What's the deal about tendencies?

[ComradeFelix]

Greetings comrades,

I'm new to the whole coming into contact with other communists thing and I'm always at a loss when I get asked what particular strand I follow.

I've read most of Marx and Engels and ever since I was in high school, I thought that was all I really needed. My grandfather, who fought in the Spanish Civil war for the cause of Marxism, taught me the very basics of communism and never introduced me to the different approaches to it. He always mentioned Trotsky as being a hero of the worker but he never explained past that.

I guess my question is, where should I start my education about the "tendencies" as they're called?

Thanks!

[Tommy4ever]

You may or may not know that lots of different Leftwing groups hate eachother and have very different ideas about how to achieve revolution and what to do afterwards. Most tendencies are named after a major thinker and follow their ideas:

For example Trotskyists support the ideas of Trotsky, Maoists support the ideas of Mao ...

You could look at some of the group descriptions here and mabye check out the wikipedia articles for a start. Then I guess you could read some books by the various major figures.

Here are a few of the 'big guns':

Bakunin
Kropotkin (two Anarchists there)

Marx
Engels
Lenin
Trotsky
Rosa Luxemburg
Mao (not the greatest thinker but very influencial, his ideas are also pretty far removed from most of Marxism)

Between them most 'isms' can be traced to this lot.

[Savage]

Keep in mind that it isn't neccisarry to subscribe to a a particular tendancy, even If it's important to understand these tendencies when navigating through history, developing your own consciousness, supporting organizations etc.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

I think you're on the right track as you are, don't fall into the dogmatic cesspit of tendencies. This is coming from an ex post-homosexualist-stalino-maoist-trostkyist-anarcho-juchist.

Tendencies in Marxism are like all the different branches of Christianity I think, Marx would die all over again if he could see it bless his little cotton socks.

Oh and the thing about anarchism is the fact that it can work with a lot of Marxist theory (should you find it necessary) and its not very sectarian.

[Zanthorus]

Basically ostensibly revolutionary groups disagree with one another on pretty much everything. When these conflicts emerged in history those on the opposing sides would usually attack the other as '[insert name here]ists]'. For example, when the First International split on the question of working-class political action, Bakunin attacked his opponents as 'Marxists'. Similarly, 'Leninism' was coined by the Mensheviks, and 'Bordigism' by Stalinists and Trotskyists. Some groups cried about 'nameism' and instead gave themselves boring names like 'Anarchism', whereas others embraced it to spite the groups who gave them names related to individuals in the first place. My preference is for tendencies named after a specific individual, because otherwise we wouldn't be able to get the hilarious posts about how everyone who subscribes to a particular 'nameism' is comparable to a religious fundamentalist, and in general the people whining about 'nameism' give entertainment which would be sorely missed if we all joined boringly named tendencies. But if you want to be an anti-nameist I guess that's your perogative.

[ckaihatsu]

While there's much solidarity inherent to the various revolutionary tendencies all in opposition to capitalist rule, it's worth keeping in mind that political positions are *objectively* defined in terms of one's relation to the means of mass industrial production.

Opportunism can be found in the extent to which one "softens" from their objective material interest to oppose continued capitalist domination. So, for example, saying that socialism can be accomplished in one country alone -- Stalinism -- is *opportunistic* compared to the workers of the *world* uniting to overthrow capitalist rule *everywhere*, on a *class* basis.


[3] Ideologies & Operations -- Fundamentals

http://postimage.org/image/34modgv1g/


Ideologies & Operations -- Left Centrifugalism

http://postimage.org/image/1g4s6wax0/

http://postimage.org/image/2cvo2d7fo/

[PhoenixAsh]

The thing with tendencies is that they are al, wrong...except when they are Anarchist.

It pretty much boils down to this. :D


But seriously...


Several issues cause a lot of discussion and heated arguments. Some of the more important ones are:

non-authoritarian - authoritarian
DOTR - nonDOTR
Vanguardism
Unionisation and the role of workers unions
Revolutionary class & class consciousness
Role of violence

And pretty much all name-ism discussions will end up in flame wars.
As will discussions about hirstorical controversial events.
As will anything related to the current revolutions in the ME and North-Africa.


