Discuss defining and uniting the Left...

[DeBon]

I've been seeing a lot of people on this forum say things about how the Socialists/Communists lack blueprints or strategy, how disorganized we are, how there are several different versions of these ideas that, in some cases, keep us from uniting. So, let's see what RevLeft thinks. What would be your ideal 'blueprints'? Or your strategy for a left America.

[FuzzypegX]

I think the problem, first of all, is establishing where sufficient ideological overlap exists for any kind of meaningful unity. Just trying to pin-down the different currents of Socialism/Communism are difficult enough, particularly when one includes non-Marxist currents (e.g. most anarchism). Assuming one is exclusively talking about Marxist currents, then there is the problem of fundamental antagonisms between Leninist currents (Marxism-Leninism and Trotskyism) and non-Leninist currents (Luxemburgism etc.) and then further major antagonisms within these two camps (particularly between Trotskyism and M-L).

Clearly, material unity is important and, arguably, necessary, but as Lenin puts it:

"Before we can unite, and in order that we may unite, we must first of all draw firm and definite lines of demarcation."

Furthermore, in order to be meaningful these lines of demarcation would have to be drawn, in my opinion, in a formal fashion by the major parties on the left in any given country - which would necessitate some kind of prior cross-party dialogue such as is lacking in most major countries at the moment.

With all this having been said, I think the reality is that the fragmentation of the existing Socialist/Communist left in the West is a reflection of the immaturity of the revolutionary period in those countries. As the material circumstances change and the conditions for revolution mature, I would expect to see major unified parties emerge (on the basis of the demonstration of the material accuracy of their particular theories/slogans).

[Rusty Shackleford]

the best thing that i could imagine would just be organizations that are relatively similar merging within their own tendency. (MLs and MLs for example)

[TheGodlessUtopian]

the best thing that i could imagine would just be organizations that are relatively similar merging within their own tendency. (MLs and MLs for example)

I would take it a step further and say that when each tendency has its own united party,each tendency would then gradually move towards uniting with the other tendencies.

[Rusty Shackleford]

well, a merger would only come about between certain organizations when material circumstances make it viable and useful.

also, i highly doubt MLs would merge with Left-coms, ever. SPUSA is a multi-tendency organization but i doubt the APL for example, would merge into it.

[a rebel]

Oh the irony, the people who talk about being united the most are separated.

[RadioRaheem84]

Yeah, start with RevLeft!

[Le Socialiste]

The revolutionary left is united in what it views as the end goal of a revolution: that of a stateless, classless society. The problem is we don't all agree on how to get there.