"sectarian" grrrr!

[redarmyfaction38]

i hate this term.
it is a cop out.
anybody that does not agree with you personal or political line must be a "sectarian".
end of debate, end of rational thinking, beginning of blind prejudice and death of the rev. left. and another 1000 years of the new capitalist world order.
imo.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Stop being one then!

[Sam_b]

anybody that does not agree with you personal or political line must be a "sectarian".

No. There is a difference between ideological and strategical argument; and having a completely hostile, verbally abusive tirade that sees one's organisation and practices as being the superiour and only option; and people being lesser for (what tends to be) minor disagreements in practice.

[Charles Xavier]

Sectarian would describe placing your own group, individual, ideological interests in front of the progress of the working class.

[Q]

Sectarianism and opportunism according to MIA (http://www.marxists.org/glossary/terms/s/e.htm#sectarianism).

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

I prefer a broader definition of sectarian, more in line with Sam b's approach.

This Wiki article gets it largely right, I think:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sectarianism

[apathy maybe]

i hate this term.
it is a cop out.
anybody that does not agree with you personal or political line must be a "sectarian".
end of debate, end of rational thinking, beginning of blind prejudice and death of the rev. left. and another 1000 years of the new capitalist world order.
imo.

I read this as Sectarian grrrrl (girl). I don't know why...

Anyway, while you have a point to some degree, I also don't 100% agree.

After all, there is a reason for differences, I, as an anarchist, am opposed to (what I call) states. I cannot support a centralised state structure without compromising my ideals and philosophies beyond repair.

Yes, that is "sectarian" if it means I won't support Cuba or Venezuela, but actually, it isn't sectarian, because statists aren't part of my "sect".

When it comes to anarchists though, I'm much more forgiving. I don't tend to be sectarian if I think that the person is seriously wanting to go towards anarchism.

Anyway, I could ramble for ages, I really just wanted to say "grrrrl"...

[Holden Caulfield]

^ is there that much sectarianism amongst anarchists in 'real life'?

[apathy maybe]

^ is there that much sectarianism amongst anarchists in 'real life'?

From my personal experience, where I come from, I haven't met "sectarian" anarchists. However, I have read lots of stuff on this board, anarchists attacking sections of anarchist thought, and reports from the USA (more so then other places), of sectarianism between different types of anarchism.


"Sectarianism" from Leninists and other statists is also rife. (I have had the "privilege" of reading crap parroting Lenin on anarchists. Basically, misunderstanding, misrepresenting, lying, bullshitting, the usual. There are pamphlets by Leninists sects warning people off anarchism. I can't seem to just find these online.)

[Lynx]

The first use of the word that I can recall referred to the conflict in Northern Ireland. It was described as sectarian. I confused it at first with secularism, because it appeared to be about protestants and catholics.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Lynx, the Wiki article I linked to above will fill in the missing details for you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sectarianism

[Lynx]

I read it just afterwards, thanks. I thought factionalism was a more common word to use (in North America). Factionalism redirects to a disambiguation page for Faction. End of that thought.

[DancingLarry]

You can always tell the true sectarian. They're the ones that think they can "win" a debate not by a factual and/or philosophical refutation of their opponent's position, but simply by labeling their opponent "opportunist", "revisionist" or "bourgeois". It's particularly the last that cracks me up, because 98% of these people that reflexively label others "bourgeois" are nothing but a bunch of suburban whiteboys.

[Charles Xavier]

From my personal experience, where I come from, I haven't met "sectarian" anarchists. However, I have read lots of stuff on this board, anarchists attacking sections of anarchist thought, and reports from the USA (more so then other places), of sectarianism between different types of anarchism.


"Sectarianism" from Leninists and other statists is also rife. (I have had the "privilege" of reading crap parroting Lenin on anarchists. Basically, misunderstanding, misrepresenting, lying, bullshitting, the usual. There are pamphlets by Leninists sects warning people off anarchism. I can't seem to just find these online.)


You misunderstand what sectarianism is. Sectarianism does not prohibit criticism other groups or movements. Sectarianism is placing ones group, organization or own self over the entire class struggle for temporary gains or self-serving smugness.

So, criticism of anarchism is justified since th main argument against it is that it is sectarian, usually placing themselves above the movement, Lifestyle revolutionaries, individual terrorism, attacking other progressive groups because they are counter to their aims, etc etc.


Lenin never smugly glossed over anything, he always with a clear head described the political reality in his pamphlets and books with facts and well drawn out conclusions. Marx and Engels as well.

Both of who theoretical destroyed anarchism.

[apathy maybe]

You misunderstand what sectarianism is. Sectarianism does not prohibit criticism other groups or movements. Sectarianism is placing ones group, organization or own self over the entire class struggle for temporary gains or self-serving smugness.

So, criticism of anarchism is justified since th main argument against it is that it is sectarian, usually placing themselves above the movement, Lifestyle revolutionaries, individual terrorism, attacking other progressive groups because they are counter to their aims, etc etc.


Lenin never smugly glossed over anything, he always with a clear head described the political reality in his pamphlets and books with facts and well drawn out conclusions. Marx and Engels as well.

Both of who theoretical destroyed anarchism.

First, I'm not using the same definition of "sectarian" to you. So you can stick that up your jumper (along with your definition of "state").

Secondly, no body has "destroyed anarchism", theoretically or otherwise. While I haven't personally read Lenin's work on the subject, I have (as indicated), read various works, by various Leninists who have quoted Lenin. And seriously, they are full of mistruths, half-truths, misrepresentations, lies, and slander.

So there you go. (And it appears that you are using the same tricks, "Lifestyle revolutionaries, individual terrorism, attacking other progressive groups because they are counter to their aims, etc etc." Not all anarchists are like this, it is a lie to say that all anarchists are like this. Whoops, fucked up your argument there didn't I.)

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

AM:


Secondly, no body has "destroyed anarchism", theoretically or otherwise. While I haven't personally read Lenin's work on the subject, I have (as indicated), read various works, by various Leninists who have quoted Lenin. And seriously, they are full of mistruths, half-truths, misrepresentations, lies, and slander.

This is, I am sorry to say, also true of anarchist attempts to criticise Lenin and Leninism.

[chegitz guevara]

From my personal experience, where I come from, I haven't met "sectarian" anarchists. However, I have read lots of stuff on this board, anarchists attacking sections of anarchist thought, and reports from the USA (more so then other places), of sectarianism between different types of anarchism.

Probably because you agree with them. In my own experience, in general, anarchists are the most sectarian section of the anti-capitalist movement. Individual exceptions may apply, and certain socialist sects may be more sectarian that anarchists in general, but over all, I get the most shit from anarchists, even when I'm just saying hi.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

CG, I sympathise with your view, but in my long experience of the left, every sect/party is openly hostile to every other sect/party, whether these are Maoists, Communists (Stalinists or otherwise), Trotskyists, Libertarian Marxists, or Anarchists (of every stripe).

This unremitting sectarianism (and it has been endemic on the far left since at least the 1860s, as far as I can ascertain) is indeed part of the reason why the ruling-class is able to laugh all the way to its next attack on our side.

We are too weak and divided to cause them more than a few minor headaches. As things are, we stand no chance mounting a serious challenge to their power, and our long-term bickering means that workers distrust us, so they are hardly likely to turn to us in the near future -- if ever.

[redarmyfaction38]

Sectarianism and opportunism according to MIA (http://www.marxists.org/glossary/terms/s/e.htm#sectarianism).
i've added that to my "favourites".
it says what i've been trying to say, unfortunately, i've not been able to express myself that clearly

[redarmyfaction38]

Stop being one then!
remember the bit on the end of your posts? "hegelism is like a mental disease"?
that IS sectarianism, the questioning of anothers tactics, the idoelogy and analysis that drives their conclusions is not.
before you accuse me, try looking in the mirror and accuse yourself.

[redarmyfaction38]

No. There is a difference between ideological and strategical argument; and having a completely hostile, verbally abusive tirade that sees one's organisation and practices as being the superiour and only option; and people being lesser for (what tends to be) minor disagreements in practice.
i agree.
but i'm a sectarian apparently, depending on who you talk to.
despite questioning those "certainties" that a lot of non "sectarians" tell me are absolute and incorruptible truth.
make what you will of that.

[redarmyfaction38]

I read this as Sectarian grrrrl (girl). I don't know why...

Anyway, while you have a point to some degree, I also don't 100% agree.

After all, there is a reason for differences, I, as an anarchist, am opposed to (what I call) states. I cannot support a centralised state structure without compromising my ideals and philosophies beyond repair.

Yes, that is "sectarian" if it means I won't support Cuba or Venezuela, but actually, it isn't sectarian, because statists aren't part of my "sect".

When it comes to anarchists though, I'm much more forgiving. I don't tend to be sectarian if I think that the person is seriously wanting to go towards anarchism.

Anyway, I could ramble for ages, I really just wanted to say "grrrrl"...
go ahead mate, i'll join you, we will be the GRRRRRRRR! anarcho socialist tendancy!:thumbup1:

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

RAF-Bomber_Squadron:


remember the bit on the end of your posts? "hegelism is like a mental disease"?
that IS sectarianism, the questioning of anothers tactics, the idoelogy and analysis that drives their conclusions is not.
before you accuse me, try looking in the mirror and accuse yourself.

I am happy to be called a sectarian when it comes to attacking the work of that ruling-class ideologue and mystical incompetent, Hegel.

So -- more please!:thumbup1:

You, on the other hand attack comrades.http://www.politicalcrossfire.com/forum/images/smiles/1087.gif

[redarmyfaction38]

AM:



This is, I am sorry to say, also true of anarchist attempts to criticise Lenin and Leninism.
rosa, why is it wrong to post a criticism of lenin or leninism?
stalin sliced his brain up, had it examined by all eminent doctors etc.
guess what, it was just like anybody elses brain!
was lenin the new messiah? did god light a star in the sky? were there wise men to kneel at his feet? OR WAS HE JUSY ANOTHER HUMAN BEING?
like marx and trotsky, hegel, mao etc.
the analytical thought they produced is now available to every tom dick and harry, we can all do it, there is no mystery, no need for quasi diety.
marxism is an analytical process not a gospel, it is eaily misunderstood and misinterpratated, their are too many "variables". marx recognised this as did lenin/trotsky, neither of which would have wanted anybody to accept their writings as some sort of biblical truth. or themselves as "god like" figures.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

RAF:


rosa, why is it wrong to post a criticism of lenin or leninism?
stalin sliced his brain up, had it examined by all eminent doctors etc.
guess what, it was just like anybody elses brain!
was lenin the new messiah? did god light a star in the sky? were there wise men to kneel at his feet? OR WAS HE JUSY ANOTHER HUMAN BEING?
like marx and trotsky, hegel, mao etc.
the analytical thought they produced is now available to every tom dick and harry, we can all do it, there is no mystery, no need for quasi diety.
marxism is an analytical process not a gospel, it is eaily misunderstood and misinterpratated, their are too many "variables". marx recognised this as did lenin/trotsky, neither of which would have

Who said it was wrong to do this?

All I said was that in my experience Anarchist criticisms of Lenin and Leninism suffered from the same weaknesses that Apathy Maybe attributed to Leninist criticisms of Anarchism.

The rest of what you say, I agree with.:)

[redarmyfaction38]

[quote=Rosa Lichtenstein;1224939]RAF-Bomber_Squadron:



I am happy to be called a sectarian when it comes to attacking the work of that ruling-class ideologue and mystical incompetent, Hegel.

So -- more please!:thumbup1:

You, on the other hand attack comrades.http://www.politicalcrossfire.com/forum/images/smiles/1087.gif[/quot

NO. i don't attack comrades, i attack the whole "my god is better than your god" attitude of a minority of posters.
i attack the whole idea that something written by another humam being can be construed as "absolute truth".
it amazes me that "marxisits" or "leninists" or "trotskyists" or any other "rev.leftists" can accept the idea that the conclusions the above came to, in the circumstances they reached those conclusions, are a definitive set of rules for how we should conduct our struggle today.
whilst there are obvious similarities and "general" rules of conduct and political analysis between then and now, our set of circumstances are different, the world has moved on way beyond what marx or lenin thought the capitalist system was capable of producing, we have to deal with that, if we don't we are stuck in an "ossified" ideology as politically bankrupt as religious fundamentalism.
the whole point of a site such as rev.left, i would think, is to take the knowledge we all have of the past, the tried and trusted ideologies, methods of struggle and taking them forward in the modern world.
this means, we have to re examine everything that has gone before us, take the bits that are still relevant, address those parts that were circumstantial, and try, using all the knowledge we have been given by these revolutionary philosphers and political leaders and activists to make damn sure we get it right next time and overthrow our capitalist masters. in my very humble fucking opinion.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

You also post baseless assertions about the SWP, and whenever you do that, I will have a go at you.

[gla22]

remember the bit on the end of your posts? "hegelism is like a mental disease"?
that IS sectarianism, the questioning of anothers tactics, the idoelogy and analysis that drives their conclusions is not.
before you accuse me, try looking in the mirror and accuse yourself.

hehelism isn't really a leftist political ideology so i don't see how it is relevant.

[Dros]

hehelism isn't really a leftist political ideology so i don't see how it is relevant.

Rosa's diatribe is against dialectics (by which she really means Marxism).

[Sam_b]

NO. i don't attack comrades


GO BACK AND READ THE WHOLE POST SHIT HEAD


like i said, fuck you

:confused:

[chegitz guevara]

CG, I sympathise with your view, but in my long experience of the left, every sect/party is openly hostile to every other sect/party, whether these are Maoists, Communists (Stalinists or otherwise), Trotskyists, Libertarian Marxists, or Anarchists (of every stripe).

My personal (and long) experience is that I get along with Marxists of pretty much any stripe, even though I'm very open with my politics. Now, a sample size of one proves nothing, but I was only speaking from my own experience.

This is what I've been telling people lately. "You know how to end sectarianism? Just stop being sectarian." It really is that simple.

[Decolonize The Left]

Rosa's diatribe is against dialectics (by which she really means Marxism).

:confused: No... I don't see how this follows. It seems like you're just claiming this because you disagree with Rosa's highly coherent and rather well-thought-out critique of dialectics....

- August

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Dros:


Rosa's diatribe is against dialectics (by which she really means Marxism).

And the proof that I 'really mean Marxism' is what?

Don't tell: me it's in the 'mass line'...

Who may question it, then?

And why do you describe my essays, and not Mao's infinitely longer works, as a 'diatribe'?

