Uncertainty in Tendency and Tactics

[Sabot Cat]

I was wondering if you could all help me find out what tendency best reflects my beliefs. As I'm sure you're aware, there are a plethora of ideologies, philosophies, and tendencies in the revolutionary leftist spectrum of thought and so I often have trouble finding what group or organization to affiliate myself with, partly because many of those that I can find information about overlap in foundational ideas but diverge in tactics. If you're willing to give me your time, here is a rather lengthy explanation of my views that can serve as a basis for your judgement on my probable affiliation:

My core ideal is the creation and maintenance of a society where everyone lives in the best sustainable conditions possible. The protection and liberation of the oppressed, as well as the abolition of any elite or hierarchical structures with disproportionate power over the whole, is a necessity in such a society. This is because those elites often act in a way counter to everyone else's interests, and thus no one should be trusted with the ability to act in their own self-interest to the detriment of the whole. Capitalism must be eliminated in pursuance of the above, as should any despotic or oligarchic system of governance (such as monarchies, 'representative democracies', one-party authoritarian states, theocracies, etc.)

I believe that the way to do this is through an essentially direct democracy consisting of recallable delegates (to prevent voter fatigue), initiatives that can be ratified by a majority (to presented to the delegates after a certain threshold is passed in signatures), and popular referendums when a community doesn't want their delegate to vote in place of them. As long as there is guaranteed freedom of movement, regions of a country should not be forced to abide by laws they don't agree upon in their community. The caveat of this is when their laws can be construed as threatening the whole of the country or minorities within the local community. Military force would be distributed as equally as possible to each region, although I'm not sure what should be done in regards to the matter of protecting people through the threat or use of force as commonly embodied in law-enforcement (I would be happy to hear opinions about whether or not this is indeed necessary and what would be the best way to avoid creating a hierarchy while maintaining everyone's personal safety), or whether federalist/centralist coercion may be required to prevent the rise of elites or institutional inequality. Also, any group that uses force should be tethered inseparably to the egalitarian ideals that they must defend.

As related to above, resources shouldn't be in the hands of a few individuals. The pursuit of the decentralization of power through the nearly even distribution of resources quickly runs into the problem of "who shall be doing the distribution, who will determine what amount of resources is 'even'" and so on. This process cannot be done by an unaccountable and monolithic bureaucracy, or any group that is not the people as a whole.

The distribution of resources must thus be done by a plurality of democratic economic organizations (the exact definition of 'democratic' is explicated above). By 'democratic economic organizations', I mean labor unions and worker cooperatives, or any organization that implements worker self-management that is united by their trade, services or products. All other types of economic organizations, such as capitalist corporations, will be prohibited as they are autocratic and inherently hierarchical. The management of the community's resources as a whole will be handled by a confederation of these democratic economic organizations. I think it might be necessary to maintain separate democratic political organizations based on geography, who can represent the interests of all people. Perhaps it will be better to have them be completely integrated, or impossible to truly separate them, but I would like a structure from without that can petition on the behalf of the needy and (in a coercive manner, if necessary) receive resources to provide for them. Economic activity will be conducted on a heavily managed market that will transition as culture allows into a gift economy; there will be no property but that which is personal or collective, excluding private property as a matter of course.

I don't favor having a fixed approach to tactics in order to make our society as close to this blueprint as possible, as I believe that we should do whatever will work the best for the situation at hand. Whether it be unions, councils, reformist parties, armed guerrillas, I support whatever's demonstrated to work. But what set of tactics do work best, in your opinion, and what evidence do you have to demonstrate it? What are some ideas that you disagree with me in, and why? Finally, what tendency do you think I should affiliate with based on what I've told you about my political philosophy?

Thanks in advance for your responses~ :)

[BIXX]

If I were you, I wouldn't try so hard to find a title for yourself. You will know once you've found one that works for you.

I don't know enough about the different tendencies to point you in a direction, but seriously, don't worry about affiliating yourself with one of them.

[Overcome]

With regard to the "law enforcement/public safety" issue I would hope that there would be a general societal pressure on individuals to act in the best interests of the community as a whole.

In a moneyless (gift) economy theft would be a non-issue, as everybody would have equal access to the means of sustinance.

Rape, murder, arson and so on would, presumably be dealt with by the community affected. The kind of sentence to be carried out is another question.

But yeah, don't put too much stock in labels. The left is fragmented and sectarian enough.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)

[Hit The North]

What would be the point of your affiliation?

I don't know where you live but it's unlikely that you're spoilt for choice in terms of organisations in your area. You need to get involved in whatever campaigns are happening and discover who's out there, who you think is effective, who you think you can respect, and take it from there. Political organisations are more 'off-the-peg' than 'tailor-made', if you get my meaning, so it is unlikely that you'll find a perfect fit. But political organisations are only useful inasmuch as they contribute to the existing class struggle, so an assessment of this is what should inform your decision.

