Best munincipal election results ever for the Dutch Socialist Party

[Das war einmal]

This Wednesday the Dutch Socialist Party (SP) achieved it's best results ever in the municipal elections. Last elections the SP got about 225 seats, this elections more then 400, countrywide. Even though the half of the population doesn't vote, this is a very good result. In the biggest cities the SP has gain significant foothold for the first time. This result is partly due to the right wing policies of the current government where the Workers Party is part of and supporting the austerities. Lots of people feel betrayed and therefore have voted for the SP. Next to that the SP has done lot's of local activist activities like providing social care for the homeless, helping people that have been evicted in their struggle and (successfully) providing alternative housing, getting a proper public skating areas for instance.

I know some of you people will think 'so a socialist party won at a bourgeois election woop-dee-do' and partly you're right but this victory will help the party in building up a proper force to fight austerities so it's for the benefit of the working class in the long term. Already we have more volunteers then ever before. There's lots of room for improvement within the party but if you knew how apathetic most Dutch people are it's relieving to see these results.

[note: For those who don't know the SP, it is the most left political party that has seats in the House of Representatives. It is formed in the late 1970's as a maoist party but has reformed to a democratic socialist party in the 90's and has since then filled the gap between the ever reformist social democrat party (The Workers Party, PvdA) and the lack of a proper communist alternative (the Dutch Communist Party was absolved in the 80's and the new CP has not been able to gain much influence). Although at first perspective the SP looks as reformist as much of the European socialist/communist parties, they in fact still use dialectic materialism as their core philosophy and it's ultimate goal is to establish as socialist society. The main reason it has shed off marxism as it's official tendency is that it didn't have any significant impact wheter a movement is called that way or not in the Netherlands. It's sister parties in Europe are Die Linke in Germany and the Socialist People's Party in Denmark while it has strong ties with the Belgian Workers Party (PVDA)) ]

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

I know some of you people will think 'so a socialist party won at a bourgeois election woop-dee-do' and partly you're right but this victory will help the party in building up a proper force to fight austerities so it's for the benefit of the working class in the long term.

Really? And how will it do that? Austerity is the result of bourgeois parties trying to keep capitalism afloat during a crisis - if the SP intends to administer capitalism in the Netherlands, it will either implement further austerity measures or be thrown out.

[Das war einmal]

Really? And how will it do that? Austerity is the result of bourgeois parties trying to keep capitalism afloat during a crisis - if the SP intends to administer capitalism in the Netherlands, it will either implement further austerity measures or be thrown out.


In the long run they want to abolish capitalism, but it's better to cut spending on say, vanity projects then elderly care. They already saved hundreds of jobs by preventing the closure of an elderly home in a city. The austerity measures are the result of EU policies that demand that our government budget deficit needs to stay under 3%, the SP is strongly against this measure, especially during times of crisis. The government went on a spending spree in the 90's when the country had a strong growing economy instead of saving it for times like these, thereby worsening the crisis now because it's not spending money to get the economy thriving again.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

In the long run they want to abolish capitalism, but it's better to cut spending on say, vanity projects then elderly care. They already saved hundreds of jobs by preventing the closure of an elderly home in a city.

Every reformist wants to abolish capitalism in the long run. As for preventing the closure of a home for the elderly, that is commendable. But my point was that any SP government will be forced to make some cuts - I don't know what you consider to be vanity projects. The real vanity projects - things like the monarchy and the army - are untouchable in the context of bourgeois politics. Ultimately, the SP might (mind you, I said "might") end up enacting a slightly better version of austerity, but this still remains within the confines of bourgeois politics.

[Das war einmal]

Every reformist wants to abolish capitalism in the long run.

Not really the Workers Party abandoned this notion a long time ago and instead embraced the neoliberal idea of 'no alternative'



As for preventing the closure of a home for the elderly, that is commendable. But my point was that any SP government will be forced to make some cuts - I don't know what you consider to be vanity projects. The real vanity projects - things like the monarchy and the army - are untouchable in the context of bourgeois politics. Vanity projects are things that costs huge amount of money without immediate improving the lives of the people. For instance there was a huge library scheduled to be built in my city, while there are community centres being closed by the dozens while we already have a big library that provides adequately. This has been canceled in part due the fact that the SP voted against this project.

There have been some budget cuts in the army as well, unfortunatly these are all done at the costs of job opportunities while the government purchased new fighter jets for billions of euro's, something the SP was against and another astonishingly bad decision supported by the Workers Party.



Ultimately, the SP might (mind you, I said "might") end up enacting a slightly better version of austerity, but this still remains within the confines of bourgeois politics.This is true, but it can make a huge difference on the everyday life of the worker. The SP is also busy outside of the government by local activism. Unfortunately there are no viable organizations that have gained any significant following in the Netherlands to lead the class struggle. The SP is the best organized mass movement with ties in every sector in society and they have the resources and manpower to organize resistance on multiple levels. All other leftist movements at the moment aren't able to sustain themselves and are de facto non-existent I hate to say.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Not really the Workers Party abandoned this notion a long time ago and instead embraced the neoliberal idea of 'no alternative'

Alright, but that simply means that the Workers' Party has stopped being a reformist "socialist" party and has become a social-democratic or liberal party. Reformism isn't simply a term for any vaguely "left" politics we dislike, it's a specific, anti-Marxist strategy of socialism "in the long run" and state intervention into the market in the short term.


Vanity projects are things that costs huge amount of money without immediate improving the lives of the people. For instance there was a huge library scheduled to be built in my city, while there are community centres being closed by the dozens while we already have a big library that provides adequately. This has been canceled in part due the fact that the SP voted against this project.

I'm not sure the library could be described as a "vanity project" - honestly I think it might provide more positive opportunities than the community centres - but even so, can you really say that the SP did something no other bourgeois party could have done?


There have been some budget cuts in the army as well, unfortunatly these are all done at the costs of job opportunities

Why "unfortunately"? I don't think socialists should be concerned about the job opportunities in a professional imperialist army.


This is true, but it can make a huge difference on the everyday life of the worker. The SP is also busy outside of the government by local activism. Unfortunately there are no viable organizations that have gained any significant following in the Netherlands to lead the class struggle. The SP is the best organized mass movement with ties in every sector in society and they have the resources and manpower to organize resistance on multiple levels. All other leftist movements at the moment aren't able to sustain themselves and are de facto non-existent I hate to say.

But the SP isn't leftist, at least not in the same sense as communists are leftists. If the communist sector in the Netherlands is weak, the worst thing you can do is spread illusions about bourgeois parties (I'm not sure the SP could even be called a bourgeois workers' party) like the SP. This further undermines the movement as people who could spend time organising are drawn into orbit of the SP, fighting for short-term improvements in an inefficient way, and leaving socialism for the "long term".

[Tim Cornelis]

its* its* its* (sorry)

The SP doesn't even want to abolish capitalism in the long run. Their vision of socialism is about "democratisation" of the economy, which they believe can be achieved through progressive taxation. It's not even opposed to the monarchy. How does it use "dialectic materialism"?

[Das war einmal]

Alright, but that simply means that the Workers' Party has stopped being a reformist "socialist" party and has become a social-democratic or liberal party. Reformism isn't simply a term for any vaguely "left" politics we dislike, it's a specific, anti-Marxist strategy of socialism "in the long run" and state intervention into the market in the short term.


How is it anti-Marxist? Marx himself supported for instance the struggle of the US forces against the confederates during the civil war to abolish slavery. Plus he opted for things like the 8-hour work day so reforms that benefit the working class aren't anti-Marxist at all.



