Marxist Organizations

[Die Rote Fahne]

So, I've been looking into joining a Marxist organization, or party, and I am still unsure what's right for me.

I've noticed among others, that the IMT, IST, WIL, etc. seem pretty appealing to me. I'm interested in the IST because I am also interested in Tony Cliff somewhat.

So, can anyone try to convince me of an organization? Preferably not a Marxist-Leninist one...

[Искра]

If you join IST you'll sell a lot of papers.

[Die Rote Fahne]

Why's that? haha

[Die Rote Fahne]

Also, the only problem I have with the IST, that I can see right now, is their support for all national liberation movements.

[Smyg]

Why's that? haha

Trotskyists. Their newspaper is their god. I know from personal experience, albeit now with these in particular.

[mrmikhail]

So, I've been looking into joining a Marxist organization, or party, and I am still unsure what's right for me.

I've noticed among others, that the IMT, IST, WIL, etc. seem pretty appealing to me. I'm interested in the IST because I am also interested in Tony Cliff somewhat.

So, can anyone try to convince me of an organization? Preferably not a Marxist-Leninist one...

The WIL is the IMT association in the USA, so you'd be joining the Canadian affiliate of the IMT rather than WIL, if you were to choose such. I'd recommend it though, we are a growing movement gaining a lot of momentum these days, especially in the US. Fightback (http://www.marxist.ca/) is the Canadian section of the IMT.

The IST is seemingly very unorganised and do not do much at all, except as previously noted...write a lot of newspapers and everyone follows what the SWP of Britain does, doesn't really have a large following outside the UK and, now apparently, Egypt where they managed to pull off the formation of a labour party. But I am not really a fan of Cliff's ideas of the USSR/Stalinism as State Capitalism and so on.


But the IMT, now that is where it's at ;)

[promethean]

So, I've been looking into joining a Marxist organization, or party, and I am still unsure what's right for me.

I've noticed among others, that the IMT, IST, WIL, etc. seem pretty appealing to me. I'm interested in the IST because I am also interested in Tony Cliff somewhat.

So, can anyone try to convince me of an organization? Preferably not a Marxist-Leninist one...
Do you still consider yourself a Luxemburgist? If so, why do you want to join the IST, which is Trotskyist? There are no Luxemburgist parties, as far as I am aware, since Luxemburgism itself a non-existent tendency. Luxemburg's heritage has been adopted by almost every self-proclaimed 'Marxist', from Stalinists to Trotskyists to Left communists. There seems to be no point in calling oneself a Luxemburgist in that case. You might as well start evaluating your own politics with relation to the positions held by the actually existing 'Marxist' organizations and perhaps joining one in the future. As far as I am aware, one does not need to be a genuine Trotskyist to join a Trotskyist party, since most of them just seem to exist to endlessly recruit people without any consideration of whether they accept their political positions or not.

[Искра]

IST supports Hezbollah as far as I know, but they had one of the best bands ever - The Redskins, so I vote for them :D

[Die Rote Fahne]

Do you still consider yourself a Luxemburgist? If so, why do you want to join the IST, which is Trotskyist?The lack of Luxemburgist organizations, and my appreciation of Trotsky and Tony Cliff's appreciation of Luxemburg and her ideas.

Though, since you seem adamant that Luxemburgism is "non-existent", I'll link you to a Luxemburgist organization. http://www.luxemburgism.lautre.net/


There are no Luxemburgist parties, as far as I am aware, since Luxemburgism itself a non-existent tendency.It is a tendency. As is clear by those who distinguish themselves as such. Would you care to explain, in detail, why it is not, or should not be considered one?


Luxemburg's heritage has been adopted by almost every self-proclaimed 'Marxist', from Stalinists to Trotskyists to Left communists.All Marxists should adopt and be appreciative of actual Marxists; the same way I appreciate Trotsky, Gramsci, etc. yet have my differing views.


There seems to be no point in calling oneself a Luxemburgist in that case. You might as well start evaluating your own politics with relation to the positions held by the actually existing 'Marxist' organizations and perhaps joining one in the future.So, I should abondon my agreements with Luxemburg, especially in the case of her disagreements with Lenin and Trotsky, and just proclaim something else, just because the Luxemburgist tendency is small. Yeah, not going to happen. A Luxemburgist is anyone who agrees with the bulk of Luxmeburg's ideas. Leninsts and Trots may be influenced, but they clearly do not agree with her.