It goes like this...

Anarchists dislike MLs for being a bunch of know it alls who tell you what to do. MLs dislike the Anarchists who are misguided children running amok. Stalinists still do not like Trotskyists because of the whole Germany thing. Trokyists still do not like Stalinists because of the whole ice-pick thing. Left communists dislike Bolsheviks for being wrong. Anarchists dislike Trotskyists for the whole Kronstadt thing....also they dislike Stalinists for the whole bully thing. Stalinists pretty much dislike everybody except MLs and on some occasions Maoists. Jucheists think everybody is wrong because North Korea is the bestest Korea and Juche is the new Marxism...everybody laughs at them. Maoists dislike the Marxists for the whole peasant thing. And everybody thinks the Democratic Socialists are weird.

So...eventually you are goign to get somebody pissed. Don't worry about it. Since whatever position you will take...it will undoubtedly be that you have allies and opponents...depending on the position and topic.

;)

[RedTrackWorker]

Greetings comrades,

I'm new to the whole coming into contact with other communists thing and I'm always at a loss when I get asked what particular strand I follow.

I've read most of Marx and Engels and ever since I was in high school, I thought that was all I really needed. My grandfather, who fought in the Spanish Civil war for the cause of Marxism, taught me the very basics of communism and never introduced me to the different approaches to it. He always mentioned Trotsky as being a hero of the worker but he never explained past that.

I guess my question is, where should I start my education about the "tendencies" as they're called?

I'm obviously a supporter of a particular group and encourage you to read out material, but at the same time, it's hard to say where to "start" and I (and my group) basically require people in conversation with us to study other groups as well.
But--Trotsky recommended this once--it might be good to pick one topic or event and look into that in depth. Some of the important differences between groups will only come out with more in depth study and looking at too many topics can make those hard to see. One could definitely do worse than looking at the Spanish Civil War and the political debates around that. It may not by itself lead you to a particular group today but it could illumine the method and the theory to find that group (if that makes sense and isn't too abstract).
But given we have the first workers' revolutions of decades going on, looking at Tunisia and Egypt and examining different groups' approaches would hopefully be really fruitful for you in examining what sets groups apart from each other in their relationship to the workers' movement. Feel free to get in touch for more specific recommendations or conversations about that or other topics.

[Commissar Rykov]

The reality is we are all crazy and froth at the mouth. We always need more sacrifi....uhhh recruits and thus will bother you like an overeager Jehovah Witness to hear the real truth. Needless to say don't listen to the rest of these heathens Uncle Joe knows the true path to enlightenment!

On a more serious note I would suggest checking out marxists.org and do some of your own research.

[hatzel]

Hey! Welcome to the forum. Let's get down to business...


He always mentioned Trotsky as being a hero of the worker but he never explained past that.

We can safely assume, therefore, that your grandfather was a Trotskyist. If you look back fondly on what he had to say and consider it in a positive light, then who knows, maybe you're a potential Trot yourself! :lol: To be honest, I'd suggest you probably start there, kind of...going back to your roots, read a bit of Trotsky and see how that fits in with how you understand stuff. Or, if you want to be really lazy, just check Wikipedia or something for the basics...and if it doesn't, then maybe you can consider the other thinkers mentioned. Chances are that if you have specific ideas of what you agree with, and what you criticise, you'll be able to say here 'hey, this is what I agree with, and this is what I criticise' and somebody might be able to tell you what tendency agrees with you in that respect. Or you could give us an overview of some of your ideas now, if you're already solid in the basics...I dunno...I'm going to stop typing...

[The Anarchist]

I'm stuck here too, but I'm an anarchist. Unfortunately I was born into a family of close-minded cappies, so I didn't receive much information. Also, it doesn't help that Anarchism is slightly obscure.

Could someone point me in the right direction?

[hatzel]

Also, it doesn't help that Anarchism is slightly obscure.

Oh, c'mon, there's nothing obscure about anarchism :lol: What kind of stuff have you already read? And what is it exactly that draws you towards anarchism over some other tendency? Or...what are your major interests in the field? Do you want to read something about sociology or whatever, or economic organisation, techniques of implementation...? So many questions all the time in these learning threads!

