sup comrades, i am a confused student. ISO or no?

[slum]

so i'm a baby marxist in the states who stumbled onto revolutionary socialism kind of through anti-imperialism and post-colonial studies (i'm currently shedding my post-modernist idealism, don't worry). my university's ISO branch has been courting me for like 6mo now and I'm considering joining, but i've seen some very contradictory things written about the organization and their ideology. i'm on board with everything i hear from their members and their newspaper, but i don't have a very developed political background*. my main interest in them is that they actually do things like have meetings and reading groups and organize public forums, whereas without them i'd just be sitting in a room alone reading and weeping as capitalism in all its obscenity alternately grinds the life from and then shits upon humanity.

*(for example, i can't get straight answers about whether they are a trotskyist group or what. my contact person basically explained the 'state capitalist' theory of the ussr as the reason they don't call themselves trotsyists and i was like 'hey that makes sense' and then i realized i don't actually know what that even means, just that capitalism is bad and i don't like stalin so his state must have been capitalist somehow, right?)

i'm torn between my thirst for company as an emerging leftist and my need to actually participate in the work of the revolutionary project, and my fear that i won't get a chance to read anything other than haymarket books for all eternity (well that and i'm broke and don't have 20$ a month to spare at the moment).

at the same time i don't want to just read as much theory as i can get my hands on and then wind up with some convoluted frankenstein marxism because i didn't get any guidance from living human beings, or wind up in a place where i'm so devoted to my ideological purity that i wind up joining a 5-member group that meets in abandoned underground parking lots and never does anything but slam other organizations in their newspaper. a romantic life, but five dirty leftists does not a vanguard party make.

help me, comrades! tell me where you are and how you got there? or indoctrinate me, i don't much care at this point. or tell me to go home and read more, that works too.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Welcome.

Just be upfront with people. If you want to be involved with activism but arn't convinced of the ISO's positions, then just tell the people you're talking to that. If you really don't agree with our arguments on this or that to the point where you wouldn't want to help build everything we do, then you can still do activism with the ISO. The reason they want you to read these basic books is to see if you agree with our basic political points of agreement or not, try and convince you of some things if we can, or at least illuminate where we might disagree and if it's fundamental or just different perspectives. I joined before we had many Haymarket Books and while I try and read them as much as I can, we've always read various things from some liberals like "The New Jim Crow" to original texts by revolutionaries to complementary or interesting works by radicals not in our specific tradition like Lars T. Lih. We don't read too much from contemporary non-marxist academics or post-modernists - at least not as a group, but it's usually necessary to prioritize readings when done as a branch. So they're asking you to read Haymarket ("Meaning of Marxism" probably) now because they want to go over general politics with you. If you don't have money for books, then there are parallel articles available various places online - just tell them you want to talk about Identity Politics or the Russian Revolution or whatever and they should be able to find some decent articles or pamphlets online to use for a discussion.

As to your specific questions, the ISO is in the tradition of Trotskyism, however we have some disagreements with some of the politics and tactics of what's usually called "Orthodox Trotskyism". A view of Russia as "State Capitalist" rather than a "degenerated worker's state" is the basic way the differences are explained. "The Two Souls of Socialism" is a pamphlet (available online) which is near and dear to my own political development and decision to join the ISO, so I'd recommend reading that and if it sounds reasonable, then I think many of the other issues will be secondary.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Confused student, you say? You'll fit right in with the ISO. ;)

TOO EASY

[slum]

Confused student, you say? You'll fit right in with the ISO. ;)

TOO EASY


lol i should have expected this

truly i have become a caricature of myself

[LOLseph Stalin]

Welcome :).

ISO is considered a Trotskyist group. I don't know too much about them though beyond that so I'll leave that bit to actual ISO members/sympathizers to explain. I'd suggest doing more studying and reading to figure out where you stand on the leftist spectrum.

[Le Socialiste]

my university's ISO branch has been courting me for like 6mo now and I'm considering joining, but i've seen some very contradictory things written about the organization and their ideology.

Could you, if possible, explain the contradictory things you've heard? I only ask because if there are we can try and discuss them (if you like).


my main interest in them is that they actually do things like have meetings and reading groups and organize public forums, whereas without them i'd just be sitting in a room alone reading and weeping as capitalism in all its obscenity alternately grinds the life from and then shits upon humanity.

