New US socialist organization

[Proukunin]

http://i52.tinypic.com/345ob36.jpg

Youth for Revolutionary Socialism. We are a united marxist youth group that just recently started in hopes to build from a small group into a large active organization to help in the fight against capitalism and fascism. We welcome anyone who believes that we can only be successful in socialist revolution if we socialists can unite together without tendencies wars.

We have a group in Revleft and if you are interested you can check out our website. There is a link in the revleft YRS group that will send you to the website. From there on you can read up on us and join if you like and you will be instructed on how to get in on the action.

Please, Comrades help us in our struggle as we are a small group right now trying to grow. With your help we may become a great socialist organization.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

How young do you have to be to be in the group?

[Proukunin]

30 and under. Im guessing that is the standard for 'youth'.

[Enragé]

Why organise seperately as 'youth', especially since i think you dont have an 'adult' organisation?

[Proukunin]

Maybe after the youth organization gets a handful of people to start acting on things we can form an 'adult' organization. there are many other youth organizations without 'adult' factions that are either trotskyist or some other tendency. YRS is mainly for students and youth workers who want to organize together without having to be in a specific tendency. It is also a chance for youth socialists who have no leftist scene around their area to jump in on the action.

[Paulappaul]

How different is this from the ISO or SDS?

[Proukunin]

I havent read much on ISO but I think SDS is an all leftist organization while YRS will be marxist. We don't want democratic socialism or anarchism. that's why it is united marxist.

and this is just the beginning. We still have a long way to go before we figure out where the organization will be heading. Thats why first we must build the group up before anything else.

[Sam_b]

We don't approve of democratic socialists or anarchists. that's why it is united marxist.


without having to be in a specific tendency

Also, you want to build a group, yet just admit you have no real direction, eg strategy and tactics?

[Proukunin]

Well Sam, what I mean is specific tendency inside marxism. I understand marxism is a tendency in itself. But it also another way of saying communist. We arent a maoist organization or a trotskyist organization. We dont want democratic socialists because they arent true revoltionaries. We don't want anarchists because they have a different plan for revolution than communists.

We can have direction, strategy and tactics but first we need the people to build those things.
you cant have organization and tactics with 2 men comrade.
see what im saying?

[Lenina Rosenweg]

Also, you want to build a group, yet just admit you have no real direction, eg strategy and tactics?

People need a chance to learn. Where will you go to learn if you are young and living in a right wing area of America?Its not my business but I could see a multi-tendency communist organisation, not for social democrats or anarchists. Possibly people will read and discuss the classics-Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Luxemborg ,etc. and discuss the Russian, Chinese, and Cuban revolutions. Learn to do productive activism and interventions.They sure as hell don't talk about this in US high schools or any of the official youth groups.

The best "old people" could do is give some advice or direction,but only if its wanted. People have to "learn by doing" and study among their peers.

I think this project is a positive thing.

[Proukunin]

The city i live in is right-wing lol. This project is positive and especially for those who have nowhere to relate to inside their right wing towns. It is a way to get to learn about communism in general and taking aspects from all revolutions. Anyways, why shun an organization that wants to grow and help teach the ways of true communism without having to follow a certain leader?

[Sam_b]

We can have direction, strategy and tactics but first we need the people to build those things.
you cant have organization and tactics with 2 men comrade.
see what im saying?

I am asking these, perhaps 'tough' questions from the experiences me and comrades are currently going through. We are in a new organisation that is a week old, comprising of 40 or so comrades from Glasgow. I think you don't need a 'manifesto' (you aren't standing for election) as much as you need a statement of principles and a press release. [Perhaps see the statment I just put up about the ISG in this sub-forum]. Don't talk abstractly about revolution, but the concretes: what groups you wish to work with, what your stated aims are beyond that [ie to build a radical organisation of youth to build a role in the current struggles against racism, homophobia, cuts and austerity measures etc]: your employment section is a good start. Ensure the organisation is a praxist one.

Although its boring as fuck, get some fundamentals on the go. Think about how you can sustain the organisation - at some point you will need subs/dues for printing, hosting, placards etc. Scope aroud the locality for venues to hold a launch rally at, and invite members of the community - trade unionists and social justice spokespersons to speak at it. Produce a leaflet to launch the organisation - web presence alone, in my experience, doesn't work. Think about what you wish to publish as a magazine or whatever.

If I can help with any of this, drop me a PM.

[Paulappaul]

I havent read much on ISO but I think SDS is an all leftist organization while YRS will be strictly communist. We don't approve of democratic socialists or anarchists. that's why it is united marxist.

I am just curious, would you allow say Council Communists or Left Communists in this united marxist group? And if so, how is their conception much different from say Anarcho - Syndicalists?

[Proukunin]

as long as they are not supporting going straight from a capitalist to communist society then yes. Anarchism wants to immediately skip from capitalist society into a stateless society which has never even been achieved on any level. They can join but they could be restricted from some electoral processes like leadership.