[Phonic]

Anarchism isn't obscure to anyone with even basic political knowledge, anarchism could once call upon the support of millions, that's a big deal to me.

[Bronco]

I'm stuck here too, but I'm an anarchist. Unfortunately I was born into a family of close-minded cappies, so I didn't receive much information. Also, it doesn't help that Anarchism is slightly obscure.

Could someone point me in the right direction?

I'd say there's more disparity between the "isms" of Anarchism than those of Communism, you've got Anarcho-Capitalists, Anarcho-Communists, Anarcho-Syndicalists, Anarcho-Primitivists etc etc.

Just do some reading around the subject, there's plenty of stuff out there on the different tendencies.

[The Anarchist]

Anarchism isn't obscure to anyone with even basic political knowledge, anarchism could once call upon the support of millions, that's a big deal to me.

Maybe it's just obscure in my world. I picked it because I believe in freedom.
Anarchism is the path to freedom without adding more control.

Nobody I know has a clue, not even my social teachers in highschool knew what I was going on about. They all provided the same lame response that it means chaos.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Oh, c'mon, there's nothing obscure about anarchism :lol:

How is it not obscure in the sense that most people won't know what a Class Struggle Anarchist agenda is? It is an obscure part of the political spectrum, the dominant political force within capitalist society is liberal-conservative thought and the nature of capitalism is to push anything else to the way side, out of the mainstream.

[hatzel]

...to be honest, I thought we were talking about 'obscure' with a somewhat different meaning...to use Wiktionary definitions, anarchism is perhaps somewhat obscure in as much as it is 'hidden, out of sight or inconspicuous' (though some might debate that), but it's not obscure meaning 'dark, faint or indistinct', nor is it 'difficult to understand', which is what I thought we meant in this context :)

[ComradeFelix]

Well, it's been a few months and I've completely neglected this post after being inundated with summer university work. The thread is probably dead
but, thanks for the advice! Sometimes the simplest thing to do is exactly as you said, "going back to your roots." I'm definitely going to try that.

One thing that I did begin to consider however was how strange it is that we're all on the internet discussing communism, anti-capitalism, etc. while doing little else. Is it justifiable? Maybe it just seems somewhat hypocritical to me because I knew someone who actually went, fought (literally) for what he believed and saw friends die for it.
Any thoughts?


Hey! Welcome to the forum. Let's get down to business...



We can safely assume, therefore, that your grandfather was a Trotskyist. If you look back fondly on what he had to say and consider it in a positive light, then who knows, maybe you're a potential Trot yourself! :lol: To be honest, I'd suggest you probably start there, kind of...going back to your roots, read a bit of Trotsky and see how that fits in with how you understand stuff. Or, if you want to be really lazy, just check Wikipedia or something for the basics...and if it doesn't, then maybe you can consider the other thinkers mentioned. Chances are that if you have specific ideas of what you agree with, and what you criticise, you'll be able to say here 'hey, this is what I agree with, and this is what I criticise' and somebody might be able to tell you what tendency agrees with you in that respect. Or you could give us an overview of some of your ideas now, if you're already solid in the basics...I dunno...I'm going to stop typing...

[Welshy]

One thing that I did begin to consider however was how strange it is that we're all on the internet discussing communism, anti-capitalism, etc. while doing little else. Is it justifiable? Maybe it just seems somewhat hypocritical to me because I knew someone who actually went, fought (literally) for what he believed and saw friends die for it.
Any thoughts?

Most of the people on here are active in the real world with political parties or organizations. Talking online and doing stuff in the real world aren't mutually exclusive.

[eyeheartlenin]

Dear hindsight20/20: Your explanatory paragraph beginning, "It goes like this.... Anarchists dislike MLs for ..." is priceless! May I quote it on-line?

With commie greetings,
eyeheartlenin

[Seresan]

I'd sooner create my own sect than submit my beliefs to those of someone else. Tendancies are basically when people find someone they like and are too lazy to think out the rest of their own beliefs.