Should Socialists Run Soup Kitchens?

[Popular Front of Judea]

I would think providing meals to the working poor and teaching English to immigrants would be a far more effective form of outreach than standing on a corner hawking newspapers. Anyone have any experience with the 'Philly Socialists'?

Philly Socialists’ Service Model: Outreach Disguised as Charity? (http://www.thenorthstar.info/?p=9583)

[Q]

Maybe they just want to care about human need in a direct, individual sort of way instead of always insisting on being systemic and political. This would make their projects indistinguishable from the average soup kitchen, of course, but I understand that not everyone’s heart has yet been turned to stone by the murderous logic of capitalism, so such mushiness is forgivable I suppose. But then it’s not so simple. Because there are now people all over Philadelphia, who when asked, will say the socialists gave me food, the socialists grew my lettuce, the socialists gave me Internet, socialists taught me English! And that is seriously dangerous.

Precisely! But it is only part of the story. And I suppose that the "Philly" socialists are forgiven for that, given that they are only a city-wide group.

The wider picture may be seen in the "circles of awareness" below, which comes from Lars Lih's book Lenin Rediscovered and is a model for a party-movement:

http://s17.postimg.org/m3thx7sp9/Schermafbeelding_2013_08_21_om_13_50_23.png

These food distributions and community gardens would be somewhere in an overlapping area of the labouring classes (the "class in itself") and the proletariat (the "class for itself"). The "Philly Socialists" would be in a more central circle, but could only form part of that.

A fully fledged party-movement seeks to organise our whole class as a class, to form it into the "proletariat". This will likely be a minority for a long time to come, but it could (and should) still involve millions. Only with such a party-movement can our class be in a position to take the fruits in a revolutionary crisis.

Not many on the left directly dispute that we need this, but many do stand on a position that such a party-movement will spontaneously occur during a revolutionary crisis. This article is a good example that not only this is not the case (it takes communists with a strategy to build this) but also that building such a movement takes time, quite possibly decades. We need to start then long before any revolutionary crisis occurs or face imminent failure on our side.

[Tim Cornelis]

I've been trying to get kind of strategy in the Netherlands. We see those movements that use such strategies are the largest and most successful (leftist movements). Landless Workers' Movement provide (state recognised) courses, use land reform as platform, organise sport events, have adopted this counter-culture. Abahlali baseMjondolo, provides education, constructs sewerage, defends housing rights, etc.

We also see Hamas, Hezbollah, and Protestantism making inroads (or having made inroads) in Palestine, Lebanon, and Brazil respectively using social services as catalyst. Brazil used to be a Catholic country but with Protestants now having soup kitchens, helping addicts, etc., they are now circa 20% of the population. We need this kind of strategy + class analysis to revive the working class movement.

[Jimmie Higgins]

I would think providing meals to the working poor and teaching English to immigrants would be a far more effective form of outreach than standing on a corner hawking newspapers. Anyone have any experience with the 'Philly Socialists'?

Philly Socialists’ Service Model: Outreach Disguised as Charity? (http://www.thenorthstar.info/?p=9583)

Well first, why would different methods for presumedly trying to do the same thing be counterposed?

Second, there are NGOs and churches with far more ability to do this sort of program than small groups of leftists with little money in most areas, so to just do charity work without some kind of direct political and organizational purpose tied to it would be as revolutionary as ACORN was.

But doing practical "survival programs" that are tied to a movement to abolish the need for such programs are definately a great thing to do for both the immediate help they provide but also as a way to organize. Without the politics, like I said, it just becomes charity and a "band-aid" but also without connecting this to community or worker self-organization, what are you actually convincing people of - radicals are nice folks? I guess that's a start, but just like homeless people aren't all evangelicals just because christians feed them and give them a surmon, people aren't going to be convinced to take action in their own lives because a radical is nice to them. (and frankly I thought some of the tone in the article was kind of condesending... as if worker's can't understand things politically).

The Panther's tried to do things like this and had some sucess (in addition to having tons of people propagandizing with their widely cirrculated newspaper). But without the political movement and militancy of which they were one part, the programs actually outlived the Panthers themselves and survived only to became incorporated into the charity structure of cities like Oakland.

So personally, I think these sorts of things would be great, however I think most revolutionaries are not in a real position to do these things without it becoming an "end in of itself". To have a meaningful effort, resources, personel, and time are required - but these are in short supply among radicals. If we end up doing tons of fundraising to keep these programs afloat, lots of time doing non-political/organizing tasks, etc.