Finally, Gla was, I think, agreeing with me, not RAF.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

CG:


My personal (and long) experience is that I get along with Marxists of pretty much any stripe, even though I'm very open with my politics. Now, a sample size of one proves nothing, but I was only speaking from my own experience.

Well, I am very pleased for you, but the history of Marxism supports my take on this, I'm sorry to have to tell you.


This is what I've been telling people lately. "You know how to end sectarianism? Just stop being sectarian." It really is that simple.

Unfortunately, sectarianism has material roots in the class origin of most leading Marxists, and will not be eradicated by a pep talk.

[chegitz guevara]

So what, we roll over and give in? Surely it is easier to overcome sectarianism in the socialist movement than it is to overthrow capitalism.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

CG:


So what, we roll over and give in? Surely it is easier to overcome sectarianism in the socialist movement than it is to overthrow capitalism.

Quite the contrary, but unless we address this problem and find its cause, then we will be wasting our time, since otherwise all we can look forward to is another 150 years of failure.

I have attempted to locate some of the main causes here:

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rosa.l/page%2009_02.htm

[Yehuda Stern]

I get 'sectarian' all the time, even though I am all for work in trade unions, in mass movements (anti-war etc.), and even for military fronts under the right conditions (something for which, ironically, I am condemned as an 'opportunist' for by the same people). You just have to accept that some people have a completely electoralist / parlimentarist mode of thinking and that for them, whoever doesn't vote labor or Sinn Fein or whatever group they admire at the moment is a sectarian.

[redarmyfaction38]

:confused:
truth is mate, you didn't read the whole post and you made accusations based on your misreading of that post.
i didn't attack you as a fellow socialist but as someone not taking the time to actually reads or try to understand what i was saying, hence the shithead and fuck you bits.
i have, as you well know, apologised unreservedly for just slinging shit.
you, i,m afraid got the tail end of an anger that you didn't cause and i'll apologise for that as well.
regardless, what i've said stands, the term "sectarian" is used by all those that wish to cop out of a serious debate about policy and methods to carry our movement forward.
it really doesn't matter how many members your party might have, if your unwilling to accept that other comrades with similar ideology but different analasys and methods might have something to contribute, if you always want to be the party with the final say on all policy within an alliance then maybe, before you denounce others as "sectarian" you should try looking in the mirror. IMO.

[redarmyfaction38]

CG:



Quite the contrary, but unless we address this problem and find its cause, then we will be wasting our time, since otherwise all we can look forward to is another 150 years of failure.

I have attempted to locate some of the main causes here:

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rosa.l/page%2009_02.htm

rosa, please don't take this as a personal attack, cos it isn't.
i clicked on the link and basically went "oh my god!" a 66,000 word essay on something that can be explained quite quickly, the comrade whose definition of sectarianism i favourited earlier in this thread, explains quite simply what "sectarianism" is.
the causes are also quite simple to explain, imo, we live in a capitalist society, we have been fed on a diet of "leaders" and the "sectional" "politics" of the ruling class where minor differences are more easily acepted because they do not threaten the general thrust of the political ideology (capitalism) that lies behind them.
even the most class conscious and revolutionary persons and parties are not immune to that ever present and overwhelming influence.
imo, if we truly want to break with "parliamentary or bourgouis politics", we on the left, have to do what they do when their system is under threat; work on our common interests and leave our sectional differences to one side until we have defeated our common enemy, in their perspective, it's us, the working class, from our perspective it's them the the bourgouisie.
the very success of revolutionary organisations like the bolsheviks was based , not on 66,000 word essays, but on simplifying the analysises of marx, lenin and trotsky into pamphlets.
"socialism" is not an intellectual argument to be debated by well meaning members of the "educated", it is a gut instinct, an acknowledged means of survival for the working class.imo.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

RAF:


rosa, please don't take this as a personal attack, cos it isn't.
i clicked on the link and basically went "oh my god!" a 66,000 word essay on something that can be explained quite quickly, the comrade whose definition of sectarianism i favourited earlier in this thread, explains quite simply what "sectarianism" is.
the causes are also quite simple to explain, imo, we live in a capitalist society, we have been fed on a diet of "leaders" and the "sectional" "politics" of the ruling class where minor differences are more easily acepted because they do not threaten the general thrust of the political ideology (capitalism) that lies behind them.
even the most class conscious and revolutionary persons and parties are not immune to that ever present and overwhelming influence.
imo, if we truly want to break with "parliamentary or bourgouis politics", we on the left, have to do what they do when their system is under threat; work on our common interests and leave our sectional differences to one side until we have defeated our common enemy, in their perspective, it's us, the working class, from our perspective it's them the the bourgouisie.
the very success of revolutionary organisations like the bolsheviks was based , not on 66,000 word essays, but on simplifying the analysises of marx, lenin and trotsky into pamphlets.
"socialism" is not an intellectual argument to be debated by well meaning members of the "educated", it is a gut instinct, an acknowledged means of survival for the working class.imo.

You are the sort of person who opens Das Kapital, and says "Three volumes, 5 million words, are you joking! You could say all that in three pages!".

I also said this on the opening page of my site:


Great care has been taken with these Essays; they have been distilled from work I have been doing for ten years, but I have been mulling over the ideas they contain for twenty-five or more. Literally thousands of hours have gone into writing, re-writing and re-thinking this material. In addition, I have spent more money than I care to mention obtaining literally thousands of obscure books, theses and papers on a whole range of topics directly and indirectly connected with dialectics

In that case, anyone who cannot bring to this discussion the seriousness it deserves is encouraged to go and waste their time elsewhere. I am not interested in communicating with clowns.

So, naff off Bozo.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Yehuda, the interesting things is that as the class struggle drives workers to unite, it drives revolutionaries in the opposite direction.

[KrazyRabidSheep]

i hate this term.
it is a cop out.
anybody that does not agree with you personal or political line must be a "sectarian".
end of debate, end of rational thinking, beginning of blind prejudice and death of the rev. left. and another 1000 years of the new capitalist world order.
imo.Yeah, "sectarian" is thrown out there almost as much as "fascist".

Why in both cases this really is a shame is that when there is something/somebody that one of these terms does apply to, it carries less weight.

Often the understanding is also misinterpreted; rather then realizing that it actually does refer to sectarian/fascist, many people write it off as mere disagreement.

I think that soon "fascist" and "sectarian" will all but lose their original meanings, and continue to exist solely as an insult or explicative of frustration (much like the term "bastard" has become.)

[chegitz guevara]

CG:
I have attempted to locate some of the main causes here:

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rosa.l/page%2009_02.htm

Dialectics has nothing to do with it. The chief cause of sectarianism is our defeat and isolation from the masses. Without an avenue to test our theories in practice, we can only construct hypotheses. We can't move from from hypotheses to theory because we cannot test them and discard the hypotheses that fail. All of our ideas have become metaphysical.

Nonetheless, within the limited parameters we can operate, we have a bit more freedom than we think. We make the choice to act sectarian or not, to declare our ideas true and all others false, when we know no such thing.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

CG:


Dialectics has nothing to do with it. The chief cause of sectarianism is our defeat and isolation from the masses. Without an avenue to test our theories in practice, we can only construct hypotheses. We can't move from from hypotheses to theory because we cannot test them and discard the hypotheses that fail. All of our ideas have become metaphysical.

Nonetheless, within the limited parameters we can operate, we have a bit more freedom than we think. We make the choice to act sectarian or not, to declare our ideas true and all others false, when we know no such thing.

Who said dialectics is the casue of sectarianism? Not me.

You clearly did not read what I had to say.

[Yehuda Stern]

Yehuda, the interesting things is that as the class struggle drives workers to unite, it drives revolutionaries in the opposite direction.

I disagree. The class struggle drives together the revolutionaries, as it does with sections of the centrists and the reformists. Only someone who believes that anyone calling himself a Marxist is a Marxist can reason the way you do. Like I said: we advocate work in trade unions, and when necessary we also advocate many tactics that require getting involved in a mass movement. We're just not philo-frontists like most British leftists are, nor do we believe that if we all simply embrace each other then our political differences will disappear.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Yehuda:


The class struggle drives together the revolutionaries, as it does with sections of the centrists and the reformists. Only someone who believes that anyone calling himself a Marxist is a Marxist can reason the way you do. Like I said: we advocate work in trade unions, and when necessary we also advocate many tactics that require getting involved in a mass movement. We're just not philo-frontists like most British leftists are, nor do we believe that if we all simply embrace each other then our political differences will disappear

Well, the evidence suggest otherwise. Workers are forced to combine, and they have, throughout the world.

Revolutionaries just fragment into smaller and smaller sects, all battling with each other. Check this out (and these are just some of the Trotskyists!):


Committee for a Workers International (CWI)

Socialist Party, Australia
Socialist Left Party (Sozialistische LinksPartei, SLP), Austria
Leftist Socialist Party / Movement for a Socialist Alternative (Linkse Socialistische Partij / Mouvement pour une Alternative Socialiste, LSP/MAS), Belgium
Revolutionary Socialism (Socialismo Revolucionário, SR), Brazil updated April 05
Socialist Alternative / Alternative Socialiste, Canada
Socialist Alternative Future (Socialistická alternativa Budoucnost), Czech Republic
Socialist Alternative (Sosialistinen Vaihtoehto), Finland
Revolutionary Left (Gauche Révolutionnaire, GR), France
Socialist Alternative (Sozialistische Alternative, SAV), Germany
International Socialists, Great Britain/Scotland
Socialist Party (SP), Great Britain
Socialist International Organisation "Start" (Sosialistiki Diethnistiki Organosi "Xekinima"), Greece
Socialist Party, Ireland, Northern Ireland
Socialist Struggle (Ma'avak Sotsyalisti), Israel
Struggle for Socialism (Lotta per il Socialismo), Italy
Offensive (Offensief), Netherlands
Democratic Socialist Movement (DSM), Nigeria
Group for a Workers Party (Grupa na rzecz Partii Robotniczej, GPR), Poland
Socialist Resistance (Sotsialisticheskoye Soprotivlemiye), Russia
Justice Party Socialists (Rättvisepartiet Socialisterna), Sweden
Socialist Alternative, USA
Committee of International Rapprochement

Socialist Convergence (Convergencia Socialista), Argentina added April 05
Left Party, USA
Communist Organization for the Fourth International (COFI)

Communist Organization for the Fourth International - FRG (Kommunistische Organisation für die Vierte Internationale-BRD, KOVI-BRD), Germany
League for the Revolutionary Party (LRP), USA
Coordinating Committee for the Refoundation of the Fourth International (CRFI)
Tendency aound the Argentinian Workers Party (Partido Oberero, PO)

Workers' Party (Partido Obrero, PO), Argentina
Workers' Cause Party (Partido da Causa Operária, PCO), Brazil
The Proletarian Society of China periodical The Trotskyist, China/Hongkong, close to CRFI
Workers Revolutionnary Party (Ergatiko Epanastatiko Komma, EEK), Greece
Socialist Workers League, Israel/Palestine
Revolutionary Marxist Association "Communist Project" (Associazione Marxista Rivoluzionaria "Progetto Comunista"), Italy, active inside PRC
Workers' Party (Partido de los Trabajadores, PT)
Workers Action, USA
International Bolshevik Tendency (IBT)

International Bolshevik Tendency (Spartacus Group) (Internationale Bolschewistische Tendenz (Gruppe Spartakus)), Germany
Marxist Bulletin, Great Britain
International Center of Orthodox Trotskyism (Centro Internacional del Trotskismo Ortodoxo - IV Internacional, CITO)

Guernica Socialist Group (Grupo Socialista Guernica), Argentina
Socialist Revolution Party [Workers' Word] (Partido de la Revolución Socialista [Palabra Obrera]), Argentina
International Committee of the Fourth International [1] (ICFI[1])

Socialist Equality Party (SEP), Australia
Party for Social Equality (Partei für Soziale Gleichheit, PSG), Germany
Socialist Equality Party (SEP), Great Britain
Socialist Equality Party (SEP), other page, USA
International Committee of the Fourth International [2] (ICFI[2])

Workers' Revolutionary Party (WRP), Great Britain
International Communist League (Fourth Internationalist) (ICL(FI))

Proletarian Platform (Platforma Proletariacka), Poland
International Liaison Committee for a Workers' International (Entente Internationale des Travailleurs)


Workers' Party (Parti des Travailleurs, PT) unofficial, periodical Fraternité, Algeria
Workers' Party (Parti des Travailleurs, PT), France updated May 05
Social Politics and Democracy (Soziale Politik und Demokratie), Germany
The Struggle (Lalit), Mauritius
Association for Workers' Emancipation (Asociatia pentru Emanciparea Muncitorilor) periodical Tribuna Socialã, Romania
Workers Information (Información Obrera), Spain
Collective for Workers' Socialism (Colectivo por el Socialismo Obrero)
Communist Encounter (Reencuentro Comunista)
Union of Circles for Workers' Politics (Union des Cercles pour une Politique Ouvrière, UCPO), Switzerland
Socialism without Bosses, General, Bureaucrats (Patronsuz, Generalsiz, Bürokratsiz Sosyalizm, PGB Sosyalizm), Turkey
International Marxist Tendency
Tendency around the Group publishing Socialist Appeal in Great Britain

The Militant (El Militante), Argentina
The Spark (Der Funke), Austria
Spark (Vonk), Belgium
FightBack, Canada updated February 05
Socialist Standpoint (Socialistisk Standpunkt), Denmark
Counter-attack (La Riposte), France
The Spark (Der Funke), Germany
Socialist Appeal periodical, In Defense of Marxism periodical, Great Britain, active inside Labour Party
Marxist Voice (Marxistiki Foni), Greece updated February 05
Shining Light (Cahaya), Indonesia
Iranian Revolutionary Socialists' League (Ettehadi-ye Sosiyalistha-ye Enqelabi-ye Iran, IRSL)
In Defence of Marxism, Israel
Spark (Iskra), Israel
Sickle Hammer (Falce Martello), Italy, active inside PRC
Militant (Militante), Mexico, active inside PRD
Struggle (Jeddo Judh) trade union wing, Pakistan
Socialist Left Force (Fuerza de Izquierda Socialista, FIS), Peru added February 05
Socialism (Socjalizm), Poland
Workers Democracy (Rabochaya Demokratiya), Russia
Insurgent Reason (Pobunjeni Um), mirror page, Serbia and Montenegro (close to CMI)
Forward! - Slovenian Marxist Circle (Naprej! - Stran Slovenskih Marksistov)
The Militant (El Militante), Spain
Militancy (Militancia), Spain/Andalusia added February 05
Marxist Left (Esker Marxista), Spain
Yesterday and Today (Onte e Hoxe), Spain
The Socialist (Socialisten), Sweden
Marxist Attitude (Marksist Tutum), Turkey
Workers International League (WIL), youth organization, USA
Revolutionary Marxist Current (Corriente Marxista Revolucionaria), Venezuela
International Secretariat of the Fourth International (Secrétariat International de la Quatrième Internationale)