We're also active in our respective communities (we're not just a talk shop)! At least, most branches strive to be.


*(for example, i can't get straight answers about whether they are a trotskyist group or what. my contact person basically explained the 'state capitalist' theory of the ussr as the reason they don't call themselves trotsyists and i was like 'hey that makes sense' and then i realized i don't actually know what that even means, just that capitalism is bad and i don't like stalin so his state must have been capitalist somehow, right?)

I'd maintain that we're loosely Trotskyist, insofar as we agree with some of Trotsky's analyses but not all of them (like his conclusions on the USSR). So while we seek to interpret, adapt, and put to work some of his works we don't necessarily accept all of them in their totality. In this sense we're not orthodox Trotskists; that is, radicals who uphold and adhere to Trotsky's theories uncritically (or at least strive to preserve them despite their inadequacies).

The ISO is home first and foremost to those who identify Marxism as the overarching framework within which major figures like Lenin, Trotsky, and Luxemburg refined and expanded upon their own contributions. Hence you'll find members who are content in calling themselves Marxists, others Leninists (like myself), and - of course - Trotskyists. We place great emphasis on the practice of drawing from these revolutionary traditions and engaging with them through active praxis. What use is theory after all if it can't be put to the test in the real world? How else would we figure out what works and what doesn't?

As for our organization's 'break' with Trotsky's analysis of the USSR (we assert it was state capitalist), it's not simply a matter of equating the disastrousness of Stalin's policies with capitalism because we find it convenient. Multiple people have attempted to analyze just what exactly the Soviet Union was in terms of its class and economic composition. Some consider it to have been a deformed or degenerated workers' state, or a state where the bourgeoisie had been overthrown but the working-class never held power (despite sections of the economy being nationalized - usually implemented from the top); others argue that it was bureaucratic collectivist, or rather a situation where the state owned the means of production but all surplus (or profit) was distributed amongst the elite party bureaucracy instead of the proletariat; and still others assert that it represented something new entirely, a different model unique to the usual capitalist/communist dichotomy (though what it actually is/was varies wildly depending on who you ask in this case).

The ISO contends that the Soviet Union was state capitalist, and that Stalin represented the solidification and entrenchment of the country's trend in this direction (but wasn't the sole cause). There were numerous reasons for this shift, not least of all the decimation of the nation's economy and working-class base in the aftermath of the civil war. But let's look at it this way: the economic means of production were concentrated in the hands of a small minority of owners for the direct motive of producing surplus-value. While private property was less evident, the basic essence and function of capitalism remained the same, wherein the role of the Stalinist bureaucracy was akin to that of the bourgeoisie - with the social aim of accumulating capital and the production of commodities. The state essentially assumed the entrepreneurial function of the bourgeoisie. The realization of profit(s) were converted by the state into further means of production (i.e. factories, machinery, etc.). The bureaucracy would resemble a workers' state if it were subordinate to the working-class, but it wasn't. This economic productive mode in Russia was the culmination of a variety of objective factors, including economic and political isolation on the world stage that all but forced the revolution's degeneration.

Sorry for the wall of text. Hope it helps, though.


i'm torn between my thirst for company as an emerging leftist and my need to actually participate in the work of the revolutionary project, and my fear that i won't get a chance to read anything other than haymarket books for all eternity (well that and i'm broke and don't have 20$ a month to spare at the moment).

While the majority of books carried by us are from Haymarket, not all of them are. Besides, most Haymarket books are republications of older theoretical texts, but it also prints an array of newer, more contemporary works (like "Meaning of Marxism"). I don't know, I guess I've never quite understood people's hangup on this. Haymarket's a leftwing, progressive publication organization that churns out some good shit - have you seen their recent Historical Materialism series? I suggest you check it out. But to someone who's broke I can see how that would be off-putting. Comrades should be able to refer you to some online texts or articles if you think that would be a more financially viable option. Our Members' Toolkit has this to say about those who might have trouble paying monthly dues:


Any member with particularly difficult financial circumstances or unusually high expenses may negotiate a lower rate of payment with their branch treasurer, or in the case of members at large, with the national treasurer.