I'm not sure the library could be described as a "vanity project" - honestly I think it might provide more positive opportunities than the community centres - but even so, can you really say that the SP did something no other bourgeois party could have done?There is no need for a new library here because we already have a big one and there is more need for community centres believe me. I don't know if other parties voted against this aswel but for other reasons. The SP is the only party that is continually fighting for the needs of the working class and not like other parties on occasions that suit them.




Why "unfortunately"? I don't think socialists should be concerned about the job opportunities in a professional imperialist army.There are plenty of army jobs that don't involve partaking in overseas imperialist combat activity.




But the SP isn't leftist, at least not in the same sense as communists are leftists. If the communist sector in the Netherlands is weak, the worst thing you can do is spread illusions about bourgeois parties (I'm not sure the SP could even be called a bourgeois workers' party) like the SP. This further undermines the movement as people who could spend time organising are drawn into orbit of the SP, fighting for short-term improvements in an inefficient way, and leaving socialism for the "long term".Well easy to say, but the reality is that you can't do much for the local population with other organizations. There are no other 'people's movements' in the Netherlands and every effort done has proven to be fruitless for whatever reason.

[PhoenixAsh]

The only thing I agree with in the whole narrative is that the SP is currently the only party diametrically opposed to austerity. Perhaps the SP is not doing what other parties couldn't do but other parties aren't doing it and the SP is.

There is no more radical leftwing alternative...at least...not one which is active or known outside a very small selective group of those who are really active. People have no clue we still have a communist party for example.

So instead of waiting for a revolution that never comes...the SP is the best alternative besides handing the entire state over to the liberal scum of the VVD and D66

[Das war einmal]

its* its* its* (sorry)

The SP doesn't even want to abolish capitalism in the long run. Their vision of socialism is about "democratisation" of the economy, which they believe can be achieved through progressive taxation. It's not even opposed to the monarchy. How does it use "dialectic materialism"?

It is opposed to the monarchy but due to opportunistic reasons it's not mentioned anymore in their election program. I don't agree with that but can't have everything.

Dialectic materialism is still the core philosophy. The concept of 'quantitative growth leads the qualitative change' is one of the parties beliefs. Democratization of the economy doesn't end with progressive taxation, essentially they are calling for worker owned companies.

I agree that they should be more clear about their anticapitalist principles and their definition of socialism is a bit vague but that's mainly because they haven't paid that much attention to ideology the last 20 years. 'no words but actions' has been the party's motto since the 90's.

[Per Levy]

I know some of you people will think 'so a socialist party won at a bourgeois election woop-dee-do'

erm no, a bourgois party won seats in a bourgois democratic election, woop-dee-do, what else is new?


Already we have more volunteers then ever before.

for what exactly? what are these volunteers used for? what is the end goal?


It's sister parties in Europe are Die Linke in Germany and the Socialist People's Party in Denmark while it has strong ties with the Belgian Workers Party (PVDA)

ah ja die linke, the social democratic party that, whenever in power, does austerity. wich goal it is to make capitalism just a bit nicer(at best). or in other words the left wing of capital, just like the SP of the netherlands.

ps: if DIE PARTEI is your party then i wonder if this all just a joke.

[Das war einmal]

erm no, a bourgois party won seats in a bourgois democratic election, woop-dee-do, what else is new?



for what exactly? what are these volunteers used for? what is the end goal?



ah ja die linke, the social democratic party that, whenever in power, does austerity. wich goal it is to make capitalism just a bit nicer(at best). or in other words the left wing of capital, just like the SP of the netherlands.

ps: if DIE PARTEI is your party then i wonder if this all just a joke.

No Die Partei is a joke, but to prevent confusion I will change it.

Thing is this is actually as good as it's going to get and I celebrate any hope for building a mass party which actually is able to achieve socialism eventually. The SP is the only organization that is able to fight the economical, ideological and political struggle on serious scale in the Netherlands. This makes it essentially the leading mass party in the class struggle. As such I don't see why it has to be labeled bourgeois, the CP of the old days had parliamentary members as well.

And these volunteers are people of all platforms that without receiving any form of reward other then people's appreciation, help people who are suffering from the injustices of capitalism.

Edit: You have every right to be skeptical, hell if I weren't a member myself I would probably be skeptical too and would not give a damn about some election. In some municipalities the SP is the biggest now and now the proof lies with what they will be able to do the coming four years.

[Das war einmal]

The only thing I agree with in the whole narrative is that the SP is currently the only party diametrically opposed to austerity. Perhaps the SP is not doing what other parties couldn't do but other parties aren't doing it and the SP is.

There is no more radical leftwing alternative...at least...not one which is active or known outside a very small selective group of those who are really active. People have no clue we still have a communist party for example.

So instead of waiting for a revolution that never comes...the SP is the best alternative besides handing the entire state over to the liberal scum of the VVD and D66

Well thats why I joined them in the beginning. But the more I know the more I see that the SP has the potential to form a revolutionary movement and why not? Maybe I have it wrong and in 20 years we will see the SP as nothing more then a social-democratic party to the left of the PvdA and perhaps a real revolutionary radical left movement may have formed, it's not what I'll be waiting for.

[Comrade Jacob]

Just like most European parties that call themselves socialists they are really social-democrats. They were once Maoists *sigh*.

[Das war einmal]

Just like most European parties that call themselves socialists they are really social-democrats. They were once Maoists *sigh*.


Well as my username says 'Das war einmal', meaning you can mope about a lost cause but you have to face todays reality. And comrade Mao proved to be a deception too when he invited Nixon over and opened China's gates for our industry to be moved there. Even the Workers Party of Belgium has moved on from it's Maoist roots, even though they're ideologically stronger then the SP in the Netherlands is. The SP is not a social-democratic party like most European parties with the same name. It's between a soc-dem and a marxist-leninist party. It actually still practices democratic centralism during meetings and as I said, dialectic materialism is still a core principal. That makes it different then social-democrats.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

How is it anti-Marxist? Marx himself supported for instance the struggle of the US forces against the confederates during the civil war to abolish slavery. Plus he opted for things like the 8-hour work day so reforms that benefit the working class aren't anti-Marxist at all.

Saying that Marx "opted" for the eight-hour work day is, well, odd. It's not as if Marx came up with that idea over coffee one morning. The demand arose in the workers' movement, and socialists accepted it as a correct albeit necessarily limited slogan.

But fighting for reforms is not reformism - the Bolsheviks fought for reforms as well, but they didn't think, as the SP apparently thinks, that the bourgeois state can be slowly tweaked until it becomes socialist.


The SP is the only party that is continually fighting for the needs of the working class and not like other parties on occasions that suit them.

If this were the case, they wouldn't try to spread illusions about bourgeois parliamentarianism, but would organise the workers to smash the bourgeois state, their esteemed representatives in the parliament not excluded.


There are plenty of army jobs that don't involve partaking in overseas imperialist combat activity.

And these jobs enable the army to carry out the dictates of the Dutch bourgeoisie.


Well easy to say, but the reality is that you can't do much for the local population with other organizations. There are no other 'people's movements' in the Netherlands and every effort done has proven to be fruitless for whatever reason.

Well, this sort of attitude is definitely part of the problem. You "can't do much for the local population", in the short term, without working through bourgeois parties, but what that means in the long term is that any militancy is channeled into helping one faction of the bourgeoisie. Imagine if black militants in America declined to found their separate organisations because they couldn't help the local population unless they worked through the Democratic Party.

[PhoenixAsh]

Well thats why I joined them in the beginning. But the more I know the more I see that the SP has the potential to form a revolutionary movement and why not? Maybe I have it wrong and in 20 years we will see the SP as nothing more then a social-democratic party to the left of the PvdA and perhaps a real revolutionary radical left movement may have formed, it's not what I'll be waiting for.