Labour (O Trabalho), periodical O Trabalho, Brazil
Socialist Workers' Organization (Organización Socialista de los Trabajadores) youth organization, Mexico
Workers' Party of Socialist Unity (Partido Operário de Unidade Socialista, POUS), Portugal
Internationalist Socialist Workers' Party (Partido Obrero Socialista Internacionalista, POSI), Spain
"Struggle" Union (Soyuz "Borot'ba"), Ukraine added February 05
Socialist Organizer, USA
International Socialist Forum (ISF)

International Socialist League (Liga Socialista Internacional, LSI)

Socialist Workers Party (Partido Socialista de los Trabajadores, PRT), Costa Rica
Workers Party (Partido de los Trabajadores, PT), Honduras
Revolutionary Workers Party (Partido Revolucionario de los Trabajadores, PRT), Nicaragua
International Socialists (IS)
other page

Left Turn (Linkswende), Austria
International Socialist Organisation (ISO), Australia
Revolts (Revolutas), Brazil
International Socialists / International Socialism (International Socialists/Socialisme International), Canada
Workers' Democracy (Ergatiki Demokratia), Cyprus
Socialist Solidarity (Socialistická Solidarita), Czech Republic
International Socialists (Internationale Socialister), Denmark
Socialist League (Sosialistiliitto, SL), Finland
Socialism from Below (Socialisme par en bas), France
Left Shift (Linksruck), Germany
Socialist Workers' Party (SWP), Great Britain
Socialist Workers' Party (Sosialistiko Ergatiko Komma, SEK), Greece
Anticapitalist Alliance (Antikapitalistiki Symmachia), Greece
Socialist Workers Party (SWP), Northern Ireland
Communism from below (Comunismo dal basso), Italy
International Socialists (Internationale Socialisten), Netherlands
Socialist Worker, New Zealand
International Socialists (Internasjonale Sosialister), Norway
International Socialists, Pakistan added February 05
Workers' Democracy (Pracownicza Demokracja), Poland
International Socialist Organization (Organización Socialista Internacional, OSI), Puerto Rico
In Struggle (En Lucha), Spain
Antikapitalist (Anti-capitalist), Turkey
Revolutionary Socialist Workers Party (Devrimci Sosyalist Isçi Partisi, DSIP), periodical Sosyalist Isçi, Turkey
Revolutionary Left (Izquierda Revolucionaria), Uruguay
International Socialist Organization (ISO), Zimbabwe
Splits from International Socialists

Socialist Action Group (SAG), Australia, split from SA added May 05
Socialist Alternative (SA), Australia, split of ISO
Solidarity, Australia, split from ISO added May 05
New Socialist Group, Canada
Active Socialist Forum (Aktivt Socialistisk Forum, ASF), Denmark, split of IS
International Socialism (Socialisme International), France
Anti-capitalist Network (Antikapitalistisches Netzwerk), Germany, split from Linksruck
Group of International Socialists (Gruppe Internationaler SozialistInnen, GIS), Germany, Germany, split from Linksruck, now left communist updated February 05
International Socialists (Internationale Sozialisten), Germany, split of SAG, close to IS
Internationalist Workers Left (Diethistiki Ergatiki Aristera, DEA), Greece, split from SEK
International Socialist Organization (ISO), New Zealand, split from SWO, close to IS
International Socialist Organization (ISO), USA, ex-IS
Left Turn, USA, ex-IS
International Trotskyist Committee for the Political Regeneration of the Fourth International (ITC)

Revolutionary Internationalist League (RIL) auxiliary organization, Great Britain
Revolutionary Workers League (RWL), USA added February 05
International Trotskyist Labor Tendency (ITLT)

Workers Front Organization, Great Britain
Trotskyist Labor League (TLL)
International Trotskyist Opposition (ITO)

International Trotskyist Opposition, Denmark, active inside SAP
British Supporters of the International Trotskyist Opposition
Our Word (Unser Wort), Germany
Revolutionary Marxist Association "Communist Project" (Associazione Marxista Rivoluzionaria "Progetto Comunista"), Italy, active inside PRC
International Workers League (Fourth International) (Liga Internacional de los Trabajadores (Quarta Internacional), LIT-CI)

Socialist Worker Front, Frente Obrero Socialista (FOS), Argentina
Workers League, Australia
Unified Socialist Workers' Party (Partido Socialista dos Trabalhadores Unificado, PSTU)
Movement for a New Socialist Party (Movimento por um Novo Partido Socialista), Brazil
Movement for Socialism (Movimiento por el Socialismo, MPS), Chile
Internationalist Socialist Group (Groupe Socialiste Internationaliste, GSI), France
International Socialist League (ISL), Great Britain
Socialist Workers' Party (Partido Obrero Socialista, POS), Mexico
Workers' Party (Partido de los Trabajadores, PT), Paraguay added February 05
Socialist Workers' Party (Partido Socialista de los Trabajadores, PST), Peru
Breach/Front of the Revolutionary Left (Ruptura/Frente da Esquerda Revolucionária, Ruptura/FER), Portugal updated February 05
Internationalist Struggle (Lucha Internacionalista), Spain
Revolutionary Workers' Party - Revolutionary Left (Partido Revolucionario de los Trabajadores - Izquierda Revolucionaria / Partit Revolucionari dels Treballadors - Esquerra Revolucionari, PRT), Spain
International Bulletin (Enternasyonal Bülten), Turkey
Workers Front (Isçi Cephesi) periodical Isçi Cephesi, Turkey
International Workers' Unity (Fourth International) (Unidad Internacional de los Trabajadores (Quarta Internacional), UIT)

Socialist Workers' Movement (Movimiento Socialista de los Trabajadores, MST), Argentina
Socialist Workers' Current (Corrente Socialista dos Trabalhadores, CST), Brazil
La Commune Group (Groupe "La Commune"), France
Union of the Working Class (Union de la Clase Trabajadora, UCLAT), Mexico
Internationalist Communist Union (Union Communiste Internationaliste, UCI)

Communist Union (trotskyist), [Workers Struggle] (Union Communiste (trotskyste), [Lutte Ouvrière], LO), France
Faction of Workers Struggle (Fraction de Lutte Ouvrière) periodical Convergences Révolutionnaires
Workers' Struggle (Combat Ouvrier), Guadeloupe/Martinique
The Spark, USA
League for the Fifth International (LFI)

Workers' Standpoint Group (Gruppe ArbeiterInnenstandpunkt, ASt), Austria
Socialist Workers Organization (Socialistická organizace pracujících, SOP), Czech Republic
Workers' Power (Pouvoir Ouvrier, PO), France, dissolved in 2003
Workers' Power Group (Gruppe Arbeitermacht, GAM), Germany
Workers' Power, Great Britain
Revolutionary Socialist League (Zväz revolucných socialistov, ZRS), Slovakia
Workers Power (Arbetarmakt), Sweden
League for the Fourth International

Fourth Internationalist League of Brazil (Liga Quarta-Internacionalista do Brasil, LQIB)
Internationalist Group (Groupe Internationaliste), France
Internationalist Group, USA
Liaison Committee for an International Conference of Principled Trotskyists and Revolutionary Internationalist Workers' Organizations

Revolutionary Marxist Committee (Marxist Trench) (Comitê Marxista Revolucionário (Trincheira Marxista)), Brazil
Workers' Oppostion (Oposição Operária), Brazil
Liaison Committee of Militants for a Revolutionary Communist International (LCMRCI)
Communist Workers Group (CWG), mirror page, New Zealand
Internationalist Trotskyist Faction - Fourth International (Fracción Trotskista Internacionalista - Cuarta Internacional) updated February 05

Internationalist Workers League (Fourth International) - Workers' Democracy (Liga Obrera Internacionalista (Cuarta Internacional) - Democracia Obrera), Argentina, split of PTS updated February 05
Fourth Internationalist Tendency (Tendência Quarta Internacionalista, TQI) updated February 05

Construction Committee for a Revolutionary Workers' Party (Comité Constructor por un Partido Obrero Revolucionario), Argentina
Trotskyist Faction (Fração Trotskista), Brazil
Liaison Committee for the Reconstruction of the Fourth International (Comité de Enlace por la Reconstrución de la IV Internacional, CERCI)

Revolutionary Workers' Party [Masas] (Partido Obrero Revolucionario [Masas], POR[Masas]) periodical Masas, Bolivia
Leninist-Trotskyist Tendency (LTT)

Workers Action, Great Britain
Movement (Movimiento)

Socialist Left Movement (Movimento Esquerda Socialista), Brazil
Socialist Workers Unity (Unidad Obrera y Socialista, UnioS!), Mexico
Permanent Revolution Collective (Collectif Révolution Permanente / Colectivo Revolución Permanente) added February 05

Bolshevik Group (Groupe Bolchevik) France
Germinal Group - In Defense of Marxism (Grupo Germinal - En Defensa del Marxismo), Spain
Posadist Fourth International added February 05

Revolutionary Worker's Party (Trotskyist) (Parti Ouvrier Révolutionnaire Trotskiste, POR(T) periodical Lutte Ouvrière, Belgium added February 05
Posadist Current of the Workers Party (Corrente Posadista do Partido dos Trabalhadores) periodical Revolução Socialista, Brazil added February 05
Revolutionary Communist Party (Trotskyist) (Parti Communiste Révolutionnaire (Trotskiste), PCR(T)) periodical Lutte Communiste, France added February 05
Revolutionary Workers Ferment (Fomento Obrero Revolucionario, FOR) other page

Socialism or Barbarism

Movement towards Socialism (Movimiento al Socialismo, MAS), Argentina
Socialism or Barbarism (Socialismo o Barbarie), Bolivia added August 04
Avanti!, France
Socialist Workers Party Tendency
Tendency around the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) of the USA
Periodical Militant

Communist League (Kommunistiska Förbundet) bookstore, Sweden
Socialist Workers' Party (SWP) periodical Militant, USA
Trotskyist Faction (Estrategia Internacional) (Fracción Trotskista (Estrategia Internacional), FT(EI)), European page

Workers' Party for Socialism (Partido de Trabajadores por el Socialismo, PTS), Argentina
Revolutionary Workers' League for the Fourth International (Liga Obrera Revolucionaria por la Cuarta Internacional, LOR-CI), Bolivia
Revolutionary Strategy (Estratégia Revolucionária), Brazil
Revolutionary Trotskyist Militants (Militantes Trotskistas Revolucionarios) periodical Clase contra Clase, Chile
Workers' League for Socialism - Against the Current (Liga de Trabajadores por el Socialismo - ContraCorriente, LTS-CC), Mexico
Trotskyist Posadist Fourth International

Revolutionary Workers' Party (Partido Obrero Revolucionario, POR), Uruguay added February 05
United Secretariat of the Fourth International (USFI)
Periodicals International Viewpoint, Inprecor, Inprekorr, Inprecor America Latina

Member Organizations

Socialist Workers Party (Parti Socialiste des Travailleurs / Akhabar Anemlay Nikhedamen /Hizb al-Ummal al-Ishtiraki, PST), Algeria
Socialist Workers' Party (Socialistische Arbeiders Partij / Parti Ouvrier Socialiste, SAP/POS), Belgium
Socialist Democracy (Democracia Socialista) periodical, Brazil
Freedom and Revolution (Liberdade e Revolução) Brazil
Socialist Left (Gauche Socialiste, GS), Canada/Quebec
Socialist Workers' Party (Socialistisk Arbejderparti, SAP), Denmark
Revolutionary Communist League (Ligue Communiste Révolutionnaire, LCR)
Arguments for Socialism (Arguments pour le Socialisme)
Avanti!
International Socialism (Socialisme International)
Militant Debate (Debat Militant)
Workers Voice (Voix des Travailleurs, VdT)
International Socialist Left (Internationale Sozialistische Linke, ISL), Germany
Revolutionary Socialist League (Revolutionär Sozialistischer Bund, RSB), Germany
International Socialist Group (ISG), Great Britain
Organization of Communist Internationalists of Greece-Spartacus (Organosi Kommouniston Diethniston Ellados-Spartakos, OKDE-Spartakos)
Socialist Revolution Group (Groupe Révolution Socialiste, GRS), Guadeloupe/Martinique
Socialist Democracy, Ireland
Bandiera Rossa Association (Associazione Bandiera Rossa, ABR), periodical Erre, Italy
Socialist Convergence (Convergencia Socialista), Mexico
Socialist Alternative Politics (Socialistische Alternatieve Politiek), Netherlands updated February 05
Internationalist League of Norway (Forbundet Internasjonalen i Norge, FIN)
Revolutionary Socialist Political Association (Associação Política Socialista Revolucionária, APSR) periodical Combate, Portugal updated February 05
Political Education Workshop (Taller de Formación Política, TFP), Puerto Rico
Alternative Left (Izquierda Alternativa, IA) periodical Viento Sur, Spain
Collective for an Alternative Left (Col.lectiu per una Esquerra Alternativa, CEA), Spain/Catalonia
New Equal Society Party (Nava Sama Samaja Pakshaya, NSSP), Sri Lanka
Socialist Party (Socialistiska Partiet, SP), Sweden
Socialist Alternative / Solidarity (Sozialistische Alternative / Solidarität, SOAL), Switzerland
Sympathising Organizations

Socialist Democracy, Australia
Socialist Action, Canada
October Review Group (Shih Yueh P'ing Lun), English articles, China/Hongkong
Japan Revolutionary Communist League (Nihon Kakumeiteki Kyôsanshugisha Dômei, JRCL)
National Council of Internationalist Workers (Kokusaishugi Rôdôsha Zenkoku Kyôgikai), Japan updated February 05
Socialist Unity League (Liga de Unidad Socialista, LUS), Mexico
Militant (Al-Mounadhil), Morocco added February 05
Revolutionary Left Current (Nurt Lewicy Rewolucyjnej, NLR), Poland
Socialist Workers' Party (Partido Socialista de los Trabajadores, PST), Uruguay added November 05
Socialist Action, USA
Organizations including USFI supporters

