DeLeon

[workersunity]

can anybody tell me more about daniel deleon? i found www.deleonism.org and such but just would like to know how you all think

[RedLenin]

I believe he was a marxist that advocated syndicalism. He thought there was a need for state socialism, but also thought that syndicalism was necessary. DeLeonism is basically marxism with a belief in syndicalism. Most marxists do not advocate syndicalism but DeLeon did. I guess that is were DeLeonism came from. Correct me if I am mistaken however.

[redstar2000]

The DeLeonist Anachronism (http://redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net/theory.php?subaction=showfull&id=1082822860&archive=&cnshow=headlines&start_from=&ucat=&)

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Zingu]

You know; all these ideologies like Council Communism, DeLeonism and syndicalism; the line gets really blurry about where they are seperate. :huh:

[Severian]

DeLeon's Socialist Labor Party's an old organization, originally founded by German radical immigrants, here's Engels commenting on it:


The Germans have not understood how to use their theory as a lever which could set the American masses in motion; they do not understand the theory themselves for the most part and treat it in a doctrinaire and dogmatic way, as something which has got to be learnt off by heart but which will then supply all needs without more ado. To them it is a credo [creed] and not a guide to action. Added to which they learn no English on principle.
source (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1886/letters/86_11_29.htm)

Over the past century+, they have learned English, but changed little else.

Redstar accurately describes them as an anachronism, but then criticizes the dogmatists of the SLP....for failing to share his particular dogma, anti-electoralism.

The key thing about the SLP is that it has always stood aside from the class struggle, and focused almost exclusively on propaganda for socialism in the abstract.

[workersunity]

Oh i know the shortcomings of the SLP, and i in no way want to join it, although the things deleon put put forth summarize my views pretty well

[Severian]

Then lemme just put it this way: the details of a dogma matter less than...that it is a dogma.

[Social Greenman]

Hello,

I am new here. I am on the deleonist.org discussion board. We are not affiliated with the SLP or any political party. We are just concentrating on Daniel De Leon's Socialist Industrial Union program. However, I am also a newbie on that board. From what I understand is that De Leon was a Libertarian Socialist. I did not register here just to type this response up. I am here to learn and hopefully contribute.

Social

[Severian]

Well, maybe I'm being unfair to DeLeon personally. I vaguely recall he had his good side too.

[Social Greenman]

What would be his bad side and good side? I mean I have not read everthing about him since I am in the process of learning.

Social

[Severian]

The bad side would be the dogma and standing aside from the living class struggle at times. The good side, I only vaguely remember, but I think he didn't always stand aside.

[Social Greenman]

Standing aside like not supporting reforms in law to make capitalism more responsible to society. Since I am not SLP and I am not leaning toward that aspect but I do understand their point of view:




Reformism

It is absolutely false and totally unhistorical to represent work for reforms as a drawn-out revolution, and revolution as a condensed series of reforms. A social transformation and a legislative reform do not differ according to the duration but according to their essence. The whole secret of historical transformations through the utilization of political power consists precisely in the change of simple quantitative modification into a new quality, or to speak more concretely, in the transition from one historical period, one social order, to another.

He who pronounces himself in favor of the method of legal reforms in place of and as opposed to the conquest of political power and social revolution does not really choose a more tranquil, surer and slower road to the same goal. He chooses a different goal. Instead of taking a stand for the establishment of a new social order, he takes a stand for surface modifications of the old order.

From Social Reform or Revolution? by Rosa Luxemburg



Reformism

"Whenever a change leaves the internal mechanism untouched, we have reform; whenever the internal mechanism is changed, we have revolution."

From Reform or Revolution

"You will find the reformer ever flying off at a tangent, while the revolutionist sticks to the point."

From Reform or Revolution

"Of all revolutionary epochs, the present draws sharpest the line between the conflicting class interests. Hence, the organizations of the revolution of our generation must be the most uncompromising of any that yet appeared on the stage of history. The program of this revolution consists not in any one detail. It demands the unconditional surrender of the capitalist system and its system of wage slavery; the total extinction of class rule is its object.

From Reform or Revolution by Daniel De Leon

I do understand that reforms help bring relief to those suffering under the present capitalist system but that relief is being rolled back by the capitalist system. I also know the the welfare state is a life preserver for the capitalist. But since the abolishment of Communism in the Soviet Union the capitalist are getting smug and feel that have little to worry about the Left. Hence the privatization that is going on and the incredible increase in capitalist propaganda. I believe all on the Left should continue fighting the roll backs. Late next week I want to present some ideas.

Social

[workersunity]

hey thanks again, i would also like to know what his bad side is? welp gotta go to environmental ethics class, ill be back later

[Severian]

Luxeburg didn't reject reforms for that reason, though. That article on Reform or Revolution even starts out saying, reform is not opposed to revolution - and the problem with Bernstein, she says, is that he opposes one to the other. Her approach was fundamentally different from DeLeon's.

Revolutionaries don't fight for reforms for the sake of the reform, we fight for the sake of the fight, the experience and self-confidence our class gains in it.

If you reject those fights for reforms, which most of the time are the only actual class struggles that are going on, you end up just doing abstract propaganda for the desirability of socialism. Which is utopian, not the Marxist approach to politics which emphasizes that everything flows from facts, the world, the living class struggle, not from ideas in our heads.

