Contemporary politics

[Prinskaj]

How should we, the revolutionary left, act in discussing contemporary political subjects, such as social programs, austerity and the likes?
I am recently having a bit of trouble with falling into old Keynesian habits while discussing economics, due to a past of being a social democrat.
And is there any works, books, etc. on the subject?

[Ostrinski]

Usually we just have knee jerk responses to the effect of "welp bourgeois state so"

[Brosa Luxemburg]

Well, I think we should fight things like austerity, attack on trade unions (yes, they are bourgeois and reformist), etc. because they are an assault on the proletariat. What should actively take place alongside this, though, is organizing these disillusioned sectors of the working class into a revolutionary organization (I would argue a party) that would fight for socialism. This party should support the workers that do fight against these things but connect them to a larger framework about capitalism. Actually (like the loyal Bordigist I am) here is a quote from Amadeo Bordiga on this.


The most important task of a genuine communist party is to keep always in closest touch with the broadest masses of the proletariat. In order to do that, communists can and should also be active in associations which, though they are not party organisations, have large proletarian groups among their members...The Russian example of the so-called "non- parties" workers' and peasants' conferences is particularly important...Communists consider it their most important task to carry on the work of organisation and instruction in a systematic fashion within these wider workers' organisations. But in order to do this successfully, in order to prevent the enemies of the revolutionary proletariat from taking possession of these broad workers' organisations, the advanced communist workers must have their own independent tightly-knit communist party, which acts always in an organised way and which is able, at every turn of events and whatever form the movement takes, to look after the general interests of communism.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

Usually we just have knee jerk responses to the effect of "welp bourgeois state so"

Well, I mean, it is somewhat understandable considering the reformism that could come about by not keeping in mind it is a bourgeois state and so change can only happen on a limited scale.

[The Idler]

We shouldn't deny that they might aid workers in the short term but rights granted by benign rulers can be taken away, only a emancipated empowered majority would be able to enforce its own rights.

[The Intransigent Faction]

How should we, the revolutionary left, act in discussing contemporary political subjects, such as social programs, austerity and the likes?
I am recently having a bit of trouble with falling into old Keynesian habits while discussing economics, due to a past of being a social democrat.
And is there any works, books, etc. on the subject?

Yeah it's tricky not to get caught falling into those habits when discussing these issues. Because we live in a capitalist world, their ideology and assumptions tend to frame our discussions, so it's tough to insist on not discussing things on their terms without getting the same old tired accusation of being a utopian hippy.

There are of course disputes within the revolutionary left about how best to handle contemporary issues in the context of the present capitalist world, so I suspect that if you're looking for some definitive approach labelled "revolutionary leftist approach to issue x", you won't have much luck.

Blatantly stating a socialist/communist position from the start in a discussion may not always be the best thing to do, but people opposed to reformist solutions, let alone to the status quo, cannot afford to be afraid to be unapologetic in their socialist/communist positions.
There's a lot of material that explains different leftist perspectives in a discussion of current issues, of course, but as far as how to discuss them...maybe someone else here has some useful material.

A lot of it really depends on who you're talking to---if you're trying to persuade a misguided but sympathetic social democrat, obviously a different response is called for than if you're confronted with reactionary ideas.

It can be tiring to get into such a broad discussion too often, but it's important that when a communist discusses austerity, for example, he or she points out why it shows an inherent flaw in the current system rather than just suggesting reforms because this may be seen as 'less extreme' or more appealing to some people.

[JPSartre12]

I think that, in the short term, we need to ally ourselves with anyone who shares the same anti-austerity and pro-labor tendencies that we have.

I know that working with bourgeois liberals sort of turns my stomach a little, but right now I think that it's important to educate and organize everyone that we can to oppose the neoliberal agenda. I'd rather we nip the right-wing Tea Party's agenda in the bud before it actually grows into a legitimate nationalist movement.

[Book O'Dead]

How should we, the revolutionary left, act in discussing contemporary political subjects, such as social programs, austerity and the likes?
I am recently having a bit of trouble with falling into old Keynesian habits while discussing economics, due to a past of being a social democrat.
And is there any works, books, etc. on the subject?

I think that one thing that a revolutionary can do to make sense about the dilemma between reform and revolution is to read something by Daniel De Leon:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/deleon/works/1896/960126.htm

[aty]

We need to show the left-bourgeois(keynesians, neokeynesians, postkeynesians) and the right-bourgeois(neo-classics, austrians, chicago-school) that capitalism is just strictly impossible.

I think there are some good advancements being done by marxist economicans such as Andrew Kliman and his new book "The failure of capitalist production".
I think this critique by Brendan McCooney on David Harvey among others is spot on:
http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/2012/03/10/the-enigma-of-the-enigma-my-critique-of-david-harvey-for-the-left-forum/

We have to formulate a new revolutionary theory that simply states just as Marx did, capitalism dont function for the working class. We must formulate and fight for a different mode of production. We cant reform capitalism, that is impossible.

Our critique against the keynesians must be just as fierce as against the "austerians". Especially in Europe at the moment this is surely very obvious.
You cant save yourself out of a crisis, it does not produce any growth and the economy get trapped in a death spiral. Especially today when capital is global and individual countries cant depend on other countries to lift them up out of the crisis, if one fall all fall.
You cant lend more money to invest yourself out of the crisis, this will just build a bigger bubble that will burst later and everything will become just as bad as before. Paul Krugman is a fucking lunatic.


I must add that the keynesian agenda opens up a room for fascists to blame "the jew" or "immigrants on welfare", this is the most dangerous thing. This is why we have to totally forget keynesiansm and blame the whole system of captialism, then you cant blame groups of people as the fascists but you have to blame the system as such. Revolutionary politics shut the door for fascism.