The Maoist Cult Next Door

[The Idler]

Not sure anyone has seen or discussed this yet, but this is the BBC programme on the Lambeth slavery case
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambeth_slavery_case
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08c3vrx
Possibly available on youtube
Some real stockholm syndrome there, but here is some commentary
http://howiescorner.blogspot.co.uk/2017/01/the-maoist-cult-next-door.html
Can't help thinking the CPGB-ML could go the same way (full cult) with the unquestioned leader-guru figure, or the RCPUSA might already have. If someone starts saying they have a machine called Jackie which controls the world, or we should defend the DPRK, or even that TV reporters are agents of the 'British fascist state', you should have questioned them a long time ago because you've found yourself in a cult not a socialist party.

[The Idler]

I'm surprised nobody else has seen this or wishes to comment. How are parties supposed to stop this sort of thing happening to them?

[IbelieveInanarchy]

I'm surprised nobody else has seen this or wishes to comment. How are parties supposed to stop this sort of thing happening to them? Maybe by not forming an hierarchic party.

[ckaihatsu]

Maybe by not mixing lifestylism in with one's politics and political practice.

(In other words one should *compartmentalize* one's political activity away from one's personal life, the same as we *have* to do with work vs. home.)

(Politics happens at much greater scales than one's experiential life and surroundings, anyway.)

[The Intransigent Faction]

Maybe by not mixing lifestylism in with one's politics and political practice.

(In other words one should *compartmentalize* one's political activity away from one's personal life, the same as we *have* to do with work vs. home.)

(Politics happens at much greater scales than one's experiential life and surroundings, anyway.)

So, what about that old slogan "The Personal is Political"? It seems hasty and oblivious to dismiss that completely. Obviously, there are certain things necessary for survival in a capitalist society, and beyond that reliance on things like consumer boycotts sends entirely the wrong message about what's wrong with capitalism and what we should do about it. That said, we should be aware of the consequences of our own actions and positions in our homes/workplaces/etc.

It's one thing to move to a commune, and another to say "This guy's saying racist stuff and I'm gonna call him out on it." Sure, calling a peer or someone else out for racist claims won't trigger a global workers' revolution, but it's beneficial and even necessary in its own way, too. Finding the right balance is something I've been struggling with. I'm not a fan of compromise, but this seems like one of those things where it's needed.

As for cults: Cults are bad, mmmkay? That's a point in favour of organizing without hierarchical structures, but I do think Leninists can be capable of accepting criticism and engaging with people in a non-cultish way.

[willowtooth]

I say we start a cult of George W. Bush just for the fuck of it

[ckaihatsu]

So, what about that old slogan "The Personal is Political"?


Well for many politics *is* personal because that's how they got into it -- maybe a loved one being killed by police, etc.





It seems hasty and oblivious to dismiss that completely. Obviously, there are certain things necessary for survival in a capitalist society, and beyond that reliance on things like consumer boycotts sends entirely the wrong message about what's wrong with capitalism and what we should do about it. That said, we should be aware of the consequences of our own actions and positions in our homes/workplaces/etc.


Yes, I agree there are 'blurry lines' and that since we're all socialized in one way or another that then implies ground-level 'politics' as well over the long term.





It's one thing to move to a commune, and another to say "This guy's saying racist stuff and I'm gonna call him out on it." Sure, calling a peer or someone else out for racist claims won't trigger a global workers' revolution, but it's beneficial and even necessary in its own way, too.


Yes.





Finding the right balance is something I've been struggling with. I'm not a fan of compromise, but this seems like one of those things where it's needed.


Well, without meaning to exaggerate I think the benefit of being online for politics, as here at RevLeft, is that you know all participants are proactively willing and that they most likely have some reflection and experience in such matters. In real life, on-the-ground, it's probably tougher to 'get a grip' on what's going on in the bigger picture around oneself unless one dedicates all of their time and efforts to their own life and work, which is basically careerism.

'Politics' around one's own life and living is almost property-ownership, or a *privileged* kind of politics (as in a commune) because it's so circumscribed and most likely detached from *larger* political concerns of class and the world.





As for cults: Cults are bad, mmmkay? That's a point in favour of organizing without hierarchical structures, but I do think Leninists can be capable of accepting criticism and engaging with people in a non-cultish way.


Yeah, I agree -- I don't think the structure, *especially* for a small group, would really be such a determining factor -- there shouldn't be revolutionary cults at all because comrades should strive to have their own personal lives outside of politics (speaking of 'balance').