New Socialist Group, Canada
Movement of the National Left (Muvimentu di a Manca Naziunale), France/Corsica
Association for Solidarity Perspectives (Verein für Solidarische Perspektiven), Germany
Movement for a Reunionese Alternative to the Neoliberal Order (Mouvement pour une Alternative Réunionnaise à l'Ordre Néolibéral, MARON)
Act Together/African Party for Democracy and Socialism (And Jëf/Parti africain pour la Démocratie et le Socialisme, AJ/PADS), Senegal
Alternative Space (Espacio Alternativo), Spain
Alternative Galicia (Galiza Alternativa)
Alternative Left (Izquierda Alternativa, IA) periodical Viento Sur
Alternative Space (Espai Alternatiu)
Andalusian Revolutionary Space (Espacio Revolucionario Andaluz)
Rainbow (Arcoiris)
Shock (Batzac)
Stand up (Zutik), Spain/Basque Country
Movement for Socialism (Bewegung für den Sozialismus / Mouvement pour le Socialisme / Movimento per il Socialismo, BFS/MPS) regional groups, Switzerland
Freedom and Solidarity Party (Özgürlük ve Dayanisma Partisi, ÖDP), Turkey
Labor Standard, mirror page, USA
Solidarity, USA
Others

Revolutionary Socialism (Socialismo Revolucionario), Argentina, split from PTS added February 05
Revolutionary Socialist League (Liga Socialista Revolucionaria, LSR), Argentina, split of MAS
Socialist Workers' Union (Unión Socialista de los Trabajadores, UST), Argentina
Democratic Socialist Perspective (DSP), Australia, ex-USFI
Workers' Liberty, Australia, linked to British AWL
Anti-fascist Left (Antifaschistische Linke, AL), Austria
Group for Revolutionary Workers Politics (Gruppe für Revolutionäre Arbeiter/innenpolitik, GRA), Austria
Working Group Marxism (Arbeitsgruppe Marxismus, AGM), Austria
Internationalist Bolshevik League (Liga Bolchevique Internacionalista, LBI), Brazil
Socialism and Freedom Collective (Coletivo Socialismo e Liberdade), Brazil updated February 05
Socialist Voice, Canada
Pioneer, China/Hongkong, ex-USFI
Workers' Power (Poder Obrero), Colombia
Revolutionary Socialists (Ishtirakiyin al-Thawriyin), Egypt
Circle for the Construction of the Revolutionary Workers Party, of the Revolutionary Workers International (Cercle pour la Construction du Parti Ouvrier Révolutionnaire, de l'Internationale Ouvrière Révolutionnaire), France
Committee for the Construction of the Revolutionary Workers' Party (Comité pour la Construction du Parti Ouvrier Révolutionnaire), France
Public Faction "Fighting for Socialism" (Fraction Publique "Combattre pour le Socialisme"), France
Federation of the Circles "Le Marxisme d'Aujourd'hui" (Fédération des Cercles "Le Marxisme aujourd'hui"), France
Internationalist Revolutionary Communist Group (Groupe Communiste Revolutionnaire Internationaliste, Groupe CRI), France
New Communist Left / Popular Association for Mutual Aid (Nouvelle Gauche Communiste / Association Populaire d'Entraide), France
Revolutionary Convergences (Convergences Révolutionnaires), France, Étincelle faction of Lutte Ouvrière and former Révolution! faction of LCR
Marxist Theory and Politics Working Group (Arbeitskreis "Marxistische Theorie und Politik"), Germany, ex-LTT
Alliance for Workers' Liberty (AWL), Great Britain, linked to Australian Workers' Liberty
International Socialist Movement - Marxist Platform of the Scottish Socialist Party (ISM), Great Britain, formerly in CWI
Revolutionary Democratic Group (RDG), Great Britain
Socialist Action Group periodical Socialist Action Review, Great Britain, ex-USFI
Communist League - Workers Power (Kommounistikos Syndemos - Ergatiki Exousia), Greece
Organization of Communist Internationalists of Greece - Workers Struggle (Organosi Kommouniston Diethniston Elladas - Ergatiki Pali, OKDE), close to USFI
Communist Project - Programatic Area of the PRC (Progetto Comunista - Area Programmatica del PRC), Italy
Reds Association (Associazione Reds), Italy
Fourth International Central Secretariat (Dayon Intânashonaru Chûô Shokikyoku), Japan
Fourth International Japan Section Reconstruction Preparation Group (Dayon Intânashonaru Nihon Shibu Saiken Jumbi Gurûpu), Japan
Japan Revolutionary Communist League, National Committee/Middle Core Faction (Kakumeiteki Kyôsanshugisha Dômei, Zenkoku Iinkai/Chûkakû-ha, Chûkakû-ha)
Japan Revolutionary Communist League - Revolutionary Marxist Faction (Nihon Kakumeiteki Kyôsanshugisha Dômei - Kakumeiteki Marukusushugi-ha, Kakumaru-ha)
Kenya Socialist Democratic Alliance (KSDA)
Labour Party Pakistan (LPP), formerly in CWI
Workers' Tribune Group (Grupo Tribuna Obrera), Paraguay
Spartacist Communist Group of the Portuguese Workers (Grupo Espartaquista Comunista do Operariado Português, GECOP)
Revolutionary Workers Party (Revoliutsionnaya Rabochaya Partiya, RPP), Russia
Revolutionary Workers Party (Revoliutsionnaya Rabochaya Partiya, RRP), Russia
Communist (Komunist), mirror page, Serbia and Montenegro
Workers International Vanguard League (WIVL), South Africa
In Defence of Marxism (En Defensa del Marxismo), Spain, close to ITO and PO-Tendency
Marxist League (Liga Marxista), Spain/Canary Islands
Marxist Propaganda Group (Grupo de Propaganda Marxista, GPM), Spain
New Clarity (Nuevo Claridad), Spain, ex-CWI
Revolutionary Workers' Party (Partido Obrero Revolucionario/Partit Obrer Revolucionari, POR), ex-UIT, Spain
Socialist Alternative (Socialistiskt Alternativ), split from Arbetarmakt, Sweden
Workers' Democratic Association (Gongren Minzhu Xiehui, WDA), Taiwan updated February 05
Liberation Party of Kurdistan (Partîya Rizgarîya Kurdistan / Kürdistan Kurtulus Partisi, PRK/Rizgari), Turkey
Workers Struggle (Isçi Mücadelesi), Turkey
Freedom Socialist Party (FSP), USA, Canada, Australia
Labor's Militant Voice, mirror page, USA, split from Labor Militant (CWI)
Socialist Workers Organization (SWO) periodical Socialist Viewpoint, USA, split from Socialist Action
Truth, ex-UIT, USA
Workers Democracy Network, USA
Ex-Trotskyists

Marxists-Humanists

Corresponding Committee periodical Hobgoblin, Great Britain
Freedom Council (Anjoman Azadi), Iran
News & Letters Committees, USA
Socialist Utopia (Utopia Socialista)

Revolutionary Socialism (Socialismo Rivoluzionario, SR), ex-LIT-CI
Libertarian Socialism (Socialismo Libertario), Spain
Others

Revolutionary Workers' Party (Partido Revolucionario de los Trabajadores, PRT), Argentina
Revolutionary Communist League (Revolutionär Kommunistische Liga, RKL) periodical Bruchlinien added February 05
Group of International Socialists (Gruppe Internationaler SozialistInnen, GIS), Germany, split from Linksruck
Movement for a Socialist Future (MSF), Great Britain
Peace and Progress, Great Britain, ex-Marxist Party added February 05
Red Action, Great Britain
Workers World Party (WWP), USA

http://www.broadleft.org/trotskyi.htm

More to follow.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Here are a few of the Communists:


Communist Parties

Last update: May 3, 2005

The parties listed were formerly part of the so-called World Communist Movement grouped around the Soviet CPSU and still adhere to marxism-leninism. Included are also splits from parties which were formerly close to the CPSU. Some of these parties appear also on other pages as the ideological broadwidth ranges from open stalinists to parties which tend towards democratic socialism.



Parties formerly associated with the World Marxist Review (Problems of Peace and Socialism)

Communist Party of Argentina (Partido Comunista de la Argentina, PCA)
Communist Party of Australia (CPA), formerly the Socialist Party of Australia
Communist Party of Austria (Kommunistische Partei Österreichs, KPÖ)
Communist Party of Bangladesh (Bangladesher Communist Party)
Belarusian Party of Communists (Partyia Kamunistau Belaruskaia, PKB) periodical Tovarishch
Communist Party - Flanders (Kommunistische Partij - Vlaanderen, KP), Belgium
Communist Party - Wallonia (Parti Communiste - Wallonie, PC) regional organization, Belgium
Democratic Progressive Tribune Society (Jami'at Al-Minbar al-Taqaddum al-Dimuqrati, al-Minbar), Bahrain, founded by members of National Liberation Front/Bahrain
National Democratic Action Society (Jami'at al-Amal al-Watani al-Dimuqrati), other page, other page, founded by members of National Liberation Front/Bahrain
Communist Party of Canada (Communist Party of Canada / Parti Communiste du Canada, CPC/PCC)
Communist Party of Quebec (Parti Communiste du Québec, PCQ)
Communist Party of Chile (Partido Comunista de Chile, PCC)
Colombian Communist Party (Partido Comunista Colombiano, PCC)
Communist Party of Cuba (Partido Comunista de Cuba, PCC), periodical Granma
Progressive Party of Working People (Anorthotiko Komma Ergazomenou Laou, AKEL), Cyprus
Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia (Komunistická strana Cech a Moravy, KSCM), Czech Republic
Communist Party of Denmark (Danmarks Kommunistiske Parti, DKP)
Revolution Force (Fuerza de la Revolución), Dominican Republic, merger of the Communist Party and other groups updated February 05
Egyptian Communist Party (Hizb al-Shuyu'i al-Misri)
French Communist Party (Parti Communiste Français, PCF)
Communist Refounders (Réfondateurs Communistes)
Communist Regroupment (Regroupement Communiste)
Facts and Analysis (Faits et Analyses)
Glaring Reds (Rouges Vifs) regional group
New Communist Left / Popular Association for Mutual Aid (Nouvelle Gauche Communiste / Association Populaire d'Entraide)
Pole of Communist Renaissance in France (Pole de Renaissance Communiste en France, PCRF)
Reconstruct the PCF (Reconstruire le PCF, RPCF) added February 05
Struggle (Combat)
German Communist Party (Deutsche Kommunistische Partei, DKP)
Communist Party of Greece (Kommounistiko Komma Elladas, KKE)
Communist Party of India (Bharatiya Kamyunista Parti, CPI)
Party of the Masses of Iran (Hezb-e Tudeh-ye Iran), periodical Rahe Tudeh
Iraqi Communist Party (Hizb al-Shuyu'i al-'Iraqi, ICP)
Kurdistan Communist Party, other page
Communist Party of Ireland (Pairtí Cummanach na hÉireann, CPI)
Communist Party of Israel (Miflagah ha-Komunistit ha-Yisre'elit / al-Hizb al-Shuyu'i al-Isra'ili, MAKI)
Japanese Communist Party (Nihon Kyôsantô, Nikkyo)
Communist Party of Kazakhstan (Kommuniststicheskaya Partiya Kazakhstana / Kazakstan Kommunistyk Partiyasy)
National Democratic Front of South Korea (Han-min-jeon)
Lebanese Communist Party (Hizb al-Shuyu'i al-Lubnani / Parti Communiste Libanais, PCL)
Socialist Party of Latvia (Latvijas Sociâlistiskâ Partija / Socialisticheskaya Partiya Latvii, LSP)
Communist Party of Luxemburg (Kommunistesch Partei vu Lëtzebuerg / Parti Communiste Luxembourgeois, KPL/PCL) periodical Zeitung vum Lëtzebuerger Vollek
Party of Communists of the Republic of Moldova (Partidul Comunistilor din Republica Moldova, PCRM)
Party of Progress and Socialism (Hizb al-Taqaddum wa-al-Ishtirakiyah / Parti du Progrès et du Socialisme, PPS) periodical Al Bayane, Morocco
Communist Party of Norway (Norges Kommunistiske Parti, NKP)
Communist Party of Pakistan [Khaskheli] (CPP[Khaskheli])
Palestinian People's Party (Hizb al-Sha'b al-Filastini, PPP)
Peruvian Communist Party [Unity] (Partido Comunista Peruano [Unidad], PCP[Unidad])
Portuguese Communist Party (Partido Comunista Português, PCP)
All-Russian Communist Party of the Future (Vserossiiskaya Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Budushchego, VKPB) updated February 05
Communist Party of the Russian Federation (Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Rossiiskoi Federatsii, KPRF)
South African Communist Party (SACP)
Communist Party of Spain (Partido Comunista de España, PCE)
Sudanese Communist Party (Al-Hizb al-Shuyu'i al-Sudani, HSS)
Swiss Labour Party (Parti Suisse du Travail / Partei der Arbeit der Schweiz / Partito Svizzero del Lavoro, PdA/PST/PdL), mirror page
Syrian Communist Party [Faysal] (Hizb al-Shuyu'i al-Suri [Faysal]) periodical Al-Nur
Communist Party of Turkey [Harvest] (Türkiye Komünist Partisi [Ürün])
Communist Party of Ukraine (Komunistychna Partiya Ukrainy, KPU)
All-Ukrainian Workers Union (Vseukrains'kiy Soyuz Rabochykh, VSR)
Communist Party of Uruguay (Partido Comunista del Uruguay, PCU)
Union of Communist Parties - Communist Party of the Soviet Unio (Soyuz Kommunisticheskih Partii - Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Sovetskogo Soyuza, SKP-KPSS)
Communist Party USA (CPUSA)
Communist Party of Venezuela (Partido Comunista de Venezuela, PCV)
Communist Party of Vietnam (Dang Cong san Viêt Nam / Parti Communiste Vietnamien)
Others parties with a similar political orientation