I joined them in the late 80's...when they still had Marxism-Leninism in their principles program. I left after the 1994 elections...although I was asked to run on the election list for the city council a few years later.

The SP isn't revolutionary anymore. It could very well be that it will be again but not with the current leadership.

I do agree that the SP is not a social-democratic party in the true sense. Maybe they could be more easily classified as a branch of democratic socialists.

[Das war einmal]

Saying that Marx "opted" for the eight-hour work day is, well, odd. It's not as if Marx came up with that idea over coffee one morning. The demand arose in the workers' movement, and socialists accepted it as a correct albeit necessarily limited slogan.

But fighting for reforms is not reformism - the Bolsheviks fought for reforms as well, but they didn't think, as the SP apparently thinks, that the bourgeois state can be slowly tweaked until it becomes socialist.


What makes you think the SP thinks this? If that were the case it would ignore the trade unions and abandon street activism or any of that. The bolshevik-state route was the blueprint for CP's everywhere and that didnt work. So now we have to think of another way that does.



If this were the case, they wouldn't try to spread illusions about bourgeois parliamentarianism, but would organise the workers to smash the bourgeois state, their esteemed representatives in the parliament not excluded.They're not spreading that idea but neither do they promote the idea of 'smash the bourgeois state'. There is no clear plan in order to achieve socialism right now and the SP is trying to find out what works.




And these jobs enable the army to carry out the dictates of the Dutch bourgeoisie.True but I was talking about the benefits for people without jobs. For a person it's better for himself to work for either a capitalist employee or bourgeois state then to be jobless. It makes him/her feel worthless.




Well, this sort of attitude is definitely part of the problem. You "can't do much for the local population", in the short term, without working through bourgeois parties, but what that means in the long term is that any militancy is channeled into helping one faction of the bourgeoisie. Imagine if black militants in America declined to found their separate organisations because they couldn't help the local population unless they worked through the Democratic Party.I don't consider the SP a faction of the bourgeois just because they take part in elections. A militant can have a lot of influence in the party.

[Das war einmal]

I joined them in the late 80's...when they still had Marxism-Leninism in their principles program. I left after the 1994 elections...although I was asked to run on the election list for the city council a few years later.

The SP isn't revolutionary anymore. It could very well be that it will be again but not with the current leadership.

I do agree that the SP is not a social-democratic party in the true sense. Maybe they could be more easily classified as a branch of democratic socialists.

Just curious then, what do you do since you left the party? I am part of a younger generation mind you so I wasn't around in the 80's where things where much more dependent on the leadership.

[FSL]

Here we see people being happy because with their support for "lesser evils" they managed to stop having money thrown away on vanity projects like libraries (which doesn't even make sense under a keynesian point of view since that's eactly what you'd want the government to be doing, generating jobs).



But you know, since that's how revolutionary movements are built in some people's minds, go ahead, have fun.

[Das war einmal]

Here we see people being happy because with their support for "lesser evils" they managed to stop having money thrown away on vanity projects like libraries (which doesn't even make sense under a keynesian point of view since that's eactly what you'd want the government to be doing, generating jobs).



But you know, since that's how revolutionary movements are built in some people's minds, go ahead, have fun.


Ehr no you misinterpretate me. The library was an example and was in fact, a vanity project, as it would have costs millions of euro's and as I told a couple of times before we already have a pretty big library here to begin with. Other vanity projects include the 'cultural capital of Europe' project or the one bringing the tour de France here. I'm not against these types of projects far from it, but strictly viewed in an utilitarian way I rather have it that the money is spend on elderly care, proper housing and community centers.

It's far from the best solution and I rather have it we would indeed spend money to reinvigorate the economy like you said, the Keynesian way. This is actually what the SP wants. Unfortunatly they are the only party that sees it that way. So when you only have two options a) a million dollar vanity project like the library that is not really needed or b) spend that money on improving the lives of the working class like preventing the closure of community centers, then it's in my opinion better to choose b.

PS. I believe you are a member of the KKE, wouldn't you be glad if your party won more then 2x times as many seats in municipalities, resulting in having more influence, being able to do more for the people locally?

[Art Vandelay]

I'm not entirely sold on participating in parliaments as a tactic but I don't think there are any "reformist" parties in this sense in existence anymore.

I don't think that Vincent West is using the term reformist in the historic sense, as in referring to the tendency within the 2nd international which propagated for a peaceful parliamentary road to socialism, but rather is intending it to be interpreted with the modern connotations of groups who subjectively seek the overthrow of capitalism in the traditional Marxist sense of social revolution, but whose tactics/program results in them being incapable of making tangible contributions to this end.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

The only thing I agree with in the whole narrative is that the SP is currently the only party diametrically opposed to austerity. Perhaps the SP is not doing what other parties couldn't do but other parties aren't doing it and the SP is.

There is no more radical leftwing alternative...at least...not one which is active or known outside a very small selective group of those who are really active. People have no clue we still have a communist party for example.

So instead of waiting for a revolution that never comes...the SP is the best alternative besides handing the entire state over to the liberal scum of the VVD and D66

During the twenties when fascism was erupting in Italy, comrade Graziadei argued that the Communist party should support the social democratic party in the arena of political struggle because the Communist movement was too weak to successfully defeat fascism on its own and no progress could be made until that goal had been achieved. To which Gramsci replied:

"The same pessimism that and the save deviations lead to an incorrect interpretation of the nature and historical function of the social democratic parties at the present time. They lead to forgetting that social democracy, although it still to a great extent conserves its social base in the proletariat, must so far as its ideology and it's political function it fulfils are concerned to be considered, not a right wing of the working-class movement, but as a left wing of the bourgeois, and as such must be unmasked in the eyes of the bourgeois." (Antonio Gramsci, the Italian Situation and the Tasks of the Communist Party)

In the modern context we do not face fascism on a mass scale but rather the spectre of "austerity". The difference between the later and the former is that the former is a political movement which can be combated on a political scale while the later is the result of decadent imperialism in its death throes which is afflicted by a decreasing rate of profit. There can be no political movement to combat what is an economic force in history, any attempt to reverse austerity would only serve to worsen the economic situation. So even if the Dutch Socialist Party were actually eurocommunists which they are not, giving them political support would only fool the proletariat into believing the dutch socialist party is the solution to their problems when if given power, they would be either forced to conform to managing austerity or running the Netherlands into the ground.

To the Dutch Socialist Party members here. I do understand why you are defensive of this party, from my interactions with the dutch left it seems that the radical bourgeois theorists with Marxist pretensions have written many a tomes devoted to convincing the left that this is the most effective course for Communists to take. And many of you have devoted years or decades to supporting the Dutch Socialist Party in one way or another. However, the point I am making is what is to be accomplished through this course of action. It isn't unproductive to support them in anyway, it's down right counter productive. So instead of spending that time attending some meting for your local social democrats or some rally where you get to pretend faux militancy by yelling slogans very loudly, why don't you just do something more enjoyable and productive with your life? Reconnect with lost love ones, make new friends, go out and hit some bars with your friends, play some minecraft or enjoy a book. Or even continue to engage in activist shenanigans if that's what you truly enjoy and what gets you out of the house. But don't pretend that it is productive on any political level.

But if you truly want to engage in revolutionary politics, do something that is less pointless than supporting the bourgeois, work towards building the revolutionary communist alternative.


PS. I believe you are a member of the KKE, wouldn't you be glad if your party won more then 2x times as many seats in municipalities, resulting in having more influence, being able to do more for the people locally?

I believe I can speak for him, myself, and the rest of the camp of revolutionary communism, when I say that he would most likely be disgusted if his party renounced it's revolutionary credentials and became in a better position to serve the bourgeois as a result.

