders exhilarating, when I was into that.

So I guess I'm just hunting down every possible writer who interests me and whose analogies, etc., I can follow first, and worrying about inter-Marxist disagreements second.

[Blackscare]

I would have to agree about having difficulties with Marx...
So I guess I'm just hunting down every possible writer who interests me and whose analogies, etc., I can follow first, and worrying about inter-Marxist disagreements second.

I think it has more to do with understanding marxism.

[S.Artesian]

I think it's much harder to understand Marxism, and actually use it, not reading Marx as opposed to reading Marx.

I would certainly recommend the Grundrisse, his writings on France 1848-1850 and on Louis Napoleon, where he practically spits the word "bourgeoisie" whenever he uses it... and his economic manuscripts of 1857-1864- volumes 33, 34 of the collected works. The writing in those manuscripts is, IMO, far superior, far more engaging, energetic than in Capital.

[HEAD ICE]

I think it's much harder to understand Marxism, and actually use it, not reading Marx as opposed to reading Marx.

I agree with this. It took me so long to actually start reading Marx, I spent so much time reading about Marx and Marxism than actually reading Marx. Marx is way better at talking about what he believed.

This is me reading the Manifesto and The German Ideology
KnXOeuhdpZo

[Amphictyonis]

Apart from LaRoucheists, the RCP is probably the most cult-like party on the left. Bob Avakian is even written by name into the constitution of the party. Someone said the RCP will look like this when Avakian dies someday.
5zYsUqAYg6c

Kinda looks like the USA cult after JFK was hot.

[Ms. Max]

LaRouce is not on the left. It is a Facist party. Good book about that, I forget the title.

[mosfeld]

LaRouce is not on the left. It is a Facist party. Good book about that, I forget the title.

He used to be a Trotskyite, though.

[HalPhilipWalker]

LaRouce is not on the left. It is a Facist party. Good book about that, I forget the title.

It's available for free online.:D

Just do a search for "Lyndon LaRouche and the New American Fascism" and you should find it. Sorry, I can't post links yet.

[S.Artesian]

He used to be a Trotskyite, though.


Technically-- a Luxemburgist. He was also in sds