Handing out fliers is simply direct and easily accomplished with small numbers. We can relate to people on political issues and begin to try and build networks and win new radical activists - and this is the basis for being able to have more sustained efforts and begining to build up a kind of opposition where we can run our own "workers schools" and survival programs and whatnot.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

The institutional approach is, of course, very attractive, assuming that the organisation that tries to implement it has the resources (many organisations ran themselves into the ground or ended up as mercenaries, trying to do things that were well above the level they operated on). However, it can be implemented in two ways: either one tries to create a copy of the existing society with a, so to speak, proletarian-communist flavour, or one tries to build up institutions that (1) help preserve the proletariat; (2) attract new members; (3) further the struggle against the bourgeois state; (4) build mechanisms of dual power in preparation for revolution. Obviously I advocate the latter - soup kitchens are part of it, but they aren't really the point. One would also need legal defense committees, shelters, and so on. Eventually also workers' squads and factory committees. I don't see the point in communal gardens, or sports organisations, to be honest.

[Q]

The institutional approach is, of course, very attractive, assuming that the organisation that tries to implement it has the resources (many organisations ran themselves into the ground or ended up as mercenaries, trying to do things that were well above the level they operated on). However, it can be implemented in two ways: either one tries to create a copy of the existing society with a, so to speak, proletarian-communist flavour, or one tries to build up institutions that (1) help preserve the proletariat; (2) attract new members; (3) further the struggle against the bourgeois state; (4) build mechanisms of dual power in preparation for revolution. Obviously I advocate the latter - soup kitchens are part of it, but they aren't really the point. One would also need legal defense committees, shelters, and so on. Eventually also workers' squads and factory committees. I don't see the point in communal gardens, or sports organisations, to be honest.
Besides the very last sentence this is spot on. I do think community gardens and sports clubs can be part of it ("all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy" as the proverb goes), it can help to form strong social links between people, as the article explains rather well. The point is to draw people into the more "central" circles of awareness: Politicise them through all kinds of institutions.

By the way, this all is hardly "orthodox Trotskyism" ;)

[Jimmie Higgins]

I don't see the point in communal gardens, or sports organisations, to be honest.I don't like gardening, but sports can be fun. At any rate, I don't see anything wrong with these things either - cultural things and hobbies are where people associate and when organic, we should do that too. And communist side-shows, anarchist scraper-bike events, etc.

BUT - this is only really organically possible when we have political and organization roots. So I have no doubt that in the next period of class radicalization we would see many more things like this. The IWW developed a culture around them back in the day and it's something that lasted and kept up militant roots probably into to industrial organizing in the 1930s - but the IWW didn't build up through songs, culture, etc - they built up a sizable force because there were existing organized militants. The culture etc, was possible because of the other.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Besides the very last sentence this is spot on. I do think community gardens and sports clubs can be part of it ("all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy" as the proverb goes), it can help to form strong social links between people, as the article explains rather well. The point is to draw people into the more "central" circles of awareness: Politicise them through all kinds of institutions.

By the way, this all is hardly "orthodox Trotskyism" ;)

Ah, but even the Sparts have their Legal Defense Committee and so on. The distinction between this, and what I understand is Lih's approach, is that Lih does not think that the socialist institutions need to be directly connected to the class struggle. On that, I agree with the usual approach - people tend to be drawn into communism chiefly through organisations that directly address some aspect of their daily struggles as proletarians or members of specially oppressed groups.

I think this is evident from the formation of the Workers' Party of Ethiopia, most of whose members were either associated with the previously-existing Marxist-Leninist organisations, or came through urban tenants' organisations and village committees.

And, of course, there is the ever-present problem of the administration of nonessential institutions resulting in an ossified party-bureaucracy.


I don't like gardening, but sports can be fun. At any rate, I don't see anything wrong with these things either - cultural things and hobbies are where people associate and when organic, we should do that too. And communist side-shows, anarchist scraper-bike events, etc.

Well - in addition to the issues I mentioned previously, there is also the ever-present problem of finite resources that the organisation can use. So it makes more sense to use those resources to form a strike committee, for example, than a sports organisation.

[Jimmie Higgins]

An interesting specific aspect to these sorts of efforts right now is the privitization and elimination of these kinds of services. On the NGO side of things, they kind of play into or adapt to neoliberalism... "look, the local initiative! How democratic!". This really stresses for me that radicals have to be sure that politics and self-organization are not just background to a charity project (like commie public relations - we're nice!)... if we have to have capitalism right now, it should be the rich paying for lunches for poor kids, not other poor people! But it also means that there is more of a real need for these kinds of programs, so I think as things (hopefully) develop and more people begin to radicalize, it is likely that we will see more initiatives like this.