At the moment, I think the best thing for someone starting out in left-wing politics is to join campaign groups rather than political parties. In the English-speaking world, at least, political parties have small memberships and are either in decline or treading water, and are not where the energy is at the moment.

Revolutionaries should begin to see themselves as a network of various communities, of individuals and organisations, who share a common purpose, rather than, as they do at the moment, as competing franchises. If that was the case, more emphasis would be placed on drawing up agreed programmes of action, instead of staking out territory on the basis of disagreement over programmes of theory.

Btw, your ideas are well expressed in the o.p. so you should take them with you in your encounters as it's important to win people over to the radical possibilities of life. I'd say that your views, irrespective of quibbles over their details, correspond with a communist vision of the future that would find favour with both Marxists and anarchists. Which, of course, helps you very little in your quest for a political home ;).

[Sabot Cat]

If I were you, I wouldn't try so hard to find a title for yourself. You will know once you've found one that works for you. I don't know enough about the different tendencies to point you in a direction, but seriously, don't worry about affiliating yourself with one of them.

I know what I'm not, and who I would support in any conflict of wills, so I suppose that's enough for now~


With regard to the "law enforcement/public safety" issue I would hope that there would be a general societal pressure on individuals to act in the best interests of the community as a whole.

In a moneyless (gift) economy theft would be a non-issue, as everybody would have equal access to the means of sustinance.

Rape, murder, arson and so on would, presumably be dealt with by the community affected. The kind of sentence to be carried out is another question.

But who is 'the community'? Everyone, or the majority? And if the latter, would acts of violence against minorities be condoned by the majority as they were especially in the Jim Crow era of the South, or throughout the nation today?

But let's say they're all egalitarian in personal morals; how would communal justice respond to someone that's popular with the community? And how would they deal with people who are accused falsely but are unpopular? I believe that the fundamental process of law, with thorough evidence evaluation by the most unbiased group of people for that situation, is a necessity for the preservation of justice.

The general conflict of a possibly bigoted majority and the need for democratic process is something that often gives me pause. Any ideas on how to institutionally check the possibly 'tyranny of the majority' as it applies to discrimination?


But yeah, don't put too much stock in labels. The left is fragmented and sectarian enough.


I like to be inclusive to others in discussions and avoid the walls erected by labels, but sometimes it's more convenient to have a specific label than explicate my entire philosophy on the spot.


What would be the point of your affiliation?

I don't know where you live but it's unlikely that you're spoilt for choice in terms of organisations in your area. You need to get involved in whatever campaigns are happening and discover who's out there, who you think is effective, who you think you can respect, and take it from there. Political organisations are more 'off-the-peg' than 'tailor-made', if you get my meaning, so it is unlikely that you'll find a perfect fit. But political organisations are only useful inasmuch as they contribute to the existing class struggle, so an assessment of this is what should inform your decision.

I'm not sure what groups are likely to share my views because I don't know what the typical name for my philosophy is, and Indiana may have been well-connected to revolutionary leftism last century, but there's almost nothing here now. For instance, there is a local group of socialists, but they're socialists the way that term's used in popular Scandinavian politics, and they haven't updated their site since 2010 and don't have any kind of activity that I can participate in to show solidarity. There aren't any anarchists but this one big tent group that could include "anarcho-"capitalists that went defunct in 2008. So there isn't much in the way of representation where I live as far as I can find via Google and what have you, but there's probably some local resources or gatherings I'm unaware of.



At the moment, I think the best thing for someone starting out in left-wing politics is to join campaign groups rather than political parties. In the English-speaking world, at least, political parties have small memberships and are either in decline or treading water, and are not where the energy is at the moment.

Revolutionaries should begin to see themselves as a network of various communities, of individuals and organisations, who share a common purpose, rather than, as they do at the moment, as competing franchises. If that was the case, more emphasis would be placed on drawing up agreed programmes of action, instead of staking out territory on the basis of disagreement over programmes of theory.


I'm very much a beginner in these kinds of things, as I'm not sure what campaign groups exist near me or that I should participate in action with. I agree that I'd favor massive direct action groups with broad aims with a core foundation that doesn't fall into the fractional chaos that's been plaguing leftist movement(s) for a while. I believe the reason that right-wing movements are more united is because they want to keep things more or less the same, while left-wing movements generally seek to change the way things currently are, thus causing dispute in what should be changed and how.



Btw, your ideas are well expressed in the o.p. so you should take them with you in your encounters as it's important to win people over to the radical possibilities of life. I'd say that your views, irrespective of quibbles over their details, correspond with a communist vision of the future that would find favour with both Marxists and anarchists. Which, of course, helps you very little in your quest for a political home ;).

Thanks for you support, and I hope I can convince at least some people of these notions if they are as just and true as I believe them to be. Although I'm not sure if most anarchists would agree with my ideas about justice and law enforcement, but I would be happy to discuss it with them. :)