United Cyprus Party (Birlesik Kibris Partisi, BKP), Cyprus/TRNC updated February 05
Workers' Party (Pairtí na nOibrí), Ireland
Socialist Popular Party of Mexico (Partido Popular Socialista de México, PPS México)
Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (Jabhah al-Dimuqratiyah li-Tahrir Filastin, DFLP) periodical Al-Huriyah
New Romanian Communist Party - Initiative Committee (Noul Partid Comunist Român - Comitetul de Initiativa)
Communist Party of Kurdistan (Partiya Komunistê Kurdistan / Kürdistan Komünist Partisi, PKK/KKP), Turkey
Communist Party of Turkey [ex-SIP] (Türkiye Komünist Partisi [ex-SIP])
Freedom and Solidarity Party (Özgürlük ve Dayanisma Partisi, ÖDP), merger of several leftist currents, among them the majority of the United Communist Party of Turkey (TBKP)
Leftist splits from communist parties

Algerian Party for Democracy and Socialism (Parti Algérien pour la Démocratie et le Socialisme, PADS)
Communist Party - Extraordinary Congress (Partido Comunista - Congreso Extraordinario, PC(CE)), Argentina added February 2005
Communist Refoundation (Refundación Comunista), Argentina
Communist Initiative (Kommunistische Initiative, KI), Austria updated April 05
Brazilian Communist Party (Partido Comunista Brasileiro, PCB), split from the Socialist Popular Party (PPS) that was formerly called PCB
Marxist Leninist Communist Party (Partido Comunista Marxista Leninista), Brazil
Bulgarian Workers-Peasants Party (Bulgarska Rabotnichesko-Selska Partiya, BRSP) updated April 05
Bulgarian Workers Socialist Party (Bulgarska Rabotnicheska Sotsialisticheska Partiya, BRSP) added April 05
Canadians for Peace and Socialism updated April 05
Costarrican People's Party (Partido del Pueblo Costarricense, PPC) periodical Libertad, Costa Rica, split from the Popular Vanguard Party (PVP)
Socialist Workers Party of Croatia (Socijalisticka Radnicka Partija Hrvatske, SRP)
Communist Party of Czechoslovakia (Komunistická strana Çeskoslovenska, SCK), split from Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia (KSCM)
Communist Party in Denmark (Kommunistisk Parti i Danmark, KPiD), split from the Communist Party of Denmark (DKP)
Communist Party of Finland (Suomen Kommunistinen Puolue, SKP), split from Leftist Alliance
Communist Workers' Party (Kommunistinen Työväenpuolue, KTP), split from the Communist Party of Finland
League of Communists (Kommunistien Liitto), Finland, split from KTP
Union of Revolutionaries-Communists of France (Union des Révolutionnaires-Communistes de France, URCF) updated February 05
Communists (Communistes), France, split from French Communist Party (PCF)
Communist Party of Britain (CPB), split from the Communist Party of Great Britain (today the New Times Network)
Communist Party of Great Britain - Provisional Central Committee (CPGB-PCC), split from Communist Party of Great Britain
New Communist Party (NCP), Great Britain, split from the Communist Party of Great Britain (today the Democratic Left)
New Left Current (Neo Aristero Reuma, NAR), split from the Communist Party of Greece (KKE)
Workers' Party (Munkáspárt), split from the Hungarian Socialist Workers' Party (MSzMP, today the Hungarian Socialist Party)
Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI-M), split from the Communist Party of India (CPI)
Iraqi Communist Party - Cadre (Hizb al-Shuyu'i al-'Iraqi - al-Kader)
Israeli Communist Forum, split from the Communist Party of Israel
Movement for the Unity of Communists (Movimento per l'Unità dei Comunisti, UC) regional group, Italy
Party of Communist Refoundation (Partito della Rifondazione Comunista, PRC), Italy
Bandiera Rossa Association (Associazione Bandiera Rossa, ABR), periodical Erre
Communism from below (Comunismo dal basso)
Communist Project - Programatic Area of the PRC (Progetto Comunista - Area Programmatica del PRC)
l'ernesto
Red Line (Linea Rossa)
Reds Association (Associazione Reds)
Revolutionary Marxist Association "Communist Project" (Associazione Marxista Rivoluzionaria "Progetto Comunista")
Sickle Hammer (Falce Martello)
Party of Italian Communists (Partito dei Comunisti Italiani, PdCI), right wing split from PRC
Popular Democracy (United Left) (Democrazia Popolare (Sinistra Unita), DP(SU)) added February 05
Communist Party for Independence and Socialism (Pati Kominis pou Lendépandans èk Sosyalism / Parti Communiste pour l'Indépendance et le Socialisme, PKLS/PCIS), split from Martinican Communist Party (PCM)
Party of Communists (Partido de los Comunistas), founded by Party of Mexican Communists and Party of the Socialist Revolution (PRS), both founed by ex-members of Socialist Popular Party (PPS) and Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD)
New Communist Party of the Netherlands (Nieuwe Communistische Partij van Nederland, NCPN), split from the Communist Party of the Netherlands (CPN) which merged in GreenLeft
United Communist Party (Verenigde Communistische Partij, VCP), Netherlands, split from NCPN
Socialist Party of Aotearoa (SPA), New Zealand, New Zealand, split from the Socialist Unity Party (SUP)
Movement for Socialism (Bevegelsen for Sosialisme), Norway, split from NKP
Communist Party of Poland (Komunistyczna Partia Polski, KPP)
Polish Socialist Workers Party (Polska Socjalistyczna Partia Robotnicza, PSPR) added February 05
Communist Refoundation (Refundación Comunista), Puerto Rico
Communist Party of Russia - Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Rossiiskaya Kommunisticheskaya Partiya - Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Sovetskogo Soyuza, RKP-KPSS) unofficial, split from the CPSU
Communist Party of the Republic of Tatarstan (Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Respublikii Tatarstan, KPRT), Russia
Communists of Working Russia (Kommunisty Trudovoii Rossii, KTP) / Working Russia (Trudovaya Rossiya)
Russian Communist Party - Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Rossiiskaya Kommunisticheskaya Partiya - Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Sovetskogo Soyuza, RKP-KPSS), split from the CPSU
Russian Communist Workers' Party - Revolutionary Party of Communists (Rossiiskaya Kommunisticheskaya Rabochaya Partiya - Revoliutsionnaya Partiya Kommunistov, RKRP-RPK)
Union of Communists (Soyuz Kommunistov, SK) unofficial, Russia, split from the CPSU
Union of Marxists (Soyuz Marksistov), Russia
San Marino Communist Refoundation (Rifondazione Comunista Sammarinese)
League of Communists of Yugoslavia in Serbia (Savez Komunista Jugoslavije u Srbiji, SKJ u Srbiji) local group, Serbia and Montenegro
Communist Party of Slovakia (Komunistická Strana Slovenska, KSS), split from the Party of the Democratic Left, the former KSS
Canarian Comunist Militants Organized in Cells (Militantes Comunistas Canarios Organizados en Células), Spain
Cell for the Reconstruction of the Canarian Communist Party (Célula para la reconstrucción del Partido Comunista Canario, CRCCP), Spain updated February 05
Communist Party of the Peoples of Spain (Partido Comunista de los Pueblos de España, PCPE), split from the PCE
Party of the Communists of Catalonia (Partit dels Comunistes de Catalunya, PCC), Spain, split from the United Socialist Party of Catalonia (PSUC)
Spanish Communist Workers' Party (Partido Comunista Obrero Español, PCOE) updated February 05
United Socialist Party of Catalonia-Living (Partit Socialista Unificat de Catalunya - Viu; PSUC-Viu), Spain, leftist split from original PSUC
Communist Party of Sweden (Sveriges Kommunistiska Parti, SKP), split from the Left Party Communists (today the Left Party)
National Committee for the Unity of the Syrian Communists (Lajnah al-Wataniyah li-Wahdah Shuyu'iyin Suriyin), periodical Kassioun, Syria
Syrian Communist Party - Political Bureau (Hizb al-Shuyu'i al-Suri - al-Maktab al-Siyasi)
Communist Party of Turkey [Workers Voice] (Türkiye Komünist Partisi [Iscinin Sesi], TKP[IS]), split from TKP
Factory (Fabrika), Turkey, origin in TIP
Truth (Gercek), Turkey, origin in SIP (now TKP)
Union of Communists of Ukraine (Soyuz Kommunistiv Ukrainy) periodical Marksizm i Sovremennost, split from Communist Party of Ukraine
All-Union Communist Party bolsheviks (Vsesoyuznaya Kommunisticheskaya Partiya bol'shevikov, VKPb), ex-USSR, split from CPSU
Communist Party of the Soviet Union [S. Skvortsov] (Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Sovetskogo Soyuza [S. Skvortsova]), ex-USSR
Communist Party of the Soviet Union [Shenin] (Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Sovetskogo Soyuza [Shenin], KPSS[Shenin] updated February 05
Communist Party of the Union (Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Soyuza, KPS) Moscow organization, split from Communist Parties of several republics of the former USSR updated February 05
Marxist Platform (Marksistskaya Platforma), ex-USSR, rest of Marxist Platform of CPSU
New Communist Party of Yugoslavia (Nova Komunisticka Partija Jugoslavije, NKPJ), split from the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
Ex-Communists

Socialist Party of Albania (Partia Socialiste ë Shqipërisë, PSS) added February 05
Democratic and Social Movement (Mouvement Démocratique et Social, MDS), formerly the Socialist Vanguard Party (PAGS), Algeria
Social Democratic Party Bosnia and Hercegovina (Socijaldemokratska partija Bosne i Hercegovine, SDP BiH), formerly the League of Communists
Socialist Popular Party (Partido Popular Socialista, PPS), formerly the Brazilian Communist Party (PCB)
Bulgarian Socialist Party (Bulgarska Sotsialisticheska Partiya, BSP), formerly the Bulgarian Communist Party (BKP)
Cambodian People's Party (Parti du Peuple Cambodgien / Kanakpak Pracheachon, Prachor)
Socialdemocratic Party of Croatia (Socijaldemokratska Partija Hrvatske, SDPH), formerly the League of Communists of Croatia
Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (Frente Farabundo Martí de Liberación Nacional, FMLN), the Communist Party of El Salvador (PCS) became part of it
Estonian Social Democratic Labour Party (Eesti Sotsiaaldemokraatlik Tööpartei, ESDTP), formerly the Communist Party of Estonia
Left Alliance (Vasemmistoliitto/Vänsterförbundet, VL), founded by Finnish Communist Party (SKP)
Party of Democratic Socialism (Partei des Demokratischen Sozialismus, PDS), mirror page, formerly the Socialist Unity Party of Germany (SED)
New Politics Network, Great Britain, formerly the Democvratic Left which was the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB)
Coalition of the Left and Progress (Synaspismos tis Aristeras kai tis Proodou, SYN), founded mostly by groups that split from KKE at different times
Inuit Community (Inuit Ataqatigiit, IA), Greenland
Guatemalan National Revolutionary Unity (Unidad Revolucionaria Nacional Guatemalteca, URNG), communist Guatemalan Labour Party (PGT) merged in it
People's Progressive Party (PPP), Guyana
Hungarian Socialist Party (Magyar Szocialista Párt, MSzP), formerly the Hungarian Socialist Workers' Party (MSzMP)
Social Democratic Alliance (Samfylkingin), Iceland, includes the formerly communist People's Alliance (Alþýðubandalagid)
Democratic People's Party of Iran (Hezb-e Demokratik-e Mardom-e Iran), split from Party of the Masses of Iran (Tudeh Party)
Organization of Iranian People's Fedaian (Majority) (Sazman-e Feda'iyan-e Khalq-e Iran (Aksariyat), OIPFM)
Democrats of the Left (Democratici di Sinistra, DS), formerly the Italian Communist Party (PCI)
Lithuanian Social Democratic Party (Lietuvos Socialdemokratu Partija, LSDP), the former Communist Party of Lithuania, the Lithuanian Democratic Labour Party (Lietuvos Demokratinë Darbo Partija) merged with it in 2001
Social-Democratic League of Macedonia (Socijaldemokratski Sojuz na Makedonija, SDSM), formerly the Communist League of Macedonia
Democratic Revolution Party (Partido de la Revolución Democrática, PRD)
Emiliano Zapata Brigades of the PRD (Brigadas Emiliano Zapata del PRD, BEZ-PRD)
Mongolian People's Revolutionary Party (Mongol Ardyn Chuvsgalt Nam)
Green Left (GroenLinks), Netherlands, the former Communist Party (CPN) became part of it
Alliance of the Democratic Left (Sojusz Lewicy Demokratycznej, SLD), the Social Democracy of the Republic of Poland (SdRP, formerly the Polish United Workers Party (PZPR)) became part of it
Party of Democrats (Partito dei Democratici), San Marino added February 05
Independence and Labour Party (Parti de l'Indépendance et du Travail, PIT), Senegal
Democratic Party of Socialists of Montenegro (Demokratska Partija Socijalista Crne Gore, DPS), Serbia and Montenegro, formerly the League of Communists of Montenegro
Socialist Party of Serbia (Socijalisticka Partija Srbije, SPS), Serbia and Montenegro, merger of the League of Communists of Serbia and the Socialist Alliance of Working People
Party of the Democratic Left (Strana Demokratickej L'avice, SDL'), formerly the Communist Party of Slovakia (KSS)
United List of Social Democrats (Zdruzena Lista Socialnih Demokratov, ZLSD), Slovenia, încludes the former League of Communists of Slovenia
Initiative for Catalonia - Greens (Iniciativa per Catalunya - Verds, IC), Spain, contains the majority of the United Socialist Party of Catalonia (PSUC) which was part of the PCE
United Socialist Party of Catalonia (Partit Socialista Unificat de Catalunya, PSUC), Spain
Left Party (Vänsterpartiet, V), Sweden, formerly the Left Party Communists (VPK)
Freedom and Solidarity Party (Özgürlük ve Dayanisma Partisi, ÖDP), contains the majority of the former United Communist Party of Turkey (TBKP)
People's Democratic Party (Narodno-Demokratychna Partiya, NDP), Ukraine, one of the successors of the the Communist Party of Ukraine (KPU)
Socialist Party of Ukraine (Sotsialistychna Partiya Ukrainy, SPU), one of the successors of the the Communist Party of Ukraine (KPU)

http://www.broadleft.org/communis.htm

More to follow.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Here are the Anti-Revisionist Parties (Maoists?):


Anti-Revisionists

Last update: May 8, 2005

The parties listed support the position that the Communist Party of the Soviet Union became revisionist after the death of Stalin and with its 20th congress.