With the collapse of services for women (and with the right-wing trying to create their own sort of mock planned parenthoods in an anti-abortion model) I think that's another area where revolutionaries can combine practical and necissary survival work, but the poltics of this work have a clear connection to politics and organizing. In the 1960s, radicals helped to form off-base coffee shops for anti-war GIs, meeting a need for a safe-space, but also clearly connected to political concerns and organizing. So even just creating a social space for a broader group of people who are being impacted by certain policies or realities of capitalist life has a long traddition and can play important roles in organizing.


Well - in addition to the issues I mentioned previously, there is also the ever-present problem of finite resources that the organisation can use. So it makes more sense to use those resources to form a strike committee, for example, than a sports organisation.Right, it's a question of priorities which is why I don't think the left is currently in a situation where focusing on culture alone would get us very far and I suggested that we would need a kind of broader base of support to be able to sucessfully sustain these sorts of things (and effective relief work) without either training soup-makers rather than class revolutionaries or just exhausting ourselves or missing more direct political efforts.

[RedSonRising]

We should be trying to do as many different things as we can. Widely distributed literature (that isn't bogged down with intellectual jargon and irrelevant historical bias), immigration services, low-income legal services, rehabilitation clinics, shelters, etc. all operated as cooperative workplaces. The working classes have many different needs, they won't look to revolutionary politics unless they see it can do something for them.

[blake 3:17]

To the OP - yes. One of the things the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty does for most of its demonstrations is provide meals and often other minor subsidies (bus tickets, for example) to help make sure people can participate. People would like to do more, but resources are limited.

A friend who worked at a major union, and oversaw dealing with mass layoffs, I one day expected that she'd been totally bummed from a big lay off -- it was an entire shift at a major auto plant -- but people went into action, and created a community kitchen and rec centre as a response. It was supported by the union but was also autonomous. She was actually pretty hopeful about the situation.

As for groups like Hamas -- they grew in large part because they started doing what Fatah and the PLO had been doing and had stopped. There's complicated reasons why -- repression, bureaucratization, etc -- but yeah, I am much more interested in stuff that is helpful to people on the ground, while also challenging the state. And often folks on the Left end up leaving political struggle in order to do something more practical and effective.

Shouldn't have to be. But endless meetings or lectures or protests ain't gonna do it.

Projects like these also get people working together in other ways, and help people just get to know each other better, and learn new collective skills and build friendships.

[RedBen]

I would think providing meals to the working poor and teaching English to immigrants would be a far more effective form of outreach than standing on a corner hawking newspapers.
i say this all the damn time. ^
"but it's not revolutionary enough maaaaan!"

[Tower of Bebel]

But how many socialist "soup kitchens" are there already?

[Ceallach_the_Witch]

This also begs the question - what is the most revolutionary kind of soup?

[Die Neue Zeit]

I don't favour soup kitchens as much as I do food banks. Working poor generally use food banks and not soup kitchens.

[RedBen]

I don't favour soup kitchens as much as I do food banks. Working poor generally use food banks and not soup kitchens.
they all serve their purpose.

[Die Neue Zeit]

It's simply amazing to see more comrades engaged in revolutionary strategy than when I took the programmatic stands on this board!

[Skyhilist]

This also begs the question - what is the most revolutionary kind of soup?

Tomato soup, obviously. It's as red as they come.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

But how many socialist "soup kitchens" are there already?

Like, one or two. Unless you count the ones that the KKE and the social democrats (can't remember how to spell their name) run in Greece

[a_wild_MAGIKARP]

Tomato soup, obviously. It's as red as they come.
Or with beetroots, like Ukrainian borsch. It's even more red.

And you know those noodle soups with the noodles in shapes of letters? We need to make that, but in shapes of hammers and sickles! and stars, and the faces of Marx and Engels!!


Anyway, the whole idea is really awesome. I support it 100%.

[PC LOAD LETTER]

Anyone down for a game of some very proley ultimate frisbee?

Makes sense, game was originally played with a pie tin.

This, and other things like basketball games. And anything else that's really cheap to play. A lot of urban areas already have public basketball courts, I'm sure someone could organize a big game weekend / game day for a neighborhood as an event. Provide water and snacks, etc.

The same org could get together and take clothes donations / raid Goodwill in the late fall to give homeless folks blankets / jackets / socks. I've done this a few times, but I just bought stuff from Goodwill and got stuff from family/friends they didn't want anymore. The socks were always gone first. Army surplus stores could work, for wool blankets and down-filled sleeping bags on the cheap. At thrift stores you can also check the labels of sweaters and get 100% wool sweaters for cheap.

[Ceallach_the_Witch]

Tomato soup, obviously. It's as red as they come.
tomato soup is such a traditional choice that it comes across as reactionary imo, I was thinking curried world-vegetable soup to showcase the international scope of socialism. It will be filling and comforting yet simultaneously spicy enough to fire revolutionary fervour in even the lumpiest member of the proletariat.