[PhoenixAsh]

Here we see people being happy because with their support for "lesser evils" they managed to stop having money thrown away on vanity projects like libraries (which doesn't even make sense under a keynesian point of view since that's eactly what you'd want the government to be doing, generating jobs).



But you know, since that's how revolutionary movements are built in some people's minds, go ahead, have fun.

Oi; FSL....didn't the KKE participate in government once?? Isn't it a parliamentary party? And didn't you staunchly defend their handing over of activists and actual revolutionaries to the cops in order to protect the vestiges of bourgeois power against any form of social revolution? And wasn't it the KKE official who allowed fascists to participate and hand out propaganda material during a strike?

@OMGbuthtatistotallydifferentbecause:[insertsomeKKEsectarianismhere]


Soooooo.....what is your actual point in this thread?


o...and about the library project, it would serve to close local libraries in favor of one central library actually costing jobs and barring people from easy access to literature etc.

[PhoenixAsh]

Just curious then, what do you do since you left the party? I am part of a younger generation mind you so I wasn't around in the 80's where things where much more dependent on the leadership.

True, but I was mainly active on a local and regional level because there was no other local party even close to my ideology. During the early 90's I participated in activities only because I liked some of the people and actually didn't want to say no. But had already began international oriented activism with revolutionary activist groups and antifa action. And in the late 1994 I was just a member in name only so I eventually left.

[Das war einmal]

During the twenties when fascism was erupting in Italy, comrade Graziadei argued that the Communist party should support the social democratic party in the arena of political struggle because the Communist movement was too weak to successfully defeat fascism on its own and no progress could be made until that goal had been achieved. To which Gramsci replied:

"The same pessimism that and the save deviations lead to an incorrect interpretation of the nature and historical function of the social democratic parties at the present time. They lead to forgetting that social democracy, although it still to a great extent conserves its social base in the proletariat, must so far as its ideology and it's political function it fulfils are concerned to be considered, not a right wing of the working-class movement, but as a left wing of the bourgeois, and as such must be unmasked in the eyes of the bourgeois." (Antonio Gramsci, the Italian Situation and the Tasks of the Communist Party)

In the modern context we do not face fascism on a mass scale but rather the spectre of "austerity". The difference between the later and the former is that the former is a political movement which can be combated on a political scale while the later is the result of decadent imperialism in its death throes which is afflicted by a decreasing rate of profit. There can be no political movement to combat what is an economic force in history, any attempt to reverse austerity would only serve to worsen the economic situation. So even if the Dutch Socialist Party were actually eurocommunists which they are not, giving them political support would only fool the proletariat into believing the dutch socialist party is the solution to their problems when if given power, they would be either forced to conform to managing austerity or running the Netherlands into the ground.

To the Dutch Socialist Party members here. I do understand why you are defensive of this party, from my interactions with the dutch left it seems that the radical bourgeois theorists with Marxist pretensions have written many a tomes devoted to convincing the left that this is the most effective course for Communists to take. And many of you have devoted years or decades to supporting the Dutch Socialist Party in one way or another. However, the point I am making is what is to be accomplished through this course of action. It isn't unproductive to support them in anyway, it's down right counter productive. So instead of spending that time attending some meting for your local social democrats or some rally where you get to pretend faux militancy by yelling slogans very loudly, why don't you just do something more enjoyable and productive with your life? Reconnect with lost love ones, make new friends, go out and hit some bars with your friends, play some minecraft or enjoy a book. Or even contained to engage in activist shenanigans if that's what you truly enjoy and what gets you out of the house. But don't pretend that it is productive on any political level.

But if you truly want to engage in revolutionary politics, do something that is less pointless than supporting the bourgeois, work towards building the revolutionary communist alternative.

Ah I see, how is the resurrection of the 4th international coming along? Or is it hampering your progress in Minecraft? It just so happens that we in our city have helped evicted people get new housing. It's not as revolutionary as selling newspapers at demonstrations, granted, but it just so happens I like doing these bourgeois stuff.

[Drowzy_Shooter]

It appears as though a "social-democrat" party has had a good result in elections. Why would this be something for us on the far left to support? It's been said that the Dutch Communist Party is lacking influence, well why not route all your efforts into supporting this new party for an attempt to establish the actual communist party as a political force rather than cheering on a "social-democrat" party that co-operates with the bourgeoisie?

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

Ah I see, how is the resurrection of the 4th international coming along? Or is it hampering your progress in Minecraft? It just so happens that we in our city have helped evicted people get new housing. It's not as revolutionary as selling newspapers at demonstrations, granted, but it just so happens I like doing these bourgeois stuff.

The "resurrect the fourth international" is a joke. And who says I support selling newspapers at demonstrations as if that accomplishes anything.

And I wasn't being passive aggressive, if you enjoy that then go ahead, who am I to tell you otherwise.

[Das war einmal]

It appears as though a "social-democrat" party has had a good result in elections. Why would this be something for us on the far left to support? It's been said that the Dutch Communist Party is lacking influence, well why not route all your efforts support this new party into attempting to establish the actual communist party as a political force rather than cheering on a "social-democrat" party that co-operates with the bourgeoisie?

Whether or not you support this is up to yourself, but seeing as this is the best result for the real actual left in the Netherlands has had in years I thought it was worth mentioning. Certainly in a traditional right-leaning country as ours.

As in attempting to establish the actual CP I did try but it didn't work out for me and sooner or later they would have to co-operate with the bourgeoisie as well.

Come to think of it, it's rather natural to work with the bourgeoisie at some point, as you live in this system where everything you do is helping them one way or another. Co-operating with the bourgeois does not necessarily mean you give in to their demands.

The SP is democratic socialist not social-democrat. Every victory that is beneficial for the working class is something the far left should support. Granted it's not proven yet that this will be beneficial but seeing as the things we have achieved already with fewer seats and votes I have good hope that it is.

[Das war einmal]

The "resurrect the fourth international" is a joke. And who says I support selling newspapers at demonstrations as if that accomplishes anything.

And I wasn't being passive aggressive, if you enjoy that then go ahead, who am I to tell you otherwise.

Well your post comes over as really defeatist. No matter what your tendency is: M-L, trotskyist, anarchist, left commie or whatever it's equally very easy to say it's counterproductive. That's vile and stupid. If someones work within whatever leftist organization helped someone else in their struggle then you should not say it has no value whatsoever.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

Well your post comes over as really defeatist. No matter what your tendency is: M-L, trotskyist, anarchist, left commie or whatever it's equally very easy to say it's counterproductive. That's vile and stupid. If someones work within whatever leftist organization helped someone else in their struggle then you should not say it has no value whatsoever.

Defeatist? On the contrary it is you who is saying that the Dutch Socialist Party is the best we can do. I simply do not think that we fool ourselves into thinking that such a course of action is productive and that we should focus our efforts on building a real communist movement as opposed to the dead end of social democracy

[Drowzy_Shooter]

Come to think of it, it's rather natural to work with the bourgeoisie at some point, as you live in this system where everything you do is helping them one way or another. Co-operating with the bourgeois does not necessarily mean you give in to their demands.


How is it ever natural for those of us who are on the side of the proletariat to work with the bourgeois? It may be semantics, but the distinction between working WITH the bourgeois and WITHIN is an important distinction. In addition, I think it is quite possible that there are many courses of action that do not "help them in one way or another" (them being the bourgeoisie). I appreciate your line about Co-Operating with the bourgeois not meaning you give into them, however it would appear to me that a socialist party that denounces Maoism and becomes "social-democrat" is quite evidently giving into the bourgeois.