Again, I don't know if this helps you in any way. I can only refer back to my own experiences upon joining when I was told my (in)ability to pay dues shouldn't be an obstacle to joining. I think the point is to try and encourage people who are interested to join and figure out the question of dues at a time most convenient to both parties.


help me, comrades! tell me where you are and how you got there? or indoctrinate me, i don't much care at this point. or tell me to go home and read more, that works too.

Well, one of the most valuable tools a revolutionary socialist can have at their disposal is the knowledge and experience that comes with organizing with other radical socialists. We like to strike a balance between elevating the theoretical level of understanding of our newer members to that of our oldest and engaging those ideas through their practical application in everyday struggles. In Berkeley our branch is working with various groups around the BDS movement against Israeli apartheid, while also organizing with other organizations involved in the struggle surrounding sexism and women's liberation. At the height of Occupy our organization threw itself into building the movement. We've also sought to spearhead the fight against racism and police brutality in some areas, seeking to connect and unite these local struggles into a nationwide network of solidarity. This is just some of the work we do, but we do it with a larger picture or goal in mind, which is the development and creation of a larger, more organized form of resistance for our side.

Please ask Jimmie Higgins or I if you continue to have questions about the ISO. We're both members (as I'm sure you've figured out ;)).

[Q]

Welcome :)

Sorry to have no welcomed you before. Someone else must have approved your post...

If you have political questions, you can ask them in the Learning forum. That's why it's there after all!

If you have questions about your account, don't hesitate to send me a PM or ask here.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Welcome :)

Sorry to have no welcomed you before. Someone else must have approved your post.

Sorry, that was me. I've been leaving the ones in this forum for you, but today I had something like 20 posts waiting to be approved and I wasn't paying attention to which section this was in when I got to this one.

In fact I may have done another one by mistake too.

[slum]

The reason they want you to read these basic books is to see if you agree with our basic political points of agreement or not, try and convince you of some things if we can, or at least illuminate where we might disagree and if it's fundamental or just different perspectives.

No, I'm on board with that and I'm really enjoying the reading so far- the first thing I read after talking w/ a member was Two Souls of Socialism which really helped me get a basic understanding of what socialism from the bottom up actually is and why the idea of socialism= stalinist tyranny is erroneous.

I was speaking more of the accusations (and I should have made this clear) I've seen on here and other blogs that the ISO basically turns its rank and file into hawkers for Haymarket books and doesn't care about the development of cadre- the branch I interact with is clearly not doing this, but I guess I'm just wary of all things that look slick and involve money at the moment (like shiny new books). I'm doing my reading either at marxists.org or what I can get out of the library and I sometimes feel like comrades are irritated that I'm not funding the socialist project or w/e. The talks at wearemany have been enlightening, but I don't get my news from SW and while I understand the need for a revolutionary newspaper and agree with pretty much everything in there its clear propagandist function turns me off.


A view of Russia as "State Capitalist" rather than a "degenerated worker's state" is the basic way the differences are explained.


The comrade below explained the 'state capitalist' stance very well- I need to do some reading of Trotsky on my own and get some alternate opinions but it makes a good deal of sense to me. I'm also not sure where I stand on SiOC- I'm inclined to say it's impossible but again, not enough reading.

Thanks for your welcome! Yeah I'll make sure to be up front about where I'm at. I'm just starting to radicalize so I'm wary of being sucked up into an organization just because it's the only one there.

[slum]

Could you, if possible, explain the contradictory things you've heard? I only ask because if there are we can try and discuss them (if you like).

I mentioned some to Jimmie Higgins above- a lot of it is clearly slander from people who dislike the way the ISO is run and think leftist's time could be better spent throwing bricks at starbucks, but I have concerns about the accusations that dissenting members who called for more focus on anti-racist work were expelled and that the organization at large is focused around extracting money from its student population and is primarily a white liberal talk shop with no engagement with actual working people (the branch in my city is somewhat multi-racial and has a decent amount of union members but this seems to be true of the audience the ISO gets for its talks)*

*i should note tho that i'm at a public university which is overwhelmingly working class, so to draw a student/worker line is really pretty stupid and i find it kind of insulting. even students who dont work are just commodifying their future labor by taking out loans

then there's stuff like people in my branch talk about how the CTU strike was led by ISO members of the union but I hear all this talk about how ISO never does anything with labor and just takes credit for other people's work.



We're also active in our respective communities (we're not just a talk shop)! At least, most branches strive to be.