[Tower of Bebel]

I don't favour soup kitchens as much as I do food banks. Working poor generally use food banks and not soup kitchens.
I was thinking about the coop movement instead. When I hear "soup kitchen" I think of religious or even right wing movements. From what I could read the socialists emphasized the organisation of workers in coops instead.

[Ceallach_the_Witch]

run soup kitchens where the homeless, if willing, could join in preparing and handing out food (and leaflets or whatever)?

[MarxSchmarx]

We should be trying to do as many different things as we can. Widely distributed literature (that isn't bogged down with intellectual jargon and irrelevant historical bias), immigration services, low-income legal services, rehabilitation clinics, shelters, etc. all operated as cooperative workplaces. The working classes have many different needs, they won't look to revolutionary politics unless they see it can do something for them.

But to some extent I think this speaks to JH's point - the left, at least in most capitalist countries, given it's very finite resources right now, can't be everything to everyone. We have to be very judicious about where and how we spend our labor, money and yes, in some cases, capital (e.g., vehicle used to ferry people to events).

If we had the money of Bill Gates it might be tempting to do what you describe. but right now getting to that stage remains the problem. For all that leftist sects that grow for growth's sake get wrong, they are correct that absent a critical mass all that the left envisions for itself can't happen.

[RedBen]

But to some extent I think this speaks to JH's point - the left, at least in most capitalist countries, given it's very finite resources right now, can't be everything to everyone. We have to be very judicious about where and how we spend our labor, money and yes, in some cases, capital (e.g., vehicle used to ferry people to events).

If we had the money of Bill Gates it might be tempting to do what you describe. but right now getting to that stage remains the problem. For all that leftist sects that grow for growth's sake get wrong, they are correct that absent a critical mass all that the left envisions for itself can't happen.
all we can do is all we can do... we all got our parts to play and i think you hit the nail on the head, but if a lot of us give a little bit it adds up. i hope everyone stays passionate about making whatever little difference they can make. stay down brothers and sisters!

[Brandon's Impotent Rage]

My vote for soups of the revolution:

Chili w/ kidney beans - because the ingredients are diverse, sweet, spicy, and most importantly bright red.

French onion soup - Because onions were the food of the poor for generations, and using this delicious french soup to mock bourgeoisie pretensions makes it all the more satisfying.

Cajun gumbo - Because its a hearty one pot affair, and one pot can feed a bazillion people.

Seafood bisque - Because I FUCKING LOVE SEAFOOD BISQUE

[Q]

I was thinking about the coop movement instead. When I hear "soup kitchen" I think of religious or even right wing movements. From what I could read the socialists emphasized the organisation of workers in coops instead.
Using the "circles of awareness" again, the point in food banks, community gardens, etc is not so much that it is the communists organising the proletariat as a class. It is much more outward: The proletariat organising and reaching out to the most backward and downtrodden layers of our class. It's true that churches also use food banks. But so what? They're clearly understanding the need of outreach better than most socialists do.

[International_Solidarity]

I recently stumbled upon an Blogpost/article about a program the Black Panthers had done in which they fed children before school. The idea being that being fed before school would keep children more active and alert. As the children grew up they came to trust and confide in the Black Panthers, and many eventually adopted their ideology.

I think charity is an excellent and effective way of creating more class consciousness. I don't know why we haven't done much of this in the past, but we definitely should plan on it for the future!

Good topic OP!

[Die Neue Zeit]

I was thinking about the coop movement instead. When I hear "soup kitchen" I think of religious or even right wing movements. From what I could read the socialists emphasized the organisation of workers in coops instead.

For-profit coops or non-profit coops? I'm more for the latter and not the former.

[Taters]

social democrats (can't remember how to spell their name) run in greece

pasok?

...before you eat this soup you must listen to this hour-long sermon lecture on our party's position on the Russian Revolution of 1917.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

pasok?

...before you eat this soup you must listen to this hour-long sermon lecture on our party's position on the Russian Revolution of 1917.

No the other group that people have delusions about, the one that entered in the deal with the Ultra-Nationalists (but hey, at least it wasn't the golden dawn). I think it began with a "S"

And in all fairness, I do think that we really need to reconsider the internal culture of our organizations, I don't really think its healthy that the concept of a monolithic political line is healthy. That's not to say that tendencies aren't important, but because each tendency, if it is worthy of calling itself that, should represent a distinct methodological framework and body of theory rather than the continuation over some disagreement on the Afgan question 30 years ago. Likewise, if we are to devlop "line" in any situation, it should be on the basis of praxis and for the sake of coherency of action, not as an exersize in theology.