Non Anarchist Socialist schools of thought

[RGacky3]

Does it exist? Are there any Socialist organisations that do not adhere to Leninism (And if so what about Marxism), that are not Anarchist?

[AmbitiousHedonism]

It depends on what you're looking for. There are probably some Christian socialist groups that aren't marxist and handfuls of utopian socialists here and there that engage in activism (I'm thinking of the grassroots "peace & justice" activists that might consider themselves socialists of some sort).

Left Communist are Marxist but don't typically do activism, and autonomist Marxist groups hate leninism, but if you can find one tell me.

[RGacky3]

It just seams strange to me that before Lenin there were many Socialist groups, but now it seams that they are either Anarchist, or Leninist, or an offshoot.

[RedCommieBear]

Well, I can think of Guild Socialism (kinda like a Union control of means of production), Eco-Socialism (greens who think socialism is a good idea), and Market socialism (society through competing co-ops), in addition to your variants of Marxism and anarchism.

[Vendetta]

That one philosopher dude who was in one of the Matrix movies.

[Red Scare]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2007 07:52 pm
That one philosopher dude who was in one of the Matrix movies.
please explain more, i have not seen the matrix, but i did see part of matrix reloaded (like 20 min) :ph34r:

[Red Scare]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 11:33 am
Does it exist? Are there any Socialist organisations that do not adhere to Leninism (And if so what about Marxism), that are not Anarchist?
i guess you could count democratic socialism as its own school of thought, if you want to call them socialists

[Lamanov]

What about these guys? (http://situationist.cjb.net) ;)

[RedCommieBear]

Originally posted by DJ-[email protected] 29, 2007 07:02 pm
What about these guys? (http://situationist.cjb.net) ;)
I like to think of Situationists as autonomist-Marxist avante-garde artists who liked to use weird jargon. They were involved in the May '68 uprising.

[Bilan]

Originally posted by RedCommieBear+August 30, 2007 11:16 am--> (RedCommieBear @ August 30, 2007 11:16 am)
DJ-[email protected] 29, 2007 07:02 pm
What about these guys? (http://situationist.cjb.net) ;)
I like to think of Situationists as autonomist-Marxist avante-garde artists who liked to use weird jargon. They were involved in the May '68 uprising. [/b]
That they were.
I dig the situationists.

beneath the paving stones, the beach!

[Hit The North]

The Socialist Party of Great Britain is a non-Leninist, non-violent, non-reformist socialist party which also lays claim to being Britain's oldest socialist party.

You can find out about them here: CLICKSKI (http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/homepage.html)

Apart from engaging in abstract propaganda it's difficult to see what they actually do.

[Djehuti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 06:27 pm
autonomist Marxist groups hate leninism, but if you can find one tell me.
Operaismo and Autonomia were actually leninists. Left communists such as Bordiga were also leninists. But they did break with leninism in many matters, nowdays autonomists and left communists rarely view themselves as leninists (but some draw influences from Lenin).

[Djehuti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 05:33 pm
Does it exist? Are there any Socialist organisations that do not adhere to Leninism (And if so what about Marxism), that are not Anarchist?
Yes. I would say that most fall into this category, at least in northern and western Europe.

Leninist groups (trotskyists and marxist-leninists) are pretty marginalized and anarchists have after the 90ies turned closer to non-leninist marxism. Many are like me, influenced by left- and council communism, autonomous marxism, anarchist communism, the situationists, Luxemburg, Lenin, Lucacs etc. Non-dogmatic modern communists.

[AmbitiousHedonism]

Originally posted by Djehuti+August 30, 2007 11:42 am--> (Djehuti @ August 30, 2007 11:42 am)
[email protected] 27, 2007 06:27 pm
autonomist Marxist groups hate leninism, but if you can find one tell me.
Operaismo and Autonomia were actually leninists. Left communists such as Bordiga were also leninists. But they did break with leninism in many matters, nowdays autonomists and left communists rarely view themselves as leninists (but some draw influences from Lenin). [/b]
Yeah, there are definetly leninist elements in both currents. I was thinking of Karl Korsch, Sam Moss and Monsieur DuPont as the most hardcore non/anti-Leninist Left Communists, but that takes the term out of its historical element... which made me think of them as autonomist Marxists, but that too has its historical element.

So basically there are some non-Leninist Marxists, but even lots of those who tried to escape Lenin's influence ended up with some of his taint.

I've heard that the folks at No Borders Collective (http://www.noborder.org/) are autonomist Marxists, but I don't know why. I remember there being a collective in the southwest that did a lot of noborders stuff that said they were not anarchists, although that's the mileu with whom they most interacted. Can't remember a name.

[Red_Pride]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2007 12:52 am
That one philosopher dude who was in one of the Matrix movies.
What was his name?

[AmbitiousHedonism]

ORGANIC is what i was thinking of

http://organiccollective.org/

[LSD]

Are there any Socialist organisations that do not adhere to Leninism (And if so what about Marxism), that are not Anarchist?

That really depends on what you mean by "socialist".

Like with most questions related to political terminology, the answer really depends on the ideological persuasions of the answerer. Since there is no objective measure of what constitutes a "socialist", it's impossible to give an unbiased assesment.