DeLeon accepted only two forms of actions: electoral campaigns, narrowly and legalistically conceived, and union organization. Which is dogmatic, to arbitrarily limit what means can be used.

His acceptance of union organization last involved one of his positive contributions: he helped found the IWW. Eventually it had to break free from his doctrinaire straitjacket, though.

I was reading that Reform or Revolution by DeLeon after I posted yesterday. I can see how that kind of thing - the propaganda for some basic Marxist ideas - were a major contribution at the time, when Marxist ideas were pretty new to this country, especially to anyone who didn't speak German....

[Social Greenman]

Again I must emphesize that I am neither dogmatic or idelogically rigid. I do not set myself as a follower of one set of ideologies but rather learn how to take the best possible route that would benefit the working class. I do understand that the I.W.W. broke with the SLP. That was a good call because they became one of the largest unions free of politics and religion. The I.W.W. functions as union should.


If you reject those fights for reforms, which most of the time are the only actual class struggles that are going on, you end up just doing abstract propaganda for the desirability of socialism. Which is utopian, not the Marxist approach to politics which emphasizes that everything flows from facts, the world, the living class struggle, not from ideas in our heads.

I don't reject the ideas of reforms which is what the SLP does. People do suffer under the present capitalistic system which we all should cry out against being the class struggle. However, Right wing propaganda has turned the working class against those reforms with claims that reforms have hurt the working class and that their salvation lies with the Capitalist class privatization schemes. Too many of them are believing those claims I'm afraid A lot of ground has been lost since the Reagan eara. The ideas which I will present later next week is nothing abstract but based on what already exist right under our very noses. It will be political and non political.

Social

[Social Greenman]

When capitalism is once again in crisis due depressions and to their cutting wages and benefits. And the working class is getting in a rebelious nature of revolutionary tendencies, they will institute reforms to preserve the system. Socialist, et al, have to educate the working class about socialism and abolishing the wage system. In it's place would be a new economic system not based on capital but on labor power in the form of vouchers or Time Labor Vouchers (TLV) http://www.deleonism.org/v1.htm and http://www.deleonism.org/v2.htm
Of course there are other models that are being tried: http://www.ithacahours.com/
http://www.zmag.org/parecon/indexnew.htm

The idea of socialist et al, believing that reforms in capitalism is the road to socialism or making capitalism into socialism are sadly mistaken. I am not saying that fighting for increases in the minimum wage, better wages, healthcare, and benefits should not be fought for because people do need relief. Capitalist are highly class conscious where the working class continues not to be.
Quote from the "German Iddeology":

"The ideas of the ruling class are, in every epoch, the
ruling ideas; i.e., the class which is the ruling
material force of society is, at the same time, its
ruling intellectual force. The class which has the
means of material production at its disposal, has
control, at the same time, over the means of mental
production, so that, thereby, generally speaking, the
ideas of those who lack the means of mental production
are subject to it."

Too many years of standing beside Liberals and Progressives have diluted (and harmed) what socialism should be agitating for. The demise of the Soviet Union has paved the way for conservatism and privatization.
As a Libertarian socialist and member of the SP-USA, I do advocate for a Socialist Industrial Union. So what I thought and wrote in my previous post was an error on my part The IWW started out as an SIU but as you wrote Severian, the political aspect was removed. Though the IWW does do a great job in raising workers conscious it has neglected the political in which they, of their own members, could run for government positions. It would be good if the IWW has an unoffical members project to do this in which they could promote electorial political aspect with the goal to elect representative from their membership into governmennt to legaly dismantal the capitalist system and setting up a new economic system. Then they can ajourn themselves after the revolution as workers now control the means of production and do those bottom decisions as to what is produced and distributed.

With the new economy in place, workers would earn their full labor and the vouchers (computer gernerated units) are exchanged at the store for personal items. The voucher units would then disappear. You really can not call that money since money is circulated.
When workers earn their vouchers in production something like 20 minutes is added to the time which is deducted for health, education, social services, and relief for disasters. Here is some quotes from Marx's "Critique of the Gotha Programme":

Let us take, first of all, the words "proceeds of labor" in the sense of
the product of labor; then the co-operative proceeds of labor are the
_total_social_product_.

From this must now be deducted:

- cover for replacement of the means of production used up.

- additional portion for expansion of production.

- reserve or insurance funds to provide against accidents,
dislocations caused by natural calamities, etc.

...


- the general costs of administration not belonging to production.

...

- that which is intended for the common satisfaction of needs, such
as schools, health services, etc.

...

- funds for those unable to work, etc., in short, for what is
included under so-called official poor relief today.

...

Accordingly, the individual producer receives back from society -- after
the deductions have been made -- exactly what he gives to it. What he
has given to it is his individual quantum of labor. For example, the
social working day consists of the sum of the individual hours of work;
the individual labor time of the individual producer is the part of the
social working day contributed by him, his share in it. He receives a
certificate from society that he has furnished such-and-such an amount
of labor (after deducting his labor for the common funds); and with this
certificate, he draws from the social stock of means of consumption as
much as the same amount of labor cost. The same amount of labor which
he has given to society in one form, he receives back in another.

As you can see advocating for a new socilist economy is well within Marx vision of a future society and educating workers that the capitalist class and working class has nothing in common.