[FSL]

PS. I believe you are a member of the KKE, wouldn't you be glad if your party won more then 2x times as many seats in municipalities, resulting in having more influence, being able to do more for the people locally?
You completely disregard the politics of the parties.
Like we're simply supposed to be happy if the party with which we identify does well in elections, regardless of whether it's a revolutionary party or not.
That it is the sole leftist party with some recognition means nothing.
In fact, it's probably a bad thing it's stronger now, if all it can achieve is reinforce wrong views.



Oi; FSL....didn't the KKE participate in government once?? Isn't it a parliamentary party? And didn't you staunchly defend their handing over of activists and actual revolutionaries to the cops in order to protect the vestiges of bourgeois power against any form of social revolution? And wasn't it the KKE official who allowed fascists to participate and hand out propaganda material during a strike?

@OMGbuthtatistotallydifferentbecause:[insertsomeKKEsectarianismhere]


Soooooo.....what is your actual point in this thread?


o...and about the library project, it would serve to close local libraries in favor of one central library actually costing jobs and barring people from easy access to literature etc.
As you must clearly remember, I've already told you I have no interest in your opinion on anything. I've seen many people similar to you (anarchists and hard revolutionaries that also want to keep "right scum" out of office) and I don't need to hear the same drivel all the time.

KKE participated in a government lasting three months once in 1989 to not have any criminal actions by the members of the previous greek government forgiven without trial (according to an embarassing law we have).
Even so that was as well a mistake, a wrong stance corrected now.
But if you really want to talk about the past, then let's talk about the KKE-led revolutionary war in 1946-49 or about the thirty years of exiles and executions that followed.

Or we could talk about the present and about just how much better KKE is compared to pseudo-anarchists like yourself and the various "left" parties your type supports in a vain effort to humanize capitalism.

We shouldn't in any case be talking about your fantasies.

[FSL]

As in attempting to establish the actual CP I did try but it didn't work out for me and sooner or later they would have to co-operate with the bourgeoisie as well.

How would it work out for you and what do you mean when you say they'd need to cooperate eventually?

[Das war einmal]

Defeatist? On the contrary it is you who is saying that the Dutch Socialist Party is the best we can do. I simply do not think that we fool ourselves into thinking that such a course of action is productive and that we should focus our efforts on building a real communist movement as opposed to the dead end of social democracy

Your posts are very cynical and more importantly, you don't understand the situation here. The SP isn't as outspoken Marxist as other self-proclaimed 'revolutionary' organization in the Netherlands, but that doesn't say anything at all.

I rather be a part of the SP and take part in serious class struggle and help in people's direct needs over flogging a dead horse. I have been a member of the CP for a couple of years and it is just that. In its defense it's not a matter of just putting in effort and make it happen. If you would live here and see for yourself perhaps you would understand.

And yes building a stronger party for the benefit of the working class is more productive then resurrecting the CP as I have noticed the differences first hand.

[PhoenixAsh]

During the twenties when fascism was erupting in Italy, comrade Graziadei argued that the Communist party should support the social democratic party in the arena of political struggle because the Communist movement was too weak to successfully defeat fascism on its own and no progress could be made until that goal had been achieved. To which Gramsci replied:

"The same pessimism that and the save deviations lead to an incorrect interpretation of the nature and historical function of the social democratic parties at the present time. They lead to forgetting that social democracy, although it still to a great extent conserves its social base in the proletariat, must so far as its ideology and it's political function it fulfils are concerned to be considered, not a right wing of the working-class movement, but as a left wing of the bourgeois, and as such must be unmasked in the eyes of the bourgeois." (Antonio Gramsci, the Italian Situation and the Tasks of the Communist Party)

Seriously? You are comparing the Dutch political landscape with the Italian situation more than 90 years ago?

Let me explain something. Since the 80's the Communist Party has been systematically destroyed by students, eco leftists and radical feminists...becoming a weird surreal cuddle party with no attachment to the reality of the day to day lives of actual workers. Then it eventually merged into GL when they lost any and all real form of influence in the labour movements.

The NCPN consisted in the early 90's of about 50 people most of which were in their late 50's through 80's who were prone to outbursts of how beautiful life had been when Stalin was around and who rejected any and all forms of community activism. They lived in a world where Milosovic was the next great socialist leader and should be defended at all costs. Basically they wrote angry articles on their website which got all of 10 hits a month. The VCP isn't much better although they have legislative presence in some small communities in the North of the country.

And although I understand the NCPN has grown somewhat and at one point had a slightly active youth group attached...they still remain, as a party, thoroughly rooted in the past. Nobody ever hears from them and from time to time the media actually posts something about a communist enclave in the North of the country and everybody is all surprised and goes: "o...they are still around?"

There is currently no revolutionary party which has any real influence....nor will there be a party with that kind of influence any time soon. The only substantial anti-capitalist revolutionary activism comes from the antifa movement, squad movements and various autonomous and anarchist groups. Who only a few years back managed to start a union.

In the meantime traditional labour unions have sold out big time and are losing members fast. With no worker communities of any real size The Netherlands has become a service economy in which nobody actually wants to see themselves as working class nor do we have any chance to collectively unionize large quantities of workers since companies are small and fragmented with only a handful of employees.

So creating a revolutionary movement in a society that has historically been compartmentalized through the bone....it is going to take some time.

But we are faced with heavy austerity measures...right now...right here...at this moment. Food banks which had been absent for decades have been reintroduced and social security, healthcare, unemployment benefits, elderly care and childcare have been reduced to near poverty line.

The ONLY party currently fighting these austerity measures and fighting to protect labour rights and the huge subsidies for companies and trying to implement some form of wage equality is the SP.

With the revolutionary scene all but scattered and fragmented...I hardly think you can compare the Dutch situation with a completely different situation 90+ years ago.

This isn't pessimism. This is reality.

This is not some theoretical exercise but the complete bankruptcy of the revolutionary movement in the Netherlands.





In the modern context we do not face fascism on a mass scale but rather the spectre of "austerity". The difference between the later and the former is that the former is a political movement which can be combated on a political scale while the later is the result of decadent imperialism in its death throes which is afflicted by a decreasing rate of profit. There can be no political movement to combat what is an economic force in history, any attempt to reverse austerity would only serve to worsen the economic situation. So even if the Dutch Socialist Party were actually eurocommunists which they are not, giving them political support would only fool the proletariat into believing the dutch socialist party is the solution to their problems when if given power, they would be either forced to conform to managing austerity or running the Netherlands into the ground.

Every party that wants to do so gets their program checked and calculated for economic feasibility. Which the SP is remarkably consistent in doing. So they wouldn't run the country into the ground.

But I bet you actually have a great realistic short term alternative for the working class that would actually relieve their plight on the short run. Or are you going to take the KKE line: let them starve until they are ready to join us in huge numbers?



To the Dutch Socialist Party members here. I do understand why you are defensive of this party, from my interactions with the dutch left it seems that the radical bourgeois theorists with Marxist pretensions have written many a tomes devoted to convincing the left that this is the most effective course for Communists to take.

There are about 500 communists left in The Netherlands. Managing a whopping total of 1230 votes the last time they participated in any elections.

Now...I am uncertain why you are directing your huge quantity of horse and bullshit at me...since I am neither a member of the SP nor do I vote for the SP...nor do I think it is revolutionary in any workable sense.

But I have also been a member of basically the only two communist parties we have in The Netherlands. And I think I am somewhat more qualified to speak to their actual level of communism and their activism (non existent).



And many of you have devoted years or decades to supporting the Dutch Socialist Party in one way or another. However, the point I am making is what is to be accomplished through this course of action. It isn't unproductive to support them in anyway, it's down right counter productive. So instead of spending that time attending some meting for your local social democrats or some rally where you get to pretend faux militancy by yelling slogans very loudly, why don't you just do something more enjoyable and productive with your life? Reconnect with lost love ones, make new friends, go out and hit some bars with your friends, play some minecraft or enjoy a book. Or even continue to engage in activist shenanigans if that's what you truly enjoy and what gets you out of the house. But don't pretend that it is productive on any political level.

