Sectarianism is Detrimental

[Althusser]

I've really been thinking lately about how hostile we can be, having to do with party affiliation and all-out cult of personality hero worship of Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, etc.

Marxist-Leninists (Stalinists) and Bolshevik-Leninists (Troskyists) have tons of arguments against each other. Trotskyists use Stalin's "socialism in one country" and failed policies to tear him down. Stalinists claim revisionism and call Trotsky a nazi informant. There's plenty of shit flung, but it's really not important.

I feel that organizations with almost identical politics attack each other on the smallest of disagreements, most of which can't really be debated correctly, decades after the endless revisionism and powerful propaganda machine from both sides.

I'd consider myself a Trotskyist, but I don't want to make a debate out of it. Communism has been hurt so much already by so many cult groups and splits because of issues as minor as the debate on whether toilet paper should be pulled from above or below the roll...

Marx had taken note of these types of happenings after the revolutions of 1848 had failed. These sects became angry and without an actual communist system running to legitimize their ideas, organizations started to fight. The universal dogmatic belief system of each hostile organization became more important than actually moving toward the type of system they wanted. Political clarity of each organization trumped goals for the future.

My ultimate question and reason for this thread is...

When the day comes that capitalism is on its last legs, what would Marxist-Leninists and Trotskyists do differently?

I want Marxist-Leninists to tell me what they would do versus what a trot would do.

I want Trotskyists to tell me what they would do versus what a stalinist would do.

Left-Communists and Anarchists, come put your 2 cents in as well. I think it's pretty obvious, but just to be clear... the purpose of this thread is not to start a flame war.

[Comrade Samuel]

First of all I would like to say great idea for a thread, it's not too often we compare what our future plans are because useless squabbling about the past is about all we do these days.

Often one of the main disagreements that is argued to no end about between trotskyists and Marx-leninists is permanent revolution v.s socialism in one country but hypothetically if capitalism was in it's final days and neither had become a reality up to that point what would that mean?

To put it simply: it would mean a huge part of the argument would mean absolutely nothing and we would be back to a point at which both sides are united to bring about world wide communism if I am not mistaken. (please do correct me if I am wrong by the way). This is not to say I think it is a very likely scenario in which capitalism collapses without a socialist state leading the charge but nevertheless I think it puts our disagreements into perspective (and yes I am aware there are other points we disagree on but I belive none of them hold as much weight in future struggles as this).

I think regardless of what sectarianism eventually floods this thread that some good will come of it between our two tendancies.

[Comrade Hill]

In my opinion, this thread is bound to start a flame war of some sort, if people begin comparing their methods of struggle to others. The tendencies have different ways of interpreting history, and since Marxism grounded in historical determinism, many people are going to believe that their version of history (which people view VERY differently across the board) coincides with objective material reality. There's really no compromise, in my opinion. There is just too much conflict regarding history.

I am a Marxist-Leninist, I am at the belief that the best thing to do as far as class struggle depends on the material conditions. If a revolutionary situation does erupt, we are going to use the theory of Marxism-Leninism, which is using a vanguard of the most advanced members of the proletariat, and apply it to the situation. We will garner class consciousness in any form of struggle we can. However, it is our view that historically, the road in which Leon Trotsky chose to take during the pre-USSR time period was very inconsistent and often troubling for the working class and the peasants. Things such as disagreements on SiOC, and the controversy regarding so called "united fronts" are going to prevent them from doing the same things us Marxist-Leninists are willing to do. Trotskyists may want to proceed with action when action is not warranted. When action is warranted, they may be reluctant to proceed.

Thus, our method of struggle, will require groups like Trotskyists, left-communists, and anarchists, to stay out of the way. Sorry, it is nothing personal, and it has nothing to do with sectarianism.

[Os Cangaceiros]

*sigh* the reason there's sectarianism is simply because some ideas are fundamentally incompatable with some other ideas.

[Althusser]

*sigh* the reason there's sectarianism is simply because some ideas are fundamentally incompatable with some other ideas.

You're missing the point of this thread. The point of this thread is to elaborate on these ideas.

[Drosophila]

*sigh* the reason there's sectarianism is simply because some ideas are fundamentally incompatable with some other ideas.

Sectarianism doesn't need to be personal, like it was here on RevLeft before all the assholes got banned. Some ideas are very different from others, but at the same time, aren't we all anti-capitalists?