[svenne]

Well, on your homepage, you call yourselves marxist-leninist (not saying that's bad or good...), and that ain't united marxist. There's a lot of people who's marxist and communist, but not leninist nor marxist-leninist. Just sayin'.
Also, how come you're not joining any of the other ML youth groups in the US, as i have understood there's at least a couple of them; some pretty big? (i'm not being an ass here, i'm just curious)

[RED DAVE]

YRS [Youth of Revolutionary Socialists] will be strictly communist.Three points from an old hand.

(1) Your name sounds weird. It sounds like something thought up by someone who is not a native speaker of English. Something like "Youth for Revolutionary Socialism" or even "Youth League of Revolutionary Socialists" in my arrogant opinion, sounds much more coherent.

(2) What do you mean by "strictly communist"? If you can come up with a definition of that (and I suggest that you not try) and not become hopeless sectarians, rots of ruck.

(3) I know I'm showing my age and politics here, but I would stay away from the word "communist." The word "socialist" contains, or should contain, the same meaning, and it doesn't have the stalinist implications (unless you're stalinists).

RED DAVE

[Proukunin]

I had a rough cut of the website, but I have revised many parts of it and also taking anything that says M-L out. The organization was recently started so the website still needs a little help, which will come when people get involved. What I meant by strictly communists is that anarchism is a different approach and one we don't advocate. I dont mean to be sectarian but they both have different ideas on revolution.

[x371322]

I dont mean to be sectarian but they both have different ideas on revolution.

Well, so do Trots and ML's, but they're both allowed in your new club, aren't they? We've seen many a flame wars on this forum between the two, arguing their theories of permanent revolution vs. socialism in one country. Pretty much every tendency has their own ideas on revolution... that's usually why we have different tendencies in the first place. So I don't follow your logic here.

For a small new group hoping to grow to become the "greatest socialist organization," I really think you're getting off on the wrong foot. It looks to me like you'd want all the support you could get at such an early juncture.


Just my 2 cents... At any rate good luck with it.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

I would agree w/Red Dave. We're in a country were people have been conditioned to think of communists as monsters. "You're an avowed communist" is almost like saying, 'So you actually admit to being a child molester". There are times when its best to aggressively state who you are, especially to rednecks and some right wing elements. "Fuck yeah, I'm a communist!" , they respect strength. Most other times though its best to say you're a socialist. Same thing.

You're organisation could be Marxist. Its legitimate to set some boundaries w/soc dems , anarchists, and those not sharing your view.

I wouldn't worry too much about tendencies right now. Marxism is an evolving science, not a religion which hunts for heretics.

[Proukunin]

I guess we'll see how it goes. I understand that trots and M-Ls have different views with SIOC and PR but maybe we can organize together and compromise on those issues in some new way. I dont know how it will end up. That is why were still trying to get people involved. To see how it will end up.

[Proukunin]

I would agree w/Red Dave. We're in a country were people have been conditioned to think of communists as monsters. "You're an avowed communist" is almost like saying, 'So you actually admit to being a child molester". There are times when its best to aggressively state who you are, especially to rednecks and some right wing elements. "Fuck yeah, I'm a communist!" , they respect strength. Most other times though its best to say you're a socialist. Same thing.

You're organisation could be Marxist. Its legitimate to set some boundaries w/soc dems , anarchists, and those not sharing your view.

I wouldn't worry too much about tendencies right now. Marxism is an evolving science, not a religion which hunts for heretics.


Oh believe me communist is not taken lightly here. I say socialist here so that people dont equate me with Stalin and Pol Pot. I stick to saying Socialist in the website unless I say united marxist, unified marxist.

[genstrike]

Here's an obvious question: Does your group have more than one member? More than three? Does it exist solely as one person's internet project?

[Proukunin]

so far we have 3. But this group was started less than a week ago. It'll take a little time.

[Q]

Is this group affiliated to Workers Power? I'm asking because the OP was for some time.

[Proukunin]

No, the organization I was in before I split is though. RevolutionUSA.

[Q]

No, the organization I was in before I split is though. RevolutionUSA.

Why did you split? Also, perhaps on a nitpicking term: You're talking in singular form ("I split"), so I guess you were the only one who left? If so, how is that a split (implying a grouping that left as a cohesive entity)?

[Proukunin]

I split, I left same thing.

differences in ideology.

[Q]

I split, I left same thing.
I guess we hold different definitions on what a "split" is.


differences in ideology.
How is that a reason for leaving? I just want to understand the reasoning here.

[Proukunin]

What do you mean how is that a reason? I had my differences with the group is all.

And I didn't say we had a split. I said I SPLIT. Which if you know any slang terms it also is another way of a person saying I left.

[Q]

What do you mean how is that a reason? I had my differences with the group is all.

Don't you believe in the unity of the working class? And if you do, how will you ensure such unity if you leave a group over some minor differences yourself? Why didn't you engage with WP about your differences and try and organise to try and get a majority for your views? How do you think you'll be more productive with starting yet another small socialist group? How will you deal with differences when they are raised?