International Communist Seminars (Brussels)

Parties adhering to Maoism or Mao-Tsetung-Thought

Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Parties waging or supporting People's War

International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organisations [Maoist]

Revolutionary Communist Party (Partido Comunista Revolucionario, PCR), Argentina
Communist Party of Colombia - Maoist (Partido Comunista de Colombia - Maoísta, PCC-M), other page
Marxist-Leninist Party of Germany (Marxistisch-Leninistische Partei Deutschlands, MLPD)
Communist Organization of Greece (Kommounistiki Organosi Elladas, KOE)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) New Democracy (CPI-ML(ND))
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) [Kanu Sanyal]
Committees for the Support of the Resistance - For Communism (Comitati di Appoggio alla Resistenza - per il Comunismo, CARC)
Commission for the Preparation of the Foundation Congress of the (New) Italian Communist Party (Commissione Preparatoria del congresso di fondazione del (nuovo) Partito comunista italiano)
Popular Front for the Reconstruction of the Communist Party (Fronte Popolare per la ricostruzione del partito comunista, FP-rpc)
Group of Marxist-Leninists/Red Morning (Groep van Marxisten-Leninisten/Rode Morgen), Netherlands
Workers' Communist Party (Arbeidernes Kommunistparti, AKP), Norway
Communist Party of the Philippines (Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas, CPP)
National Democratic Front (NDF)
Russian Maoist Party (Rossiiskaya Maoistskaya Partiya)
Labour Party (Partija Rada), Serbia/Montenegro
Communist Party of Turkey/Marxist-Leninist (Türkiye Komünist Partisi/Marksist-Leninist, TKP/ML)
Revolutionary Communist Party (Partido Comunista Revolucionario, PCR), Uruguay
Ray O. Light unofficial, USA added February 05
Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM)
other unofficial page

Communist (Maoist) Party of Afghanistan (Hizb-e Komunist-e Maoist-e Afghanistan)
Revolutionary Front Marxist - Leninist Maoist (Frente Revolucionario - Marxista Leninista Maoísta, FR-MLM), Bolivia, close to RIM
Union of Communist Revolutionaries (Maoists) (Unión de Revolucionarios Comunistas (Maoístas)), Chile, close to RIM added February 05
Communist Workers' Union (Marxist-Leninist Maoist) (Unión Obrera Comunista (Marxista-Leninista-Maoísta), UOC(mlm)), Colombia, close to RIM
Revolutionary Communist Group of Columbia (Grupo Comunista Revolucionario de Colombia, GCR)
Communist Party of India (Maoist) (CPI(M)) added February 05
Communist Party of Iran (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist) (Hezb-e Komunist-e Iran (Marksist-e Leninist-e Maoist-e))
Iraqi Revolutionary Marxist-Leninists Regroupment (Al-Tajammu' al-Marksiyin al-Leniniyin al-Thawriyin al-Iraqiyin), close to RIM
Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), unofficial, unofficial
Communist Party of Peru [Louminous Path] (Partido Comunista del Perú [Sendero Luminoso]), unofficial page, unofficial page, periodical El Diario Internacional
Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP) periodical Revolutionary Worker, USA
Maoist Communist Party (Maoist Komünist Partisi, MKP), Turkey
Communist Party of Turkey/Marxist-Leninist (Maoist Party Centre) (Türkiye Komünist Partisi/Marksist-Leninist (Maoist Parti Merkezi))
Others

Afghanistan Liberation Organization (Sazman-e Reha'i-ye Afghanistan, ALO)
Liberation Party (Partido de la Libéracion, PL), Argentina
Communist Party of Australia (Marxist-Leninist) (CPA-ML) periodical Vanguard updated April 05
Marxist-Leninist Party of Austria (Marxistisch-Leninistische Partei Österreichs, MLPÖ)
Workers' Party of Belgium (Parti du Travail de Belgique / Partij van de Arbeid van België, PTB/PvdA)
Communist Party of Brazil - Red Faction (Partido Comunista do Brasil - Fração Vermelha, PCdoB-FV) periodical A Nova Democracia
Revolutionary Communist Party (Organizing Committees) / Parti communiste révolutionnaire (comités d'organisation) (PCR(co)/RCP(OC)), Canada
Communist Party of China (Zhongguo Gongchandang) updated February 05
Democratic Alliance for Betterment of Hong Kong
Labour Party of Colombia (Partido del Trabajo de Colombia, PTC-Moirista)
Revolutionary and Independent Workers' Movement (Movimiento Obrero Independiente y Revolucionario, MOIR), Colombia
Patriotic Front for the Renovation and the Progress (Front Patriotique pour le Renouveau et le Progrès, FP-RP), Congo, Democratic Republic added February 05
Communist Party of Czechoslovakia - Czechoslovakian Workers Party (Komunistická strana Ceskoslovenska - Ceskoslovenská strana práce, KSC-CSSP)
Communist Party of the Dominican Republic (Partido Comunista de la República Dominicana, Pacoredo)
Dominican Workers' Party (marxist-leninist) (Partido de los Trabajadores Dominicanos (marxista-leninista), PTD-ml)
Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist) (Parti Communiste (marxiste-léniniste-maoïste)), France
Against the Current (Gegen die Strömung), Germany
Communist Party of Germany/Marxists-Leninists (Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands/Marxisten-Leninisten, KPD/ML)
Marxist-Leninist Communist Party of Greece (Marxistiko-Leninistiko - Kommounistiko Komma Elladas, M-L KKE)
Organization for the Reconstruction of the Communist Party of Greece (Organosi gia tin Anasyngrotisi tou Kommounistiko Komma Elladas, OAKKE)
Revolutionary Communist Movement of Greece (Epanastatiko Kommounistiko Kinima Elladas, EKKE)
Communist Workers Newspaper Group (Gruppe Kommunistische Arbeiterzeitung, K.AZ), Germany
New Unity Group (Gruppe Neue Einheit), Germany
Workers League for the Reconstruction of the KPD (Arbeiterbund für den Wiederaufbau der KPD, AB), Germany
Communist Party of Greece (marxist-leninist) (Kommounistiko Komma Elladas (marxistiko-leninistiko), KKE(m-l))
Communist League of India (Marxist-Leninist) [Lal Salaam] added May 05
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation (CPI-ML Liberation)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) [Mahadev Mukherjee] (CPI-ML[MM])
National Socialist Council of Nagaland [Issak/Muivah] (NSCN[I/M]), India
United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA), India
Revolutionary Labour Party of Iran (Hezb-e Kar-e Enqelabi-ye Iran)
Toilers Party of Iran (Hezb-e Ranjbaran Iran)
Italian Marxist-Leninist Party (Partito Marxista-Leninista Italiano, PMLI)
Red Line - for the Reconstitution of the Communist Party (Linearossa - per la Ricostruzione del Partito Comunista), Italy
Red Line (Linea Rossa), other page, Italy, faction inside PRC
Japan Communist Party (Action Faction) (Nihon Kyôsantô (Kôdô-ha))
Japan Labor Party (Nihon Rôdôtô)
Workers' Communist Party (Rôdôsha Kyôsantô), Japan
Workers Socialist League (Rôdôsha Shakaishugi Dômei, Rôshadô), Japan
Communist Party of Burma [White Flag] (Bama Pyi Comyuni Pati [Alan-Pyu], CPB)
Communist Party of Aotearoa (CPA), New Zealand
Serve the People - a marxist-leninist group (Tjen Folket - ei marxist-leninistisk gruppe), Norway
Communist Workers Peasants Party (Communist Mazdoor Kissan Party, CMKP), Pakistan
Patriotic Front of the Socialist Left (Patriotyczny Front Lewicy Socjalistycznej, PFLS), Poland
Communist Party of the Portuguese Workers (Partido Comunista dos Trabalhadores Portugueses, PCTP)
Communist Party of Spain [Maoist] (Partido Comunista de España [Maoista], PCE)
Communist Party of Spain (reconstituted) (Partido Comunista de España (reconstituido), PCE(r))
Communist Unification of Spain (Unificación Comunista de España / Komunisten Batasuna, UCE)
New Revolutionary Workers' Organization of Spain (Nueva Organización Revolucionaria de los Trabajadores de España, nORTe)
New Workers' Newspaper (Nya Arbetartidningen, Nya AT), Sweden
United Communist Party (Birlesik Komünist Parti, BKP) periodical Uzun Yürüyüs, Turkey
Workers Party (Isçi Partisi), Turkey
Freedom Road Socialist Organization [Fight Back] (FRSO), USA
Freedom Road Socialist Organization [Freedom Road] (FRSO), USA
Maoist Internationalist Movement (MIM), USA
Organizing Committee to form the Communist Party USA (Marxist-Leninist) unofficial added February 05
Progressive Labor Party (PLP), other page, USA
Parties formerly associated with the Labour Party of Albania

International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organisations [Hoxhaist]

Albanian Communist Party (Partia Komuniste Shqiptare, PKSH) added February 05
Revolutionary Communist Party (Partido Comunista Revolucionário, PCR), Brazil
Chilenian Communist Party (Proletarian Action) (Partido Comunista Chileno (Acción Proletaria), PC(AP))
Communist Party of Colombia (marxist-leninist) (Partido Comunista de Colombia (marxista-leninista), PCdeC(ml)) added February 05
Workers' Communist Party (Arbejderpartiet Kommunisterne), Denmark
Communist Labour Party (Partido Comunista del Trabajo), Dominican Republic
Marxist Leninist Communist Party of Ecuador (Partido Comunista Marxista Leninista del Ecuador, PCMLE)
Democratic Popular Movement (Movimiento Popular Democrático, MPD)
Communist Party of Germany [Red Morning] (Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands [Roter Morgen], KPD)
Workers Communist Party of the France (Parti Communiste des Ouvriers de France, PCOF)
Movement for the Reorganization of the Communist Party of Greece (1918-55) (Kinisi gia Anasyntaxi tou Kommounistikou Kommatos Elladas (1918-55)), Greece added May 05
Labour Party of Iran (Hezb-e Kar-e Iran, Toufan)
Organization for the Communist Party of the Proletariat of Italy (Organizzazione per il Partito Comunista del Proletariato d'Italia)
Communist Party of Mexico (marxist-leninist) (Partido Comunista de Mexico (marxista-leninista), PCM(M-L))
ML-group Revolution (ML-gruppa Revolusjon), Norway
State Committee of Communist Organizations (Coordinación Estatal de Organizaciones Comunistas, CEOC), Spain
Communist Collective 27 September (Colectivo Comunista 27 de Septiembre, 27-S)
Communist Organization of the Valencian Country (Organización Comunista del País Valenciano / Organització Comunista del País Valencià, OCPV), Spain updated February 05
October Communist Organization (Organización Comunista "Octubre"), Spain
Communist Party of Tunisian Workers (Parti Communiste des Ouvriers Tunisiens / Hizb al-'Ummal al-Shuyu'i, PCOT)
Revolutionary Communist Party of Turkey (Türkiye Devrimci Komünist Partisi, TDKP), other page
Labourers Party (Emegin Partisi, Emep), legal wing of TDKP
Communist International Marxists-Leninists

Communist Party of Germany/Marxists-Leninists [Red Morning] (Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands/Marxisten-Leninisten [Roter Morgen], KPD/ML)
Setup Organization of the New Workers Party, Marxists-Leninists (Opbouworganisatie van de Nieuwe Arbeiderspartij - Marxisten Leninisten, NAP-ML (Opbouworganisatie), Netherlands
Others

Communist Party of Albania "8 November" (Partia Komuniste e Shqipërisë "8 Nëntori") added February 05
Labour Party of Albania (Partia e Punës e Shqipërisë, PPSH)
Advance Group (Grupo Avanzar), Argentina
Marxist-Leninist Bloc (Bloc Marxiste-Léniniste / Marxistisch-leninistisch Blok), Belgium
Communist Collective Aurora (Communistisch Collectief Aurora), Belgium
Communist Party of Brazil (Partido Comunista do Brasil, PCdoB)
Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist) (CPC(ML))
Marxist-Leninist Party of Quebec (Parti Marxiste-Léniniste du Québec, PMLQ)
Socialist Party of Cyprus (Kibris Sosialist Partisi, KSP) updated February 05
Communist Party of Denmark/Marxists-Leninists (Danmarks Kommunistiske Parti/Marxister-Leninister, DKP/ML)
Workers' Party of Ecuador (Partido de los Trabajadores del Ecuador, PTE)
Revolutionary Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist) (Parti Communiste Révolutionnaire (Marxiste-Léniniste)), France added February 05
Communist Party of Germany/Marxists-Leninists [Red Star] (Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands/Marxisten-Leninisten [Roter Stern], KPD/ML)
Organization for the build-up of a communist workers party of Germany (Organisation für den Aufbau einer kommunistischen Arbeiterpartei Deutschlands) periodical Arbeit Zukunft updated February 05
Red October - Organization for the Build-up of the Communist Party in Germany (Roter Oktober - Organisation zum Aufbau der Kommunistischen Partei in Deutschland), Germany updated February 05
Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist) (CPB (M-L))
Revolutionary Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist) (RCPB-ML)
Communist Ghadar Party of India (CGPI)
Organization for Peoples Empowerment (Lok Raj Sangathan, LRS)
Revolutionary Democracy, India
Spark (Scintilla), Italy
Polish Party of the Working Class - Initiative Group (Polska Partia Klasy Robotniczej - Grupa Inicjatywna) added February 05
Popular Democratic Union (União Democrática Popular, UDP), Portugal
Proletarian Communist Organization (Marxist-Bolshevik) of Portugal (Organização Comunista Proletária (Marxista-Bolchevique) de Portugal, OCP(MB)P)
Communist Party of Togo (Parti Communiste du Togo, PCT)
Communist Party - Build Up Organization (Reorganization Coordination) (Komunist Partisi - Insa Örgütü (Yeniden Örgütlenme Koordinasyonu), KP-IÖ[YÖK]) periodical Ileri, Turkey updated February 05
Communist Party - Build Up Organization [DHB] (Komunist Partisi - Insa Örgütü [DHB], KP-IÖ[DHB]) periodical Devrimci Halkin Birligi
Communist Voice Organization, USA
US Marxist-Leninist Organization (USMLO) periodical Voice of Revolution
Ex-Maoist Parties