As far as I am aware, one does not need to be a genuine Trotskyist to join a Trotskyist party, since most of them just seem to exist to endlessly recruit people without any consideration of whether they accept their political positions or not.Clearly you are unaware of Tony Cliff's appreciation of Luxemburg. In fact, Trotsky wrote an article "Hands off Rosa Luxemburg! (http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1932/06/luxemberg.htm)" aimed at Stalin for his locating of Luxemburg as a centrist.

Regardless, numerous Trotskyists explicitly express that one of their influences was Luxemburg. However we have different views of things such as centralism, the vanguard structure, right to self determination, the agrarian question, permanent revolution, what the USSR was, spontaneity etc.

[promethean]

Not sure if this should be in Chit Chat.


The lack of Luxemburgist organizations, and my appreciation of Trotsky and Tony Cliff's appreciation of Luxemburg and her ideas.

Though, since you seem adamant that Luxemburgism is "non-existent", I'll link you to a Luxemburgist organization. http://www.luxemburgism.lautre.net/

It is a tendency. As is clear by those who distinguish themselves as such. Would you care to explain, in detail, why it is not, or should not be considered one?

All Marxists should adopt and be appreciative of actual Marxists; the same way I appreciate Trotsky, Gramsci, etc. yet have my differing views.

So, I should abondon my agreements with Luxemburg, especially in the case of her disagreements with Lenin and Trotsky, and just proclaim something else, just because the Luxemburgist tendency is small. Yeah, not going to happen. A Luxemburgist is anyone who agrees with the bulk of Luxmeburg's ideas. Leninsts and Trots may be influenced, but they clearly do not agree with her.
From a historical perspective, Luxemburgism has never existed. This is as compared to other real world tendencies like Trotskyism, Stalinism or Left communism, which have actually had historical roles to play in the struggles of the working class. Marxists usually trace the traditions of thought beginning with the First International and continuing to the Second and Third Internationals. If you knew anything at all about the German revolution itself, you would know that there was no such thing as a 'Luxemburgist' party there as such, unless you are going to describe the Spartacists as 'Luxemburgists'. This would be historically inaccurate since the Spartacists themselves did not call themselves so. They considered themselves as Orthodox Marxists originating from the Othodox Marxist Second International, who had broken with the social-patriotic practices of the Second International. The organization you linked to seems to be more of a Luxemburg appreciation society than anything originating from a historical tradition. On the other hand, for example, Left communism actually played a major role in the German revolution. Left communists did not agree with Luxemburg while she was alive. After her death however, they discovered her writings and mostly incorporated much of her thought into their politics.


Clearly you are unaware of Tony Cliff's appreciation of Luxemburg. I am aware of that and of Cliff's attempt to break away from mainstream Trotskyism claiming inspiration from Luxemburg. This does not really mean much, since Cliff himself supported national liberation, which was something Luxemburg did not support.


Regardless, numerous Trotskyists explicitly express that one of their influences was Luxemburg. So does every other Marxist tendency.


However we have different views of things such as centralism, the vanguard structure, right to self determination, the agrarian question, permanent revolution, what the USSR was, spontaneity etc. So, you disagree with pretty much every political stance of the organisation you want to join. I don't see how a self proclaimed 'Luxemburgist' can join a Trotskyist organisation and still claim to be a 'Luxemburgist'.

[Die Rote Fahne]

Not sure if this should be in Chit Chat.It would have been fine, but you decided to argue tendencies. So, wherever the mods deem it fit to be.


From a historical perspective, Luxemburgism has never existed.I agree to a point. This term came about from those who were attacked for supporting her ideas -- not just her as a revolutionary. They were called Luxemburgists, and ended up adopting the term to themselves.


This is as compared to other real world tendencies like Trotskyism, Stalinism or Left communism, which have actually had historical roles to play in the struggles of the working class. Just because few if no, I will argue the Spartacus League, were self-proclaimed "Luxemburgists" does not magically strike her ideas, or the fact that her ideas HAS inspired a unique tendency, from the tables.

Her ideas played a big role in the Spartacus league, and the origins of the German Communist Party.


Marxists usually trace the traditions of thought beginning with the First International and continuing to the Second and Third Internationals. If you knew anything at all about the German revolution itself, you would know that there was no such thing as a 'Luxemburgist' party there as such, unless you are going to describe the Spartacists as 'Luxemburgists'. This would be historically inaccurate since the Spartacists themselves did not call themselves so. They adhered to her ideas, as she was a leader, and founder. Why would the majority decide to follow her if they were against her? She believed in democracy, and if they had chosen another leader she would have been fine.