Because the only politics is revolutionary politics. Now...I know you are trampling with impatience to let the working class starve because that is the only way you and your ilk think they will "learn their lesson" and turn communist, socialist or anarchist... But you don't have to be so obvious about it. Nor do you seem to realize that we simply do not have any real communist or socialist activism outside antifa, autonomous/anarchist groups and the squad movements.



But if you truly want to engage in revolutionary politics, do something that is less pointless than supporting the bourgeois, work towards building the revolutionary communist alternative.


Who says we aren't?

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

What makes you think the SP thinks this? If that were the case it would ignore the trade unions and abandon street activism or any of that.

How so? Openly bourgeois parties can - and usually do - engage in trade union and street activism. As for why I think the SP wants to work through the bourgeois state, well:


The bolshevik-state route was the blueprint for CP's everywhere and that didnt work. So now we have to think of another way that does.

This is the same tired old refrain, used by social democrats, democratic socialists a la Harrington etc. "Communism doesn't work, so let's find out what does work." (Spoiler: that means working through the bourgeois state).

As you yourself say:


They're not spreading that idea but neither do they promote the idea of 'smash the bourgeois state'.

But obviously they are trying to manage the bourgeois state. So yeah, I don't see how their - your - position could be construed as anything other than garden-variety Bernsteinism. It's not even the case that, as you say:


There is no clear plan in order to achieve socialism right now and the SP is trying to find out what works.

Which, incidentally, would be horrible. "What do we want? Er... When do we want it? Um...".


True but I was talking about the benefits for people without jobs. For a person it's better for himself to work for either a capitalist employee or bourgeois state then to be jobless. It makes him/her feel worthless.

So the solution is to participate in the bombing of brown people? That's a new one. If you want to improve the material situation of the unemployed, fight for more unemployment benefits (and educate people that their worth is not decided by their employment). But of course, every opportunist group must tail public opinion, which is, at the moment, decidedly against the "parasitic" benefit claimants.


I don't consider the SP a faction of the bourgeois just because they take part in elections.

Neither do I. I consider them a bourgeois party because of what they're trying to accomplish by standing in elections, their programme etc.


I don't think that Vincent West is using the term reformist in the historic sense, as in referring to the tendency within the 2nd international which propagated for a peaceful parliamentary road to socialism, but rather is intending it to be interpreted with the modern connotations of groups who subjectively seek the overthrow of capitalism in the traditional Marxist sense of social revolution, but whose tactics/program results in them being incapable of making tangible contributions to this end.

Well, that is how I would generally interpret the term, but the Dutch SP seems like a "historic" reformist group to me - as does e.g. the Croatian Socialist Workers' Party, the American DSA etc.

[PhoenixAsh]

It appears as though a "social-democrat" party has had a good result in elections. Why would this be something for us on the far left to support? It's been said that the Dutch Communist Party is lacking influence, well why not route all your efforts into supporting this new party for an attempt to establish the actual communist party as a political force rather than cheering on a "social-democrat" party that co-operates with the bourgeoisie?

New party? Read my previous post.

I would like to add...the NCPN was established out of CPN members which did not agree with the merge. Most of them are on live support. Most of them reject any form of action and organization since they are so f-ing desillusioned with there being no factories and large collectives of workers.

[FSL]

The SP isn't as outspoken Marxist as
So it is outspoken Marxist "in some degree" then?
And what degree is that?


It takes part in serious class struggle ie the library vanity project you mentioned?
What's its opinion on the current state, should it be smashed and replaced by a workers' state, for example?
Because I don't see how could it be taking part in serious class struggle, that is struggle aiming in a revolutionary change of the society, but refusing to speak of it.

You see, the thing with the lesser evils is that no matter how few are actually achieved, people still like them because they didn't have a lot going on for them in the first place. They were just the least bad thing around.
So are you actually taking part in serious class struggle, are you getting bosses anxious?
Or are you simply proposing wiser budget cuts (that's the impression of the party you're giving here)?

[Das war einmal]

How is it ever natural for those of us who are on the side of the proletariat to work with the bourgeois? It may be semantics, but the distinction between working WITH the bourgeois and WITHIN is an important distinction. In addition, I think it is quite possible that there are many courses of action that do not "help them in one way or another" (them being the bourgeoisie). I appreciate your line about Co-Operating with the bourgeois not meaning you give into them, however it would appear to me that a socialist party that denounces Maoism and becomes "social-democrat" is quite evidently giving into the bourgeois.

Because we live in a capitalist society, that is completely dominated by the bourgeoisie. So unless we live on a different planet, you're gonna have to cooperate with some aspects some time. This means using the media, voting for proposals that are beneficial for the working class, supporting small business against big corporations (e.g. because they give workers better treatment) or working with bourgeois parties in actions against racism or fascism. I could go on but you get the idea. Denouncing maoism is only natural because it's an irrelevant ideology here, nothing to do with giving in but facing the reality.


You completely disregard the politics of the parties.
Like we're simply supposed to be happy if the party with which we identify does well in elections, regardless of whether it's a revolutionary party or not.
That it is the sole leftist party with some recognition means nothing.
In fact, it's probably a bad thing it's stronger now, if all it can achieve is reinforce wrong views.
.
Well in my defense I am happy cause I believe it has true potential. And how can it be a bad thing if it helps the cause of the working class in the Netherlands?

Calling your party revolutionary doesn't make it so, a lesson that the SP learned. An anarchist or trotksyist will say the KKE isn't revolutionary for example, calling it won't convince them.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

This means using the media, voting for proposals that are beneficial for the working class, supporting small business against big corporations (e.g. because they give workers better treatment) or working with bourgeois parties in actions against racism or fascism.

I think this says it all, really.

[PhoenixAsh]

As you must clearly remember, I've already told you I have no interest in your opinion on anything. I've seen many people similar to you (anarchists and hard revolutionaries that also want to keep "right scum" out of office) and I don't need to hear the same drivel all the time.

I have no interest in what you have or don't have interest in. I think that was perfectly clear as well. Don't want me to call you out on your blatant support for a class collaborating and working class betraying party then don't post.


KKE participated in a government lasting three months once in 1989 to not have any criminal actions by the members of the previous greek government forgiven without trial (according to an embarassing law we have).
Even so that was as well a mistake, a wrong stance corrected now.

Really? Have they stopped participating in parliament? Have they collectively given up their seats?

O...wait...no. They are doing EXACTLY what you are accusing the SP of.



But if you really want to talk about the past, then let's talk about the KKE-led revolutionary war in 1946-49 or about the thirty years of exiles and executions that followed.

And the murder of Anarchists and Trotskyists and betraying their own members? Should we talk about that as well?

Or should we talk about their more recent activity of handing activists over to the cops, protecting parliament from being stormed, their support of nationalist parties like the CP of the Ukraine?



Or we could talk about the present and about just how much better KKE is compared to pseudo-anarchists like yourself and the various "left" parties your type supports in a vain effort to humanize capitalism.

Didn't the KKE lose from the GD?


We shouldn't in any case be talking about your fantasies.

I personally don't give a shit what some bourgeois collaborator wants and doesn't want.

Said the one who has been systematically voting in bourgeois elections for the KKE which participates in bourgeois elections, governments and parliament.

Hypocrisy much?

