does it hurt us

[asiankaos]

I was wondering id people thought it hurts us that we are so divided my labels? I know there fundamental difference between marxism/stalinism/Maoism/ etc... My question is do you think people are to hung up on these labels and it prevents real dialogue between the different groups?
I would like to believe(dont know if I can prove it) that for the most part we have the same ideals and beliefs, but we are so divided between "he's a Stalinist how can he support that guy" we dont see that we actually have more in common then different. I might be way off but this is something i feel hinders us greatly as a movement/reveloution.

[LOLseph Stalin]

I actually agree. I generally don't get too hung up on labels; I have my views which are obviously more in line with some ideologies than others, but as long as somebody is a revolutionary then I'm willing to side with them. It just pisses me off when some Stalinist will rant about wanting to ice pick Trots or some Anarchist refuses to work with Marxists simply because we don't believe in abolishing the state right away.

The short answer? Yes, sectarianism hurts us badly. Fascists are powerful in many countries right now because they're united. We need more of that on the left.

[Ele'ill]

but why is it that anarchists won't work with Marxists because of the issue of state, I think that kind of just skips over some pretty obviously huge differences

[LOLseph Stalin]

but why is it that anarchists won't work with Marxists because of the issue of state, I think that kind of just skips over some pretty obviously huge differences

I think we could potentially work together for organizational purposes since we both want capitalism destroyed.

[Philosophos]

I really can't understand why we keep doing this. I'd prefer to be surrounded by people who are left no matter what tendencie they follow (even though there are no 'real' tendencies since we are all different people so we can't completely agree with any tendencie). It's much better to have people that think differently than having mindless human-like machines (see nationalists, fascists, pro-capitalists in general).

Sometimes this sectarianism really prevents dialogue and that can only be harmful. Hope it changes if an actual revolution takes place.

[Comrade Samuel]

I actually agree. I generally don't get too hung up on labels; I have my views which are obviously more in line with some ideologies than others, but as long as somebody is a revolutionary then I'm willing to side with them. It just pisses me off when some Stalinist will rant about wanting to ice pick Trots or some Anarchist refuses to work with Marxists simply because we don't believe in abolishing the state right away.

The short answer? Yes, sectarianism hurts us badly. Fascists are powerful in many countries right now because they're united. We need more of that on the left.


You've hit the nail right on the head here. If the left is ever to achieve anything of even the slightest significance it will be because we've learned how to cooperate regardless of what dead bearded guys we worship.

There are many among us who simply do not care about curing the terminal illness that is sectarianism and to them I say: you're dooming us all to life under fascism.

[baronci]

politics (as we know it) is irrelevant to class struggle. The proletariat does not come towards revolution out of a desire to fulfill political ambitions, but out of a desire to assert its species being


There are many among us who simply do not care about cursing the terminal illness that is sectarianism and to them I say: you're dooming us all to life under fascism. this might be more believable if Francisco Franco never came to power

[Workers-Control-Over-Prod]

but why is it that anarchists won't work with Marxists because of the issue of state, I think that kind of just skips over some pretty obviously huge differences

If our goal as Socialists is to increase divisions and enhance antagonisms in our society according to the objective economic divisions, bourgeois and proletarian, if our goal is to increase class tensions to the point of Revolution, then we as Socialists will have to start organizing along class lines.

[baronci]

http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/monsieur-dupont-nihilist-communism

[Ele'ill]

I think we could potentially work together for organizational purposes since we both want capitalism destroyed.

I think criticisms of organization are why sectarianism exists.



There are many among us who simply do not care about cursing the terminal illness that is sectarianism and to them I say: you're dooming us all to life under fascism.

pretentious and naive




If our goal as Socialists is to increase divisions and enhance antagonisms in our society according to the objective economic divisions, bourgeois and proletarian, if our goal is to increase class tensions to the point of Revolution, then we as Socialists will have to start organizing along class lines.

what does this have to do with what i posted?

[helot]

I think we could potentially work together for organizational purposes since we both want capitalism destroyed.


I find it hilarious that it's supposed that me and my comrades could work with the marxist organisations in my city, organisations that cling to the coattails of the labour party and try to co-opt shit. No mate, are you mad? That undermines our efforts. They're toxic. You can call me sectarian all you want but it'd be an empty word because we have different aims.

[#FF0000]

The "labels" don't divide us. Fundamental differences in strategy, tactics, analysis, and theory do.

[Comrade Samuel]

I think criticisms of organization are why sectarianism exists.




pretentious and naive





what does this have to do with what i posted?

Funny, those are probably the exact words that a right-winger would use to describe both of us.

Do differing yet equally defendable thoughts regarding tactics, history and theory really warrant such bitterness? It's not like our opinions on Stalin are worth a damn to the enemies of the working class in this day and age. When it comes to debating (especially when it's tendancy related) it's almost as if folks on revleft are more concerned with inflating their egos than they are about standing by their principals or making an effort to understand differing worldviews. It's unscientific, counter-productive and makes us look like a bunch of narcissists.