Socialist Party of Albania (Partia Socialiste ë Shqipërisë, PSS) updated February 05
Ethiopian Peoples' Revolutionary Party (Yethiopia Hizbawi Abyotawi Party, EPRP), center
Analysis and Critique (Analyse und Kritik, AK; formerly the Communist League), Germany, left socialist
Association for Socialist Politics (Vereinigung für Sozialistische Politik), Germany, radical leftist
Communist Debate (Kommunistische Debatte), Germany, radical leftist
Forum of Communist Working Groups (Forum kommunistischer Arbeitsgemeinschaften), Germany, formerly League of West German Communits (BWK)
Communist Party of Iran (Hezb-e Komunist-e Iran, CPI)
Kurdistan Organisation of the Communist Party of Iran (Sazman-e Kordestan-e Hezb-e Komunist-e Iran, Komalah)
Iraqi Communist Party - Central Command (Hizb al-Shuyu'i al-Iraqi - Al-Qiyadah al-Markaziyah), periodical Al-Ghad
New Unity (Nuova Unità), Italy
Workers Communist Party (Rôdôsha Kyôsantô), Japan, marxist-leninist
Militants for the Progress of Madagascar (Militants pour le Progrès de Madagascar / Mpitolona ho Amin'ny Fampandrosoan'i Madagaskar, MFM), liberal
Labour Party (Partido del Trabajo, PT), Mexico, left socialist
Revolutionary Popular Democratic Party (Partido Democrático Popular Revolucionario, PDPR), Mexico, radical leftist
The Democratic Way (Annahj Democrati / La Voie Démocratique), Morocco
Communist Party of Nepal (United Marxist-Leninist) (Nepal Kamyunist Parti (Ekikrit Marksvadi ra Leninvadi), CPN(UML))
Socialist Party (Socialistische Partij, SP), Netherlands, left socialist
Socialist Worker, New Zealand, trotskyist
Communist Party of Peru (Red Homeland) (Partido Comunista del Perú (Patria Roja), PCdelP), marxist-leninist
New Left Movement (Movimiento Nueva Izquierda, MNI), Peru
Act Together/African Party for Democracy and Socialism (And Jëf/Parti africain pour la Démocratie et le Socialisme, AJ/PADS), Senegal, left socialist
Communist Party (Kommunistiska Partiet), Sweden, anti-revisionist updated February 05
Tunisian Perspectives (Perspectives Tunisiennes)
Bolshevik Party (North Kurdistan-Turkey) (Bolsevik Partisi (Kuzey Kürdistan-Türkiye), BP(KK-T)), marxist-leninist
Communist Party - Build Up Organization (Komunist Partisi - Insa Örgütü), other page
Communist Workers Party of Turkey (Türkiye Komünist Isçi Partisi, TKIP), radical leftist
Revolutionary Communists Union of Turkey (Türkiye Ihtilalci Komünistler Birligi, TIKB) periodical Alinteri, marxist-leninist
Revolutionary Communists Union of Turkey - Bolshevik (Türkiye Ihtilalci Komünistler Birligi - Bolsevik, TIKB-B) periodical Devrimci Durus
League of Revolutionaries for a New America (LRNA), USA
Workers Party U.S.A., marxist-leninist
Socialist League (Liga Socialista, LS), Venezuela
International Struggle - Marxist-Leninist (IS/ML)

Alliance Marxist-Leninist (North America), Canada/USA
Communist League of Great Britain
Communist Party Alliance (CP Alliance), Great Britain
Proletarian Path, India added February 05
Communist Party of Italy Marxist-Leninist (Partito Comunista d'Italia Marxista-Leninista, PCIML)
Marxist Leninist Communist Party (Marksist Leninist Komünist Partisi, MLKP), Turkey
Socialist Platform of the Oppressed (Ezilenlerin Sosyalist Platformu, ESP), Turkey
Other Anti-Revisionist Parties

Algerian Party for Democracy and Socialism (Parti Algérien pour la Démocratie et le Socialisme, PADS)
Communist Action - Marxist-Leninist (Kommunistische Aktion - marxistisch-leninistisch), mirror page, Austria
All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) (Vsesaiuznaia Kamunistychnaia Partyia (Bal'shavikou), VKP(B)) periodical Vpered, Belarus
October 8th Revolutionary Movement (Movimento Revolucionário 8 de Outubro, MR-8) periodical Hora do Povo, Brazil
Marxist Leninist Communist Party (Partido Comunista Marxista Leninista), Brazil
Bulgarian Workers-Peasants Party (Bulgarska Rabotnichesko-Selska Partiya, BRSP) updated February 05
Recabarren Organization of Communists (Organización Comunista Recabarren, OCR), Chile
Communist Party of Czechoslovakia (Komunistická strana Çeskoslovenska, SCK)
Communist League (Kommunistien Liitto / Kommunisternas Förbund), Finland
Communist Workers' Party (Kommunistinen Työväenpuolue, KTP), Finland
Communist Militant (Militant Communiste), France
Communist Regroupment (Regroupement Communiste), France
Communists (Communistes), France
Communists in Struggle for the Building of a Marxist-Leninist Party in France (Communistes en Lutte pour la Construction en France d'un Parti Marxiste-Léniniste)
Facts and Analysis (Faits et Analyses), France
Struggle (Combat), France
Union of Revolutionaries-Communists of France (Union des Révolutionnaires-Communistes de France, URCF) updated February 05
Bolshevik Initiative Germany (Bolschewistische Initiative Deutschland)
Communist Party of Germany [Red Flag] (Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands [Rote Fahne], KPD)
Red Fox (RotFuchs), Germany
Free Workers' Union/Anarchist Party (Freie Arbeiter Union/Anarchistische Partei, FAU/AP), Germany
Communist Action, Great Britain
Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist-Leninist) (CPGB-ML)
New Communist Party (NCP), Great Britain
Partisan, Great Britain
Communist Party of Greece (Kommounistiko Komma Elladas, KKE)
Resist (Kontra), Greece
New Communist Party of Haiti (Nouveau Parti Communist Haïtien, NPCH)
Socialist Unity Centre of India (SUCI), India added February 05
Organization of Iranian People's Fedai Guerrillas (Sazman-e Cherikha-ye Feda'i-ye Khalq-e Iran, OIPFG)
Socialist Party of Latvia (Latvijas Sociâlistiskâ Partija / Socialisticheskaya Partiya Latvii, LSP) added February 05
Red Fox - Marxists-Leninist of Luxemburg (Roude Fiisschen - Marxisten-Leninisten zu Lëtzebuerg) added February 05
Red Workers Party (Partido Obrero Rojo, POR), Mexico added February 05
New Communist Party of the Netherlands (Nieuwe Communistische Partij van Nederland, NCPN)
Setup Organization of the New Workers Party, Marxists-Leninists (Opbouworganisatie van de Nieuwe Arbeiderspartij - Marxisten Leninisten)
United Communist Party (Verenigde Communistische Partij, VCP), Netherlands
Communist Party of Poland (Komunistyczna Partia Polski, KPP)
Communists of Working Russia (Kommunisty Trudovoii Rossii, KTP) / Working Russia (Trudovaya Rossiya) updated February 05
Russian Communist Workers' Party - Revolutionary Party of Communists (Rossiiskaya Kommunisticheskaya Rabochaya Partiya - Revoliutsionnaya Partiya Kommunistov, RKRP-RPK)
Russian Revolutionary Movement (Russkoe Revoliutsionnoe Dvizhenie) added February 05
Communist Party of Slovakia (Komunistická Strana Slovenska, KSS)
Communist Party of the Peoples of Spain (Partido Comunista de los Pueblos de España, PCPE)
Communist Refoundation Board (Mesa de Refundación Comunista, MRC), Spain
Workers Power (ml) (Arbetarmakt(ml)), Sweden added February 05
Communist Party of Switzerland (Build-up Organization) (Kommunistische Partei der Schweiz (Aufbauorganisation))
Revolutionary People's Liberation Party-Front (Devrimci Halk Kurtulus Partisi-Cephesi, DHKP-C)
Front for Rights and Freedom (Haklar ve Özgürlükler Cephesi, HÖC), Turkey
Spartacus Group (Spartakus Grupu), Turkey added February 05
All-Union Communist Party bolsheviks - Ukraine (Vsesoyuzka Komunistychna Partiya bil'shovykiv, VKPb)
Communist Party of Workers and Peasants (Komunistychna Partiya Robitnykiv i Selyan, KPRS)
Union of Communists of Ukraine (Soyuz Kommunistiv Ukrainy) periodical Marksizm i Sovremennost
Marxist-Leninist Organizer unofficial, USA added February 05
All-Union Communist Party bolsheviks (Vsesoyuznaya Kommunisticheskaya Partiya bol'shevikov, VKPb), ex-USSR
All-Union Communist Party (bolsheviks) (Vsesoyuznaya Kommunisticheskaya Partiya (bol'shevikov), VKP(b)), ex-USSR
Bolshevik Platform of the KPSS (Bol'shevistskaya Platforma v KPSS), ex-USSR
Communist Party of the Soviet Union [A. Miroshnik] (Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Sovetskogo Soyuza [A. Miroshnika]), ex-USSR
Communist Party of the Soviet Union [Shenin] (Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Sovetskogo Soyuza [Shenin], KPSS[Shenin] updated February 05
Communist Party of the Union (Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Soyuza, KPS) Moscow organization updated February 05
New Communist Party of Yugoslavia (Nova Komunisticka Partija Jugoslavije, NKPJ), Ex-Yugoslavia

http://www.broadleft.org/antirevi.htm

And these are continuing to split; witness the recent fragmentation of the RCP and the Communist League.

Plenty more listed here:

http://www.jaysleftist.info/

http://www.broadleft.org/index.htm

[Hit The North]

Yes, there are a lot of 'sects', 'parties', 'movements' out there. Nevertheless, most of those organizations will be splits in times of revolutionary recession from groups who grew in more felicitous times. I agree with Yehuda that the class struggle does bring revolutionaries together - by involving us in practice, as chegitz guevara points out, and by swelling the ranks of the revolutionaries amongst the workers. A concrete example would be the British Miners Strike of 1984-5, where mass picket lines, demonstrations and Miners Support Groups saw reformists working with revolutionaries, Trots working with Tankies - lol, even Workers Power alongside SWP! Although this was a defensive strike in the context of retreat and weakening combativeness in the class, the fortunes of the revolutionary left was healthier then than they were for 15 years after the Miners' defeat. I'm not trying to paint an idealist picture here - factional rivalries between groups still manifested themselves - but they were largely sidelined in the face of the practical tasks we set ourselves.

Again, chegitz is correct to point to our isolation as a consequence of low class struggle as the key driver of sectarianism. Rosa, I'm surprised you don't grasp this, given that you're fond of quoting Cliff when he argues that it is lack of power that corrupts - sectarianism and factionalism being particular forms of corruption within the revolutionary 'community'.

[Yehuda Stern]

Do I have to spell it out? Most groups claiming to Marxism are not in fact Marxist in any meaningful sense.

[black magick hustla]

I think some people mistake having a spine for sectarianism.

I think my politics differ fundamentally from most marxist organizations. I think internationalism is the highest communist principle, and this means opposing all capitalist wars, including national liberation ones and world wars like WW II. Unfortunately most "communists" don't do this. I think in order to be a communist you need to be a revolutionary fatalist.

If I didn't want to be a communist (i.e. have a spine), I would join the biggext left leaning bourgeois party.

[ShineThePath]

Hmmm...interestingly while I may disagree with what particular Mamot has put forward (his thoughts on National Liberation), I agree with him on the matter of sectarianism. Splits happen because of political divisions, some of those splits are principled, some of them not, but this is based on the particular analysis you're coming from.

I would also disagree that this itself doesn't reflect itself in the working class movements. Simply, there is no unity in the so-called "working class movements" or any other social movements, it can be just as polarized and its sectarianism a bit worse than principled political splits.

In the end, I have no interest with Unity for unity's sake, there is a question here of what is a principle basis of unity, what questions are defining line.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

BTB:


I agree with Yehuda that the class struggle does bring revolutionaries together

The evidence suggest otherwise; even Respect has just been through an acrimonious split!


Rosa, I'm surprised you don't grasp this, given that you're fond of quoting Cliff when he argues that it is lack of power that corrupts - sectarianism and factionalism being particular forms of corruption within the revolutionary 'community'.

What makes you think I disgree? But this corruption seems to be a premanent feature of revolutionary socialism, given the petty-bourgeois, non-proletarian origin of the vast number of professional revolutionaries, and the de-classe nature of many of the rest.

And you are right, that at times, the struggle forces revolutionary parties to unite temporarily (but even then, when workers see dozens of different parties descending on them, that only re-inforces the Monty Python image all now have of us in their heads), but the long-term drift is for parties to fragment, as the history of our movement shows.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

YS:


Most groups claiming to Marxism are not in fact Marxist in any meaningful sense.

The problem is, of course, they all say this about one another, including, no doubt, the group you belong to.

That is what sectarianism is -- we can only thank you for illustrating it (inadvertently)!

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

STP:


I would also disagree that this itself doesn't reflect itself in the working class movements. Simply, there is no unity in the so-called "working class movements" or any other social movements, it can be just as polarized and its sectarianism a bit worse than principled political splits.

Sure, there are splits in workers' organisations, and between them, but the overall drift is for workers to combine (and thus unionise -- important aspects of historical materialism are based on this fact!), and for revolutionaries to divide (this is because of the sectarian approach of their predominantly petty-bourgeois and de-classe leaders and full-timers).

[Die Neue Zeit]

Do I have to spell it out? Most groups claiming to Marxism are not in fact Marxist in any meaningful sense.

To be a political Marxist is to be a class-strugglist (http://www.revleft.com/vb/basic-principles-t87418/index.html). Do we really need to use the term "Marxist" and associate ourselves too much with a particular individualism? :rolleyes:

[ShineThePath]

I am not sure how Unions combining is a historical tendency? Maybe this is true in the UK, but this is definitely not true in the US. In fact, overall the tendency in the US if for there to become far more particular worker forms rather than there being any unity. Internationals really have no relevance and when they do, they actually play a reactionary role.

Further, lets assume the historical tendency is for Unions to united, I really myself have the beg question of what does this effectively matter? I think Lenin has shown in WITBD without any revolutionary leadership that Trade Unionism essentially becomes attached and within the parcel of the Bourgeoisie, i.e. the demands are purely economist and tend never to grow beyond this.

On the question of splits amongst 'Marxists,' I don't see this as question of people being 'de-classed petty bourgeoisie,' it is a question of political line. I think it is a part of the very nature of political struggle within our movement that you have people split and go in seperate ways, this is the main reason for these splits Certain questions for people become principle and rather than be in a grouping and collective where they no longer share their principle of unity, they'd rather leave.