They considered themselves as Orthodox Marxists originating from the Othodox Marxist Second International, who had broken with the social-patriotic practices of the Second International. I consider Luxemburg an Orthodox Marxist, as do many.


The organization you linked to seems to be more of a Luxemburg appreciation society than anything originating from a historical tradition. On the other hand, for example, Left communism actually played a major role in the German revolution. Left communists did not agree with Luxemburg while she was alive. After her death however, they discovered her writings and mostly incorporated much of her thought into their politics.Left Communism is useless, to be frank. Luxemburg agreed much more with Lenin, than she would have with the left communists.


I am aware of that and of Cliff's attempt to break away from mainstream Trotskyism claiming inspiration from Luxemburg. This does not really mean much, since Cliff himself supported national liberation, which was something Luxemburg did not support. Okay, I beleive I mentioned that up top somewhere...I guess you don't read my posts.


So does every other Marxist tendency.I've never heard of any Stalinists, Maoists, Leninists, etc who claim to have ideological agreement with the majority, if any, of Luxemburg's thought.


So, you disagree with pretty much every political stance of the organisation you want to join. I don't see how a self proclaimed 'Luxemburgist' can join a Trotskyist organisation and still claim to be a 'Luxemburgist'.How do I disagree with pretty much everything?

Simple. By not selling out within the organization. I'm sorry that, unlike you, I support unity between the tendencies to democratically debate within a single working class party, and lay with the decision of the majority vote.

[Die Rote Fahne]

Are there any non-aligned organizations? Like, just Marxist, with no affiliation to a particular tendency?

[Искра]

I hate to ask this, but in which century do you live in?

[Die Rote Fahne]

I hate to ask this, but in which century do you live in?:(

I'm aware there are like none, but even an obscure one would be cool. I have no qualms with joining a Trotskyist org, but still.

[Welshy]

Why's that? haha

I was in the ISO (formerly a member of the IST) and I was at the protests against the governor in Michigan and there were some other members there who were trying to start a branch at one of our universities. I saw them so I went over to them and they had me sell papers the entire time I was with them and it prevented me from really having any conversations with workers (I suck at talking to strangers as it was), and I had to work my way out so I could go inside. At every event I went to as a member of the ISO I had to sell papers, and so did everyone else.

EDIT:

Warning shameless self advertisement:


Are there any non-aligned organizations? Like, just Marxist, with no affiliation to a particular tendency?

Well the Workers' Party in America doesn't hold to any particular tendency, but there isn't a branch in Canada. However, if you are interested at all in the party, don't let the fact that there's no branch get in the way. The party leadership is really good in helping out supporters or members who are not near a branch. For example I'm not near any branch and if I need something, I just contact party leadership (or someone else in party I know) and they help with what I need in pretty timely fashion. Contact Miles (or CotR) for more info.

[Iraultzaile Ezkerreko]

I was in the ISO (formerly a member of the IST) and I was at the protests against the governor in Michigan and there were some other members there who were trying to start a branch at one of our universities. I saw them so I went over to them and they had me sell papers the entire time I was with them and it prevented me from really having any conversations with workers (I suck at talking to strangers as it was), and I had to work my way out so I could go inside. At every event I went to as a member of the ISO I had to sell papers, and so did everyone else.

I'll preface my comments with this: "Branch culture is bound to differ in an organization as large and geographically distant as the ISO."

My experience in a year as a member of the ISO and in Building a branch in the south is that selling the paper is actually a great way to start conversations with people out in public. In Atlanta, especially in regards to the Troy Davis movement, we were able to both sell the paper on demos and actively intervene in the struggle on behalf of revolutionary politics by arguing against statements made by speakers about voting for the Democrats and winning masses of people to a radical un-permitted march through the streets of Atlanta instead of going home quietly after being lectured by the elite at the King Center. As always, balance is necessary for these tactics and actions to be successful, both in the short and long run.

@ DRF: As regards suggestions for parties or groups in Canada, I'd probably suggest the New Socialist Group or International Socialists. Though, through reading your posts, I'd say you are probably more in agreement with the NSG than the IS.

[Grigori]

Although collaboration is good, i really don't think it is such a good idea to be a openly card carrying member of a leftist group. Capitalists have purges too. It is best to work from the shadows.

[Magón]

I was going to mention that International Luxemburgist Network, but it seems you already know about them.