Over the past hundred and fifty years, Marxism has done a pretty effective job at claiming the label "socialism" as its own. Even though the term, and many of the underlying ideas, predate Marx and Engles by centuries, Marxism has always claimed them as its own.

And since Leninism presents itself as nothing more than a continuation and expansion of Marxist theory (in the "age of imperialism", whatever the hell that means), it too claims exclusive rights to the term.

And, indeed, to a Leninist, non-Leninists are not socialists! They're certainly no communists, as you can see in countless threads on this site. I can't count the number of times I've been called a "liberal" or a "democrat", anything but socialist or communist, since as far as the Leninist current is concerned, both those terms are their exclusive property.

That's not to say that Leninists are inherently sectarian, however. Every political movement has to establish standards by which they judge other currents, and that certainly includes Anarchist ones as well. For my part, I reject the notion that, for instance, the British Labour Party or the Canadian NDP are in any way, shape, or form "socialist", despite the insistance by certain older members of both that they are.

If one were to accept that these parties were "socialist", however, there would be a perfect example of non-Marxist, non-Anarchist socialist parties. The only problem is that viewing the Labour party as "socialist" means stretching the term until it has almost no meaning.

And so the answer to your question is yes ...and no. It all depends on your personal perspective of what makes someone a "socialist", a "Leninst", or an "Anarchist".

[Random Precision]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31, 2007 04:40 pm
And, indeed, to a Leninist, non-Leninists are not socialists! They're certainly no communists, as you can see in countless threads on this site. I can't count the number of times I've been called a "liberal" or a "democrat", anything but socialist or communist, since as far as the Leninist current is concerned, both those terms are their exclusive property.
I'm a Leninist, and I've never claimed that we are the only socialist/communist game in town. The only ones describing themselves by the term "socialist" that I would reject would be the reformist "democratic socialists".

[RGacky3]

well the reason I ask is because before Marx there were many different Socialist ideas, but it seams after Marx only his caught on, then when Lenin came around there were pro-Bolshevik Socialists, and anti-Bolshevik Socialists and Anarchists. But now it seams like most people are eather Leninist or Anarchist.

I suppose the Situationists would be an exception, but I don't think they are an influencial current, the Zapatistas maybe, I don't know about the Latin-American Democratic Socialism thats comming up, although Mr. Chaves I believe calls himself a Troskyite, and I'm not sure about Evo Morales.

[The Advent of Anarchy]

Syndicalists?

[Labor Shall Rule]

To LSD

Considering that Marxism is based on a scientific approach to the liquidation of the entire capitalist system; the historical and sociological analysis that reveals that the animation of classes is only bound up by certain phases of the historical development of production, and the exploitive relationship that exists between wage labor and capital that physically revealed, through both statistics and cold-hard facts, that we are in a epoch of immense contradictions that will eventually end with the resolution of labor finally ruling over society as a whole, I think we should come to the conclusion that Marxism is the only way of attaining what 'socialism' is. This was revealed by Marx, not Bakunin, not Saint Just, and not any other 'socialist' out there. I am content with having "socialism" for ourselves, because it is only attainable through the acknowledgement of Marx's theories; if they do not have a scientific approach of the political situation, and the class struggle, then they simply don't have what it takes. I am not saying anarchists are wrong - anarchists such as the Friends of Durruti, for example, drawed the same conclusions as 'statists'.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Originally posted by RedDali
Does it exist? Are there any Socialist organisations that do not adhere to Leninism (And if so what about Marxism), that are not Anarchist?
Yes. I would say that most fall into this category, at least in northern and western Europe.

Leninist groups (trotskyists and marxist-leninists) are pretty marginalized and anarchists have after the 90ies turned closer to non-leninist marxism. Many are like me, influenced by left- and council communism, autonomous marxism, anarchist communism, the situationists, Luxemburg, Lenin, Lucacs etc. Non-dogmatic modern communists. [/b][/quote]
I'm a "Leninist" Marxist checking in. It's good to see that the sectarian "Bolshevik-Leninists" (Trotskyists) and the conservative "Marxist-Leninists" (Stalinists) are indeed marginalized day in and day out. It's surprising (yet pleasant, nonetheless) to hear you say, however, that more and more anarchists are turning to some form of revolutionary Marxism.

Regardless, that last sentence of yours: you still mentioned Lenin. ;) :D

There was an interesting Trotskyist article on the relevance and irrelevance of the fine points behind Lenin's theory of imperialism, but on the whole, like the relativeness of everything else in life (relative monopoly, relative profits, etc.), the theory is still valid. I think that, and his emphasis on organization as being key to revolution, would explain his permanent "taint," as a poster above put it (although I'd naturally disagree with his choice of words).

However, it is also good to know that the precedents to his particular "dialectic," such as Hilferding (finance capital), and some of the lesser known antecedents (Gramsci, Kalecki, Baran, Sweezy, etc.) are also getting their fair share of the spotlight.



And, like I said to RedDali above in regards to no credible "isms" with non-Marxist analyses of capitalism (the "problem"), there are no credible "isms" within Marxist thought with non-"Leninist" analyses of its highest but not necessarily final stage (also a "problem"). [The organization stuff I mentioned above is more of a "solution," though.]