Unlike you I am not a member of any political party participating in parliament; nor do I vote...at all. So...rather than accusing me of something you might want to check yoruself out first and make sure you are spiffy clean. After spending weeks and months defending handing anarchists and trotskyists over and spend post after post defending the KKE killing trotskyists and Anarchists and leftcoms I think the one who is seriously misguided is you.

[FSL]

Well in my defense I am happy cause I believe it has true potential. And how can it be a bad thing if it helps the cause of the working class in the Netherlands?

Calling your party revolutionary doesn't make it so, a lesson that the SP learned. An anarchist or trotksyist will say the KKE isn't revolutionary for example, calling it won't convince them.

The thing is that you are calling your party not revolutionary and you seem perfectly fine with that.

[Drowzy_Shooter]

Because we live in a capitalist society, that is completely dominated by the bourgeoisie. So unless we live on a different planet, you're gonna have to cooperate with some aspects some time. This means using the media, voting for proposals that are beneficial for the working class, supporting small business against big corporations (e.g. because they give workers better treatment) or working with bourgeois parties in actions against racism or fascism. I could go on but you get the idea. Denouncing maoism is only natural because it's an irrelevant ideology here, nothing to do with giving in but facing the reality.


You mean to say that the reality is that the best option after renouncing Maoism becomes being Social Democrats?

[PhoenixAsh]

What people seem to forget is that the SP is currently the only party fighting austerity and protecting the working class. There is no debate whether the SP is revolutionary...they aren't in any real sense. The best label is democratic socialists of some form.

They do however manage to get people to participate in political activism on a large scale. And that is something we should all be happy about because it is the very first step in creating class consciousness and readiness to participate in activism.

Unlike great revolutionary societies...like, say, the US or UK...the Dutch lack a revolutionary party or even a strongly revolutionary political history or tradition. Creating class consciousness sadly, unlike these great revolutionary examples I mentioned, needs to come through other ways and directions. In this case it is the SP.

[PhoenixAsh]

You mean to say that the reality is that the best option after renouncing Maoism becomes being Social Democrats?

democratic socialist

[Das war einmal]

How so? Openly bourgeois parties can - and usually do - engage in trade union and street activism.

No they don't. Not here. In all my years I haven't seen any street type activism and except for the SP no party constantly support the trade unions (which as Phoenixash describes have been highly reformists but unfortunatly are all we have)


As for why I think the SP wants to work through the bourgeois state, well:



This is the same tired old refrain, used by social democrats, democratic socialists a la Harrington etc. "Communism doesn't work, so let's find out what does work." (Spoiler: that means working through the bourgeois state).

I don't say communism doesn't work, I say the exact dogmatic method of the old M-L line didn't work. Cause you know it didn't.






But obviously they are trying to manage the bourgeois state. So yeah, I don't see how their - your - position could be construed as anything other than garden-variety Bernsteinism. It's not even the case that, as you say:



Which, incidentally, would be horrible. "What do we want? Er... When do we want it? Um...".


Thats because the situation is drastically different here and now then it was in 1917 Russia. Following a doomed blueprint to socialism is rather pointless. That doesn't mean we got no vision, but its not strictly planned.



So the solution is to participate in the bombing of brown people? That's a new one. If you want to improve the material situation of the unemployed, fight for more unemployment benefits (and educate people that their worth is not decided by their employment). But of course, every opportunist group must tail public opinion, which is, at the moment, decidedly against the "parasitic" benefit claimants.

I'm against bombing whoever and will always oppose that. And I'm not against benefits, on the contraire. Where did you get that idea? I only say that for lot of people it's better for their self esteem if they have a job they like. We can have an army and not bomb people you know.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

What people seem to forget is that the SP is currently the only party fighting austerity and protecting the working class.

Yeah, like SYRIZA and Die Linke.


They do however manage to get people to participate in political activism on a large scale. And that is something we should all be happy about because it is the very first step in creating class consciousness and readiness to participate in activism.

So the first step toward class consciousness is to participate in a struggle to manage capital in some specific way? Not only does this literally make no sense, the PVV and the PvdA already do this - get people to participate in activism along those lines - much more successfully than the SP.


Unlike great revolutionary societies...like, say, the US or UK...the Dutch lack a revolutionary party or even a strongly revolutionary political history or tradition.

There's a revolutionary party in the US or the UK?

[Das war einmal]

Yeah, like SYRIZA and Die Linke.



So the first step toward class consciousness is to participate in a struggle to manage capital in some specific way?


No the first step is teaching the members about marxism and why the SP should follow in its tradition which I'm currently doing at the moment.

[Das war einmal]

The thing is that you are calling your party not revolutionary and you seem perfectly fine with that.

It's not revolutionary in name but that doesn't mean it has no potential at becoming one eventually.

[PhoenixAsh]

Yeah, like SYRIZA and Die Linke.

Who ever.


So the first step toward class consciousness is to participate in a struggle to manage capital in some specific way? Not only does this literally make no sense, the PVV and the PvdA already do this - get people to participate in activism along those lines - much more successfully than the SP.

You really haven't got any fucking clue about The Netherlands do you? Because that line was so full of idiotic nonsense and so fundamentally untrue it is plain comedy gold.


There's a revolutionary party in the US or the UK?

No there isn't...hence my point.

[FSL]

It's not revolutionary in name but that doesn't mean it has no potential at becoming one eventually.
So what percentage of its membership does want a revolution? Because even you here said that "these things don't work nowadays".

And if it's large enough, why don't the revolutionaries break away from the reformists instead of remaining there and having their politics neutered?



No the first step is teaching the members about marxism and why the SP should follow in its tradition which I'm currently doing at the moment.
So you're practicing a one-man entryism?
And success is you convincing them that revolutions like Russia's don't work anymore so something else is needed?


The things you say give us little reason to believe that the strengthening of this party will mean something good for the working class.

[Drowzy_Shooter]

It's not revolutionary in name but that doesn't mean it has no potential at becoming one eventually.

But again, why attach support to a party that has to "become revolutionary" rather than to a party that is following a line of being "revolutionary". Or as fsl said, why not split off to form a party with actual revolutionary intent?

[PhoenixAsh]

So what percentage of its membership does want a revolution? Because even you here said that "these things don't work nowadays".

And if it's large enough, why don't the revolutionaries break away from the reformists instead of remaining there and having their politics neutered?



So you're practicing a one-man entryism?
And success is you convincing them that revolutions like Russia's don't work anymore so something else is needed?

The things you say give us little reason to believe that the strengthening of this party will mean something good for the working class.

FSL...you long ago lost any credibility to adequately assess what strengthens the working class and what does and doesn't mean something good for the working class. Your continued support for and participation in elections for bourgeois collaborationist parties that actively betray the working class like the KKE make your entire participation in this thread a hypocritical joke.

Some revolutionaries work within the SP to radicalize the membership and create class conscious among workers who do not see themselves as workers. The Dutch working class doesn't see itself as working class. There is NO class consciousness in The Netherlands. At all.

Currently there is no revolutionary alternative which has any inroads to the working class.

[PhoenixAsh]

But again, why attach support to a party that has to "become revolutionary" rather than to a party that is following a line of being "revolutionary". Or as fsl said, why not split off to form a party with actual revolutionary intent?

There is no revolutionary party in The Netherlands.

The SP was revolutionary before and the best bet for the revolutionary movement is currently entryism.

Splitting off is not an option as working class doesn't feel it exists in The Netherlands. Workers do not see themselves as workers or part of the working class and being designated a worker is more often than not considered an insult.

Does it get more clear for everybody?

[Das war einmal]

But again, why attach support to a party that has to "become revolutionary" rather than to a party that is following a line of being "revolutionary". Or as fsl said, why not split off to form a party with actual revolutionary intent?

Well I can't really discuss this here. Suffice to say it has to do with the situation here in the Netherlands why starting, joining or splitting into a 'revolutionary' party in the traditional sense is not viable.