[Os Cangaceiros]

You're missing the point of this thread. The point of this thread is to elaborate on these ideas.

No offense, but if you have no idea what the aforementioned ideas are, and why they're so contentious, then you must not have a very good knowledge of the history of the left.

If over a century of praxis didn't eliminate them, I don't think singing kumbayah on a message board will.


Sectarianism doesn't need to be personal, like it was here on RevLeft before all the assholes got banned. Some ideas are very different from others, but at the same time, aren't we all anti-capitalists?

If all the assholes got banned, 90% of this forum would be gone.

[eyeheartlenin]

As for what the Stalinists would do if US capitalism were in crisis, that's no mystery. In the 1930's, Gus Hall's CPUSA were big supporters of FDR, the Democratic Party plutocrat/President.

More recently, both editions of Freedom Road Socialist Organization endorsed Barack Obama (whose administration subsequently targeted comrades of the FRSO for repression). So Stalinism is not shy about going the distance for bourgeois politicians.

In contrast, in a crisis of capitalism, Trotskyists would work hard to try to organize a proletarian party independent of the Democrats (and of the bourgeoisie the Democrats represent), to fight for workers' power and a workers' government.

[Drosophila]

If all the assholes got banned, 90% of this forum would be gone.

Really? I haven't seen much lately.

[Althusser]

First of all, anyone who entertains the notion that Trotsky was a "nazi informant" is no Trotskyist; Mr. Hammer and Sickle, the author of the original post, should *definitely* find a different avatar.

I understand completely. I wanted to use something extremely ridiculous. In contrast to the example I used for Stalin, it doesn't fit. I see that. Not at all am I entertaining that notion, I just never felt Stalinists had a great argument against Trots, so I used the fascist collaborator bullshit. I have my bias.

[KurtFF8]

When the day comes that capitalism is on its last legs, what would Marxist-Leninists and Trotskyists do differently?

I want Marxist-Leninists to tell me what they would do versus what a trot would do.

I want Trotskyists to tell me what they would do versus what a stalinist would do.

Left-Communists and Anarchists, come put your 2 cents in as well. I think it's pretty obvious, but just to be clear... the purpose of this thread is not to start a flame war.

Well the problem here is we don't know what kinds of developments will happen to lead to a situation where "capitalism is on its last leg," nor do we know which groups will be involved in what ways that will lead to such a situation (what a sentence that is!)

Some of the most militant marches I've ever been to saw an amazing amount of unity and cohesion amongst various Trotskyist and M-L groups all working together. And that's the only place where unity can be formed: through action. The (in)famous polemics that lead to these lingering divergent "ideologies" were the result of concrete situations and real struggle, not simple abstract political disagreement. The same must be said about potential "Left unity" (something that seems universally desirable in the general and abstract, yet disdained in the particular sometimes)

So I would just say that we don't know how different groups would act differently: we can take cues from how groups have acted over the past X or Y amount of years and try to assume and judge from there though (such a task would certainly result in a sectarian flame war in this thread though)

tl;dr version: I don't know, and we can only know through the real struggle as it unfolds instead of speculation.

[jookyle]

A lot of what separates the two has to do with strategy of taking a "backwards" country into socialism. Permanent Revolution, for example, is in more opposition to stageist theory than it is to socialism in one country. (Personally, I don't see a reason why the two couldn't happen at the same time.) But unless you're living on the one of the handfuls of feudal territories in Africa, than capitalism is already established, in form or another, where you live so the ideas are irrelevant as far as being put into practice goes. It's not 1937 anymore Stalin and Trotsky are dead, time to move forward.

[ckaihatsu]

[W]hether toilet paper should be pulled from above or below the roll...


I can definitively say that it *can't* be from *above* the roll because *that* would be... -- (wait for it) -- too TOP-DOWN...!


x D


We can overcome sectarianism on this by, uh, taking a... *principled position* over, uh, the matter.... (Just don't forget to flush!)

(Sorry -- toilet humor.)


= D

[Ocean Seal]

*sigh* the reason there's sectarianism is simply because some ideas are fundamentally incompatable with some other ideas.
So you're telling me that there are irreconcilable ideas between ML's and Trots that actually manifest themselves today?

[Os Cangaceiros]

There obviously are...just look at reality. There are extremely contentious differences between Trotskyist groups for chrissake.

[o well this is ok I guess]

I remember reading an insurrectionist pamphlet that called for something like mass sectarianism and inventing exclusive languages to use only with your friends.