Fair enough, this seems to be true of the branches I know. Inevitably the branch at my university is mainly focused on students rights stuff and it isn't their fault political engagement is so low here.



In this sense we're not orthodox Trotskists; that is, radicals who uphold and adhere to Trotsky's theories uncritically (or at least strive to preserve them despite their inadequacies).

Yeah, I'm not interested in orthodox ideologues who don't examine their theories or apply them in reality for fear of insulting someone's ghost.


But let's look at it this way: the economic means of production were concentrated in the hands of a small minority of owners for the direct motive of producing surplus-value... with the social aim of accumulating capital and the production of commodities... the realization of profit(s) were converted by the state into further means of production (i.e. factories, machinery, etc.).

Thank you! This does help. Yeah, that sounds like capitalism to me.

The Haymarket thing probably only bothers me because I'm broke and hate advertising. I'm certainly happy someone is printing Myths of Male Dominance again, for example. I do my reading on-line and in libraries because i dont have that kind of disposable income and i don't know if that's somehow incompatible with the ISOs methods.



Well, one of the most valuable tools a revolutionary socialist can have at their disposal is the knowledge and experience that comes with organizing with other radical socialists.

This is why I would consider joining, but I guess as Jimmie Higgins mentioned above I can do this without being a member. I'll have to do some more reading and think on it, but I've been spending a lot of my time lately helping with building the branch's events anyway and that's been a good experience alongside reading and political discussions.

Thanks for your welcome! I'm looking forward to learning more on this forum about other veins of leftist thought and doing more reading (I'm with you on Lenin, dude speaks sense).

[slum]

thanks! more studying is definitely on the agenda.

[slum]

thanks for the warm welcome, i'll make sure to check out the learning forum.

[Le Socialiste]

I was speaking more of the accusations (and I should have made this clear) I've seen on here and other blogs that the ISO basically turns its rank and file into hawkers for Haymarket books and doesn't care about the development of cadre- the branch I interact with is clearly not doing this, but I guess I'm just wary of all things that look slick and involve money at the moment (like shiny new books).

A healthy dose of skepticism's never hurt anyone. I get how these things might throw up 'red flags' (see what I did there? ;)1) and no branch or district should reduce itself to hawking Haymarket literature. At the same time, Haymarket books provide an inestimable service in terms of their educational value and general availability. The latter factor is especially important, as the organization has issued republications of older (and harder to find) texts from major Marxists - like Luxemburg.

But the importance of Haymarket should not (and has not, in my experience) supersede the even more vital task of developing new cadre. The two ought to go hand in hand, with greater emphasis on the raising of one's theoretical level and experience.


I'm doing my reading either at marxists.org or what I can get out of the library and I sometimes feel like comrades are irritated that I'm not funding the socialist project or w/e. The talks at wearemany have been enlightening, but I don't get my news from SW and while I understand the need for a revolutionary newspaper and agree with pretty much everything in there its clear propagandist function turns me off.

Marxists.org, wearemany.org, and what you can get your hands on from the library are excellent sources of learning. If you think the people you're talking to are irritated over this, you should confront them about it (in as comradely a manner as you're able). The point, after all, isn't to sell Haymarket books but to learn from their content. If they're prioritizing selling literature over engaging comrades through whatever resources the latter can access online or elsewhere they need to seriously reassess their own role(s) as members of the ISO.

When you refer to the 'propagandist function' of the SW newspaper, what exactly do you mean by that? Our newspaper is basically a tool for engagement and agitation, but it also functions as a way to organize the national organization and link members up via their own shared experience(s). The newspaper is meant to, in Lenin's words, fulfill the task set for it as a "collective agitator" and "collective organizer." Learn, propagandize, and organize.


The comrade below explained the 'state capitalist' stance very well- I need to do some reading of Trotsky on my own and get some alternate opinions but it makes a good deal of sense to me. I'm also not sure where I stand on SiOC- I'm inclined to say it's impossible but again, not enough reading.

Yes, you should try and read as much as you can and draw your conclusions from these. As for SiOC, consider this: capitalism is a global phenomenon. Thus socialism can only succeed in a similar manner (on an international scale). Take Russia's example, where the first majorly successful proletariat revolution was hamstrung by its subsequent isolation from the rest of the capitalist world.