Confused about Party recruitment

[Blanquist]

In another thread there seemed to be a consensus that most parties have very small memberships. Some have just a couple hundred, at most a thousand but even then it might be inflated.

I ask, how is this even possible? If a party has been around for decades, if it has been writing articles and selling newspapers, etc to have such small party member lists?

It's hard to act like it's hard to become a party member, I could probably join any of the party's and they would take me, so it can't be because they put potential members through too much trouble.

Trotsky said every party member must have a few 14 year olds under their wing, to teach them, guide them, and mentor them. Are any Trotzkist parties doing this? If they were they should have thousands of members.

I once read an internal IMT program about recruitment. It talked about the 'ones-and-twos', that they still had just a hundred, but they would grow.

But hasn't that party been around forever? Doesn't Alan Woods fly all over the world meeting Hugo Chavez and giving speeches?

What is so hard about having a party and having EVERYONE know who they are?

[Prometeo liberado]

The reasons are many. Too many people have a highly idealized vision of what becoming a party member entails. Inspiring meetings all the time, secret plotting, organizing marches all day, every day. In reality your lucky if there is an active party holding meetings once a month in your area. People get bored and disillusioned. Some parties like the RCP are so paranoid that you would have to be invited in. I have even heard that the PSL was formed in part because the WWP dragged their feet as far as getting new members in(I don't believe it). And finally some parties fear an influx of new members. What does a revolutionary socialist party have to offer a new cadre today? Not much. Lastly different, new, voices often upset the party hierarchy and you know socialism isn't about asking questions or upsetting the boss. Your question should have been, why do people stay in the party.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Trotsky said every party member must have a few 14 year olds under their wing, to teach them, guide them, and mentor them. Are any Trotzkist parties doing this?

I sure hope not.

[TrotskistMarx]

Dear friend, don't blame the leaders and members of marxist political parties in USA and in other countries for being so low in the amount of members. I said in another post, that I read in a book by Edgar Allan Poe, that for some reason humans tend to love, support and join organizations that are full of luxuries, brightness, pomposity and bright great looks. So that's why it is no wonder that Obama and Mitt Romney with the millions and millions of dollars invested in getting their images and political platforms accross using all kinds of scientific psychological advanced technologies have so many and many millions of supporters and voters. Even if those Obama and Mitt Romney's supporters are aware of how evil Obama and Mitt Romney are, and how Democrats and Republicans only benefit the rich upper classes.

So having said all this, at the end of the day, it all comes down to money. In the real world of politics, the organizations with more money are the ones that succeed. Like Tony Montana in the movie Scarface who said: "First you gotta get the money, after the money comes the power. And after the power comes the girl."

The world left will have to step down from their romantic idealism and become more realistic and think about more ways on how they can get lots of funds to finance the political programs of the leftist parties of this world and how important money and honesty are for a political party to be succesful

PS: Money without honesty leads to party corruption. So that's why I said we need both honesty and funds in order for a leftist movement to be successful. Money without honesty in a political party leads to failure.


.


In another thread there seemed to be a consensus that most parties have very small memberships. Some have just a couple hundred, at most a thousand but even then it might be inflated.

I ask, how is this even possible? If a party has been around for decades, if it has been writing articles and selling newspapers, etc to have such small party member lists?

It's hard to act like it's hard to become a party member, I could probably join any of the party's and they would take me, so it can't be because they put potential members through too much trouble.

Trotsky said every party member must have a few 14 year olds under their wing, to teach them, guide them, and mentor them. Are any Trotzkist parties doing this? If they were they should have thousands of members.

I once read an internal IMT program about recruitment. It talked about the 'ones-and-twos', that they still had just a hundred, but they would grow.

But hasn't that party been around forever? Doesn't Alan Woods fly all over the world meeting Hugo Chavez and giving speeches?

What is so hard about having a party and having EVERYONE know who they are?

[TrotskistMarx]

Hi, indeed, I am objective and I understand the reasons of why many leftist movements in America and in other countries are paranoid as a natural reaction to the threats of the repressive police machinery against leftist parties. Another thing and very important point that you should add to this is that most humans are naturally smart. What I mean is that american families are humans and humans have a natural defense mechanism a survival mechanism. So many american parents and families just don't want their children and families to be involved in left-wing organizations, because they are aware and conscious of how evil the US government has been at obliterating even non-leftist leaders such as JFK and civil war leaders such as Martin Luther King, Malcom X, and even against non-political citizens such as Troy Davis, Trayvon Martin, John Lennon, etc. etc.

People in America are smart and not dumb, they know that Uncle Sham has its itchy fingers of its guns pointed against the US general population. And as we all know the USA national police departments, CIA, FBI and all the wings and tentacles of the USA monster evil Dracula government just enjoys murdering people. It has been murdering people since even before 1776, with the American Holocaust against natives of USA

Even movies like The Bourne Supremacy and CIA movies out there show how US government spies on its citizens, and specially on leftist citizens that are political and electoral threats to the corporate Rockefeller-Rothschilds duopoly dictatorship that we have had in America since 1776.

It requires a super-human power to be a great leftist in America

.



The reasons are many. Too many people have a highly idealized vision of what becoming a party member entails. Inspiring meetings all the time, secret plotting, organizing marches all day, every day. In reality your lucky if there is an active party holding meetings once a month in your area. People get bored and disillusioned. Some parties like the RCP are so paranoid that you would have to be invited in. I have even heard that the PSL was formed in part because the WWP dragged their feet as far as getting new members in(I don't believe it). And finally some parties fear an influx of new members. What does a revolutionary socialist party have to offer a new cadre today? Not much. Lastly different, new, voices often upset the party hierarchy and you know socialism isn't about asking questions or upsetting the boss. Your question should have been, why do people stay in the party.

[Kronsteen]

If a party has been around for decades, if it has been writing articles and selling newspapers, etc to have such small party member lists?

There's a difference between the membership on paper, and membership on the ground.

I've seen parties claim memberships of 10,000 because over 50 years 10,000 people signed a membership form. The facts that almost none were current members, many had dropped out after attending a few meetings, and many were dead was ignored.

The truth is that most parties don't know how many real members they've got, because even when recruitment is high, retention (which is much more diffucult to measure) is usually low. Plus there are members who drop in and out of activity.

The irony is that the parties which best know their membership are those with the most frequent purges. Thus the UK-SLP and the US-ICL both have about 50 members - the former having had (AFAIK) 3 purges in a decade, and the latter throwing members out for 'insufficient participation'.

Finally, the hard core of a party - those who organise all the rest - is a small group. My local UK-SWP branch is considered extremely healthy with about 10 who turn up to every twice-monthly meeting, another 20 who come sometimes...and 2 who arrange meetings, write articles and stay in contact with the central London office.