[PhoenixAsh]

So lets recap:

* The SP is not currently a revolutionary party.
* The SP was a revolutionary party
* The SP is not social democratic. It rather is democratic socialist.
* The SP is no different in their parliamentary participation as, say, the KKE.
* The SP is currently the only party fighting austerity and rejecting its necessity.
* The SP is currently the only party trying to protect labour laws and the benefit structures
* The SP is currently the only party getting people to participate in political activism
* The SP is currently the only platform which creates some form of class consciousness


* There is no revolutionary alternative in The Netherlands
* The NCPN and VCP are both marginalized fringe groups with activity and influence level 0
* Collectively these parties consist of maybe 500 members and got ~1200 votes
* People do not know we even have Communist Parties in The Netherlands
* The only structural anti-cap activism comes from the Squad, Autonomous and anarchists


* There is no revolutionary historical tradition in The Netherlands
* The Dutch society has historically been strongly compartmentalized
* There is no notable Dutch Working class movement or consciousness
* The Dutch economy does not have large quantities of workers
* The Dutch working class is fragmented over small companies in the service economy
* The Dutch working class does not identify itself as working class
* The term working class is considered more often than not an insult or seen as negative

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

No they don't. Not here.

Perhaps not in the Netherlands, but parties like the US Democrats, Argentinian Justicialists etc. all have a significant presence in the unions, and the latter engage in a lot of street-level activism. The point was that participation in unions and street activism doesn't make a party proletarian.


I don't say communism doesn't work, I say the exact dogmatic method of the old M-L line didn't work. Cause you know it didn't.

Well it certainly worked better than the SP model, since as far as I can tell, not even the IMT has proclaimed the Netherlands a workers' state.


Thats because the situation is drastically different here and now then it was in 1917 Russia. Following a doomed blueprint to socialism is rather pointless. That doesn't mean we got no vision, but its not strictly planned.

First you claim that there is no plan, now there is a plan but it's sort of not "strict", whatever that means. Anyway - does this "vision" include smashing the bourgeois state, or do you intend to work through it? Obviously the latter. Which makes you reformists of the old type.


I'm against bombing whoever and will always oppose that. And I'm not against benefits, on the contraire. Where did you get that idea? I only say that for lot of people it's better for their self esteem if they have a job they like. We can have an army and not bomb people you know.

An imperialist power, even a subordinate one like the Netherlands, has an army primarily to bomb people, to threaten to bomb people, or to put down domestic disturbances. Apparently the SP isn't even against the army.


You really haven't got any fucking clue about The Netherlands do you? Because that line was so full of idiotic nonsense and so fundamentally untrue it is plain comedy gold.

I have enough of a fucking clue to know that the PVV and the PvdA have election campaigns which are, as you know, a form of activism.


* The Dutch economy does not have large quantities of workers

You have something like 18% of industrial workers alone - that's much better than Russia on the eve of the October Revolution.

[FSL]

Nepal might not have a large number of workers. Malawi might not have a large number of workers. Someone claiming that a european country doesn't -at this point in its developement- have a large number of workers is obscene and just shows the poverty of some people's understanding of society.


Then again if these people call themselves anarchists but in reality support just about any center-left party, you can only expect so much.

[PhoenixAsh]

Nepal might not have a large number of workers. Malawi might not have a large number of workers. Someone claiming that a european country doesn't -at this point in its developement- have a large number of workers is obscene and just shows the poverty of some people's understanding of society.


Then again if these people call themselves anarchists but in reality support just about any center-left party, you can only expect so much.

Perhaps I have overestimated your level of reading apprehension...or you are being obtuse. So let me put it in easy to understand writing so that even hard line KKE supporters can understand it:

The Dutch working class doesn't see itself as working class. The Dutch working class doesn't identify itself as working class. The Dutch working class sees the terms worker and working class are seen as insulting. The association with working class is seen as negative.

This doesn't mean the Dutch do not have a working class. This does not mean they are not workers or part of the working class. It means they do not see or want to see themselves as working class.

Now...instead of trolling this thread with about as much sense as there was in you actively defending handing over actual revolutionaries to the police and actively betraying the working class while using red herrings...I suggest you actually try to understand the Dutch mentality.

[FSL]

Is it a byproduct of this "dutch mentality" to be an anarchist that supports center-left parties? Can't be because we have people like that here too.


Everything else you described point to a lack of widespread class-consciousness and there is nothing particularly dutch about that.

[PhoenixAsh]

Is it a byproduct of this "dutch mentality" to be an anarchist that supports center-left parties? Can't be because we have people like that here too.

I have no idea. I don't support the SP but I do recognize they are currently the only one actively doing something about austerity and workers rights which gains results. Plus they are majorly successful in getting people to actively participate in activism. For which I am glad....because the only parties we have are KKE aligned Stalinists....and we all know they are class collaborationists that tend to hand real revolutionaries over to the cops.



Everything else you described point to a lack of widespread class-consciousness and there is nothing particularly dutch about that.
[/quote]

It isn't just merely a lack of class consciousness but a total antipathy towards class consciousness. People actively reject the notion of being associated with the working class because of the economic divisionism we have in Holland which is kind of unique in the world.

[Tim Cornelis]

Or we could talk about the present and about just how much better KKE is compared to pseudo-anarchists like yourself and the various "left" parties your type supports in a vain effort to humanize capitalism.

Oh the irony.


So it is outspoken Marxist "in some degree" then?
And what degree is that?

None on paper. Some individual members identify with Marxism a bit, such as MP Sadet Karabulut who praised the Communist Manifesto and regards it as her favourite book. Beyond that there's no real Marxism in the party, except for Das war Einmal and Q (17 votes) and other such individual cases.

As for my position on the SP:

Supporting them strategically is advantageous. They are more likely to make concessions to the working class, which aids in building up a revolutionary party. For instance, my organisation Breakthrough is involved in a committee of welfare workers in Amsterdam (which includes some SP-members) and a campaign against forced labour in welfare and of welfare recipients in general, which has brought many (relatively) new members (often with no background in far-left politics at all) to the organisation. By strengthening the position of the SP in municipal councils and other such bourgeois structures, and then placing demands for the improvement of the position of the Dutch working class, we create a, for us, 'win-win' situation. If the SP concedes or backs the demand (for instance, no more forced labour of welfare recipients), Breakthrough successfully defended the interests of its members and potential members, if the SP does not, we can expose them.

I support working with the SP, not within. Trying to bring back its somewhat revolutionary character (its highlight, after all, was Stalinism) is futile. It has moved the right even compared to, say, 2005. Das War Einmal mentioned that the SP calls for worker-owned businesses, which I've never heard them say publicly, nor would any voter be familiar with that. Since the 1998 (if I'm not mistaken) congress they have abandoned workers' control in favour of some vague reference to 'democratising' the economy, which they claim can either be done through cooperatives or progressive taxation, with all the emphasis on the latter. Any mention of worker-owned enterprises is not even mere background noise, it's non-existent.

[PhoenixAsh]

I have enough of a fucking clue to know that the PVV and the PvdA have election campaigns which are, as you know, a form of activism.

Which is obviously not the kind of activism we are talking about. What we are talking about is direct participation in political awareness and consciousness ranging from protests, the occasional strike/work refusal, occupations, evasions, attending district meetings, judicial advice on a local and individual level, mutual aid etc.


You have something like 18% of industrial workers alone - that's much better than Russia on the eve of the October Revolution.

No. We have 18% working in industry of which a large parts are higher educated engineers in, for a large part, the petro-chemistry branche & waterworks. Those we do have are harbor workers and construction workers divided over smaller companies.