Some questions that pop in my mind.

[Proukunin]

Trotskyism isn't unity of the working class. It seperates itself from other working class movements. YRS does not, we accept all socialists who want to learn more about socialism and revolution. Most people who have joined are non-doctrinaire anyways. Hence the name United Marxist. We want to unite all marxist ideologies so that we can form a new way to approach communism.

[Wanted Man]

What will you do, concretely?

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

30 and under. Im guessing that is the standard for 'youth'.

Don't be so sure. Some of the sects running around in the U.S. have 40+ year old members in their "youth" sections. :lol:

[Lyev]

Trotskyism isn't unity of the working class. It seperates itself from other working class movements. YRS does not, we accept all socialists who want to learn more about socialism and revolution. Most people who have joined are non-doctrinaire anyways. Hence the name United Marxist. We want to unite all marxist ideologies so that we can form a new way to approach communism.The separation is not volitional and, with all due respect, I am afraid you will be in exactly the same boat as everyone else for quite some time -- with only 3 members in a week-old organisation, you are very separate from any workers' movements. There also seems to be a lapse between 'socialists' and 'working class movements' in your logic. You say that, in an effort to disassociate yourself with any sects and doctrinaire groups (i.e., 'Trotskyism') that the 'Youth of Revolutionary Socialists' is not apart or distinct from workers in their daily struggles. Following on from that, you say, 'we accept all socialists' -- but this does not mean that your any more or less open to the much wider and more general working class movement. The same formula of a merger between non-communist workers with the much more divided and smaller Marxist movement still stands. Do you get my drift?
I am not trying to be disparaging or anything by the way, just some thoughts.

[Proukunin]

We want to unite all Marxist tendencies so we can show that you can wither away the differences between Maoism, Marxist-Leninism, Trotskyism, Stalinism and all other -ism's in the communist movement. If we are going to unite a working class we'll have to work with Stalinists also. To get a majority of the working class to unite. But I believe that by bringing together all communist sects. We can have a stronger communist movement.

[Sam_b]

Hardline Stalinists may be excluded from some leaderships due to the sectarianism of Stalinism

This is a bit ironic, if you don't mind me saying.

Also, if 'Trotskyism isn't [for] unity of the working class', which I disagree with; why would you ever accept those into the fold who don't stand for such a unity you propegise?

[Proukunin]

If you are accepting the role of being in a united marxist group you are accepting to stand for unity in all aspects. That is what the group has proposed from the beginning. Unity within ALL marxist tendencies.

I didn't say they weren't for unity. I said that Trotskyism isn't unity. What I mean by this is that the failure of Trotskyist groups to work with Hoxhaists and Stalinists is diving up the working class also. If there is going to be pure unity in a working class movement, I feel there should be pure unity between all tendencies within Communism.

[28350]

Why are you doing this?
Rather, what do you hope to achieve?

[Proukunin]

Why are you doing this?
Rather, what do you hope to achieve?


I thought I made it pretty clear.
Why is this so hard to understand?? We want the whole communist movement to be one big united force. Instead of Stalinist, Hoxhaist, Trotskyist, Maoist, Leninist, and so on. Instead why not just be Communist? Communists together fighting for the same goal. Working together on different aspects of their ideologies.

[Sam_b]

TBH, this rationale is pretty hard to understand because it doesn't make that much sense. There's no reason that there cannot be 'one big united force' with you being in Revolution, or me being ISJ, Lyev being CWI or whatever. We build working class organisational movements through a bunch of things, primarily industrial intervention and of course the united front. There is no problem having Trot or Hoxhaist organisations, primarily for the reason that these are not intended to be 'mass' parties, but strategic and tactical formations for a development of class struggle through engagement with the wider class itself. If you are suggesting that your organisation is to amass all leftists to be 'one big united force', there are problems here:

1. You are explicitly a youth organisation. How is this in-going with the building of a united left force?
2. If you've developed this organisation with the intention of it being the 'one big united force' then this is sectarian, as it assumes that the organisation is somehow 'one over' the class and has its interests put before the class itself in the goal of it being the only mass movement.
3. If none of this applies, then why not stay in the old organisation and work within the structures of united fronts?

There's nothing stopping a group developing its own strategy along the lines of its ideological tradition, and joining you and other organisations in united fronts. Political organisations are not exclusively a barrier to building a mass movement. This is the thing that people here are questioning, becuase the line seems a bit confused. If anything, it's good practice for having to make these arguments to others when you are recruiting.

[Kassad]

Multi-tendency organizations have been attempted before. Multi-tendency organizations that are nearly identical to this one exist presently. Multi-tendency organizations also tend to be theoretical hair-splitters because they unite for a brief period before they begin fighting internally and the organization eventually either splits or implodes. There are revolutionary organizations that exist already that are growing and building the struggle for socialism. Why is this necessary at all?