[LOLseph Stalin]

I find it hilarious that it's supposed that me and my comrades could work with the marxist organisations in my city, organisations that cling to the coattails of the labour party and try to co-opt shit. No mate, are you mad? That undermines our efforts. They're toxic. You can call me sectarian all you want but it'd be an empty word because we have different aims.

Well then don't work with reformist parties, work with revolutionary parties.

[BIXX]

If I have to compromise my ideals simply cause I'm trying to initiate "left unity" the I won't initiate left unity. There is a reason there isn't left unity, and even though unity would be nice, it's only nice for you if it's unity that agrees with your ideals. So as long as I don't have to compromise, then yeah, I'll go for it. But as soon as someone says that I have to act I'm a way they see for rather than I see fit, I won't.

[asiankaos]

If I have to compromise my ideals simply cause I'm trying to initiate "left unity" the I won't initiate left unity. There is a reason there isn't left unity, and even though unity would be nice, it's only nice for you if it's unity that agrees with your ideals. So as long as I don't have to compromise, then yeah, I'll go for it. But as soon as someone says that I have to act I'm a way they see for rather than I see fit, I won't.

I understand this, and actually agree, but is it worth being so unmoveable that those of us who agree the system needs to be done away with won't unite because of our differences. I think people look at other leftists as the enemy when we want the same thing just dont agree in how to do it.

[baronci]

Funny, those are probably the exact words that a right-winger would use to describe both of us.

Do differing yet equally defendable thoughts regarding tactics, history and theory really warrant such bitterness? It's not like our opinions on Stalin are worth a damn to the enemies of the working class in this day and age. When it comes to debating (especially when it's tendancy related) it's almost as if folks on revleft are more concerned with inflating their egos than they are about standing by their principals or making an effort to understand differing worldviews. It's unscientific, counter-productive and makes us look like a bunch of narcissists.

this assumes that people are even "looking at us" to begin with. the far-left is totally irrelevant in this day and age. The hardcore marxist theologies likely won't ever gain traction in the world political landscape as politics has become a tool made and used by the bourgeoisie and petit-bourgeoisie. The working class is largely left out of debate. As Engels said, "The working class has no nation"

[BIXX]

I understand this, and actually agree, but is it worth being so unmoveable that those of us who agree the system needs to be done away with won't unite because of our differences. I think people look at other leftists as the enemy when we want the same thing just dont agree in how to do it.

As long as I can make my own decisions rather than being ruled by someone else, then I'm ok with it.

I would even work with a Stalinist (however, not closely to any degree) if I didn't have to worry about them dictating what I do.

[Ele'ill]

Funny, those are probably the exact words that a right-winger would use to describe both of us.

no, I meant what you wrote was naive and pretentious. As if I am supposed to work with people who I don't want to work with in order to serve an organization that doesn't serve a goal I desire.


Do differing yet equally defendable thoughts regarding tactics, history and theory really warrant such bitterness? It's not like our opinions on Stalin are worth a damn to the enemies of the working class in this day and age. When it comes to debating (especially when it's tendancy related) it's almost as if folks on revleft are more concerned with inflating their egos than they are about standing by their principals or making an effort to understand differing worldviews. It's unscientific, counter-productive and makes us look like a bunch of narcissists.

I don't know if this is a response to me but 'standing by principals' or 'beliefs' often means not joining up with folks who have other conflicting principals and beliefs and disbanding from organization when the purpose of such has run its course successful or unsuccessful.

[blake 3:17]

It's absolutely bizarre to have bunches of different groups based on slightly different interpretations of historical or theoretical questions most people have never heard of.

One group I was in had a relatively sane approach for a small revolutionary left group to a large reformist party -- join if you wanted and participate as a revolutionary would in any mass work.

[Darius]

Marxism lost it's touch with science. It's now more like a religion with different sects, objects of worship and saints. This is because large part of socialists still do not want to let go of historicly failed experiments, and are wasting time for apologetics, endlessly defending dead regimes and their leaders. The other part of socialists, which at least acknowledges historical facts, however do not have any better theoretical or practical solutions for today. So of course sectarianism hurts, and it does not help to progress, it just drowns the movement in to petty apologetics and childish bragging over whose action figure are cooler. When all the unity and scientific substance disappears, what remains is only remnants of history and bunch dogmas with labels.

[helot]

Well then don't work with reformist parties, work with revolutionary parties.

I of course don't work with them but in a way it's quite saddening that the only revolutionary organisation in my city is an anarchist organisation even though i am an anarchist it'd be nice to have others even if it results in a rivalry because then atleast there'd be more discussion etc of revolutionary politics here.