What is lacking amongst Marxists though is a sense of this being a part of the very process of revolution. We should encourage regroupments and organizations to form on their own lines, but within this have an open exchange of ideas that isn't tied to baggage of the past 100 years of the fight for Socialism.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

STheP:


I am not sure how Unions combining is a historical tendency? Maybe this is true in the UK, but this is definitely not true in the US. In fact, overall the tendency in the US if for there to become far more particular worker forms rather than there being any unity. Internationals really have no relevance and when they do, they actually play a reactionary role.

The US is rather unique, I grant you, but the trend world-wide is pretty clear.


Further, lets assume the historical tendency is for Unions to united, I really myself have the beg question of what does this effectively matter? I think Lenin has shown in WITBD without any revolutionary leadership that Trade Unionism essentially becomes attached and within the parcel of the Bourgeoisie, i.e. the demands are purely economist and tend never to grow beyond this.

Well, as you know, Lenin has been seriously mis-interpreted over the years -- but, even if he hadn't have been, he never really tackled the problem of sectarianism among revolutionaries, except where he tried to trace it to the petty-bourgeois origin of certain Menscheviks.

I do the same for all us Leninists, and push Lenin's ideas much further than he dared (in the link I added above).

[redarmyfaction38]

RAF:



You are the sort of person who opens Das Kapital, and says "Three volumes, 5 million words, are you joking! You could say all that in three pages!".

I also said this on the opening page of my site:



So, naff off Bozo.
why do you look for a fight when there isn't one rosa? i'm not saying your 66,000 word essay is irrelevant, i promise you, when i've got time, i will read it all.
what i am saying however, (apparently very badly), is that i think it is better to do as lenin and trotsky did, precis the vast tracts of marxist thought and analysis into easily understandable "soundbites".
your analysis may be a revelation to us all, but how many do you think will actually bother to read it?
here's how i ended up reading "das capital", i read lenins "state and revolution", moved onto "wage labour and capital" and then decided that i should at least attempt the original works to ensure i wasn't being fed bullshit.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

RAF:


what i am saying however, (apparently very badly), is that i think it is better to do as lenin and trotsky did, precis the vast tracts of marxist thought and analysis into easily understandable "soundbites".
your analysis may be a revelation to us all, but how many do you think will actually bother to read it?
here's how i ended up reading "das capital", i read lenins "state and revolution", moved onto "wage labour and capital" and then decided that i should at least attempt the original works to ensure i wasn't being fed bullshit.

And if you had bothered to read the opening words of that Essay, you would have seen that I have summarised its contents in several places:

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rosa.l/Summary_of_Essay_Nine-Part-02.htm

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rosa.l/Why%20I%20Oppose%20DM.htm

[redarmyfaction38]

BTB:



The evidence suggest otherwise; even Respect has just been through an acrimonious split!



What makes you think I disgree? But this corruption seems to be a premanent feature of revolutionary socialism, given the petty-bourgeois, non-proletarian origin of the vast number of professional revolutionaries, and the de-classe nature of many of the rest.

And you are right, that at times, the struggle forces revolutionary parties to unite temporarily (but even then, when workers see dozens of different parties descending on them, that only re-inforces the Monty Python image all now have of us in their heads), but the long-term drift is for parties to fragment, as the history of our movement shows.
as a worker, when i look dispassionately, at the rev.left, i have a tendancy to agree with you rosa, there are a lot of so called revolutionaries that are not working class, they see our movement as an intellectual exercise and in reality have no understanding of how people like myself live and work, they have no understanding of working class communities, their values, their day to day struggle to survive etc.
the one thing that enabled working class communities to survive and occassionaly prosper was common interest and solidarity, this common interest and solidarity required turning a blind eye to individual fraility whilst punishing those that worked against our communal interest.
the so called "vanguard parties" of the organised working class need to learn from this.
they need to get off their "intellectual" high horses and start thinking about the "marxism" they supposedly believe in and work together to enable us "bozos" to create the future we all desire.
or on a personal note, rosa, do you think us "bozos" have nothing to contribute and need 666:D000 word essays to tell us why we're incapable of thinking or acting for ourselves without the beneficient endorsement of intellectual revos?

[redarmyfaction38]

RAF:



And if you had bothered to read the opening words of that Essay, you would have seen that I have summarised its contents in several places:

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rosa.l/Summary_of_Essay_Nine-Part-02.htm

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rosa.l/Why%20I%20Oppose%20DM.htm
my apologies! i was to busy going "oh my god" at having to read yet another "marxist" epic to notice.:)
doesn't make the rest of my post any less relevant though:p

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Duplicate post

[redarmyfaction38]

Yeah, "sectarian" is thrown out there almost as much as "fascist".

Why in both cases this really is a shame is that when there is something/somebody that one of these terms does apply to, it carries less weight.

Often the understanding is also misinterpreted; rather then realizing that it actually does refer to sectarian/fascist, many people write it off as mere disagreement.

I think that soon "fascist" and "sectarian" will all but lose their original meanings, and continue to exist solely as an insult or explicative of frustration (much like the term "bastard" has become.)
an explicative of frustration definately.
an insult, you are probably right as well.
i'd be interested to hear your definitions of both.
being an oldie, i was given a definition of fascism as the "corporate state", "nazism", "fascism" etc. were a capitalist reaction to the power of the "workers movement" and consequentaly extreme reactions of the ruling class to an obvious threat to their power and position.
there are facts that muddy the waters of that definition, u.s. companies supplied and financed the rise of nazism in germany, what was their motivation? was it actualy the destruction of the ussr? or was it the destruction of the "european empires" that competed with the usa for international capitalist domination?
there are more questions than answers, imo.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

RAF:


as a worker, when i look dispassionately, at the rev.left, i have a tendancy to agree with you rosa, there are a lot of so called revolutionaries that are not working class, they see our movement as an intellectual exercise and in reality have no understanding of how people like myself live and work, they have no understanding of working class communities, their values, their day to day struggle to survive etc.
the one thing that enabled working class communities to survive and occassionaly prosper was common interest and solidarity, this common interest and solidarity required turning a blind eye to individual fraility whilst punishing those that worked against our communal interest.
the so called "vanguard parties" of the organised working class need to learn from this.

Well, at last we seem to agree on something.:)


or on a personal note, rosa, do you think us "bozos" have nothing to contribute and need 66000 word essays to tell us why we're incapable of thinking or acting for ourselves without the beneficient endorsement of intellectual revos?

I used the word 'clown' specifically for those who cannot bring to this debate the effort and seriousness I have devoted to it.

In this there was no suggestion why no one else is "capable of thinking or acting for themselves without the beneficient endorsement of intellectual revos"; I was merely making a point about idiots who think they can dismiss my work in a few sentences, especially if they haven't bothered to read it.

Of course, no one has to read my work, no more than they have to read that of Marx, or Lenin or Trotsky, but then only a Bozo will dismiss work (in such terms) that they haven't read.

[redarmyfaction38]

RAF:



Well, at last we seem to agree on something.:)



I used the word 'clown' specifically for those who cannot bring to this debate the effort and seriousness I have devoted to it.

In this there was no suggestion why no one else is "capable of thinking or acting for themselves without the beneficient endorsement of intellectual revos"; I was merely making a point about idiots who think they can dismiss my work in a few sentences, especially if they haven't bothered to read it.

Of course, no one has to read my work, no more than they have to read that of Marx, or Lenin or Trotsky, but then only a Bozo will dismiss work (in such terms) that they haven't read.
does my promise to read it when i have the time, get me out of the "bozo" definition rosa?
or does it just promote me to "clown" status?
:p

[redarmyfaction38]

does my promise to read it when i have the time, get me out of the "bozo" definition rosa?
or does it just promote me to "clown" status?
:p
one day rosa, you wil stop being offended by me and hopefully realise that we are actually on the same side.
we will undoubtedly continue to differ on our analysis and personal experience, but, imo, that is all well and good, different perspectives can only help the educatiob of all, imo.
BUT, i really think you need to develop an "anarchic" or "off the wall" sense of humour.
yes the revolution is the most serious goal and task before us all.
unity of action is the most important task before us in these god forsaken times where the bourgeouisie run amok.
but, we need to take ourselves a bit less seriously, we need to allow ourselves the human things, get pissed, fall over, boogie on down etc, remind ourselves that we are just people and keep our connections with our non revolutionary friends and relatives or run the risk of ending up like the barstards in charge.imo.
with love.

[Zurdito]

True sectarianism is when you refuse to work with a group for a common, clearly defined and limited cause, when you both could find a broaf programme of agreement for that cause if you wanted to. for example, demanding the vote for women or minorities, opposing an attack on pay and conditions, opposing a war/invasion/occupation, etc.

sectarianism is not criticising other left groups in strong terms even when you unite with them ins pecific and limtied united fronts like I named above. sectarianism is not refusing to change your politics and lie just in order to desperately keep together a convenient alliance.

when we all oppose a coup together, for example, and we join united fronts with organisations that represent the working class but do not have revolutionary pr class-independence politics, this is correct, to not do this would be sectarian. when they demand that to be in the alliance you have to give political support (i.e. this includes a "critical" vote in elections) to "progressive" or "anti-imperialist" bourgeois forces, then saying, "fine, kick us fromt he alliance" is NOT sectarian.

I hope this is understood.

[chegitz guevara]

Do I have to spell it out? Most groups claiming to Marxism are not in fact Marxist in any meaningful sense.

Yes, but which ones? All of them except mine?

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

CG: exactly!

[Zurdito]

I tried to post this straight after other but my internet stopped working:

also I think it is true that high class struggle and victories bring revolutionary groups together, and low class struggle/defeats pull them apart.

as for the working class uniting over time? only believe this if you think that political manouvres by bourgeois union bureaucrats is the same as actions of the working class.

in reality the working class in countries where it has been defeated for years is atomised and competing individual agaisnt individual, mirroring what happens in the revolutionary left. the pathetic "trade unions" (which it is an insult to real trade unionism to call them) which today claim to lead the class are only uniting because the biggest unions closest to the bourgeois regime take over smaller unions with more rooting in the class, in order to eradicate any small traces of workers democracy and turn them into outright organs for policing the working class on behalf of the bosses. so this is not the same as the working class "uniting" or as ground level, deocratically controlled unions in each workplace, which respond to the base, uniting in action as they realise their interests are the same. No. the centralisation of the union bureaucracy is an attemtp to do the opposite and make sure that the mechanisms do not exist for the base to mobilise themselves, and so instead their mobilisation is dependent on unions which they control less each time. of course this does npot lead to united class action, as these union leaders who increase their powers through centralisation are the same ones whose job is to prevent mobilisation.

in fact across the world there are more and more regional, national, ethnic, religious etc. ocnflcits appearing allt he time since the fall of the Soviet Union, as the working class fragments and fights itself in replacement of the class struggle.

so personally I believe that as objective conditions bring for greater class struggle, there is a possibility of the revolutionary elft working more lcosely together and putting its differences aside, as there is a possibility of the working class moving further in this direction also.

of course if the crisis leads to more crushing defeats, then this could lead to an explosion in the other direction, as we saw in the 1930's.

the important thing here is for the revolutionary left itself to prepare itself, though hard debate and challenging our mistakes and differences openly and honestly, to be able to provide some kind of strategy to the working class vanguard - those who want or are forced to fight - in order to organise this sector of society, agree ons ome political aims, and attempt to work together to lead the class as a whole to some victories. This is the way to set in motion the building of a revoltuionary party and international - something which not even the basis of exists today in any country in the world.

the ones who will throw out the word "sectarian" are the deluded ones who thinkt hat their group is the basis of the future revolutionary party and league and that therefore wasting time on silly arguing is pointless when THEY are out there fighting the class struggle (in place of the class aparrently).

This is the truly dangerous attitude, much more dangerous than "sectarianism", because until the revolutionary left has a real scientific understanding of the situation (i.e. that right now there is no revoltuioanry party or international, just different gorups, and that we need to devide as our urgent task to create one), what we need to build (an anti-bureaucratic, democratically controlled, openly classist workers party in our countries, and a revolutioanry international at the international level) who we need to talk to specifically (i.e. not just "the class", but right now, those sectors who struggle, i.e. not the bureaucrats, but those who struggle beyond what the bureaucrats allow, i.e. not the "community leaders", but those who are breaking beyond what the "community leaders" accept), etc. until we do that, then we will nto be able to provide any useful strategy to the working lcass vanguard in the event of an escalation of class struggle or of variosu attacks on our class made necessarry by the worsening of the material conditions for capitalism.

For example, this kind of confusion on the left will lead to left groups making statements like "vote for Hugo Chavez" or Evo Morales to vanguard workers who have tgried to go beyond what that section of Venezuelan national borugeoisie accepts and have been brutally repressed, rather than us developing that vanguard into one hwich udnerstand why the "socialism" that did this is not "socialism" and why our socialism is socialism, and why together we can provide a strategy for the whole class. this kind of confusion could lead to the left calling on the class to make allainces with reactioanry communtiy leaders like the SWP did with RESPECT, to give political support in elections to bourgeois forces, to tell workers and radicalsied sections of the population who were disgusted with Labour, that they need to create a new reformist party, instead of explaining why it is that in today's capitalism, even reformist parties like Labour have been forced to be right-wing, and that this shows why capitalism itself is the problem and why therefore a new classist party was needed.

so that is my opinion the debate about "sectarianism"

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Z, thanks for that, but you ignore the facts. Whatever the state of the class stuggle, revolutionary parties continue to fragment, as the history of our movement shows. Where do you think all those parties I listed came from? The moon?

And sure, there are enormous pressures on workers to split, but the trend of the last 200 years is unmistakable. All round the earth there are unions where there were none 100 years ago. And this takes place despite the best efforts of union bureaucrats to screw things up.

Contrast that with us Marxists. One International 140 years ago -- 140 years later: 1000s of waring sects, all with the 'correct line'.

The 'real scientific undertanding' you speak of is in fact part of the problem, for every one of the groups listed above has a 'scientific understaning of the problem', but still regards every other group as 'un-dialectical', 'anti-Marxist', 'revisionist' or 'counter-revolutionary'.

Our 'theories' split us apart, the class war drives workers to combine.

A prime example of this being your crass understanding of what the SWP tried to do.

Notice what you did? You allowed some 'theory' or other to force you to make sectarian comments about fellow comrades. You just couldn't resist it, could you? And you have been programmed to do this by the ideolgues in your party, and programmed to think you are right and every one else wrong.

So, thanks for proving my point.

[redarmyfaction38]

Z, thanks for that, but you ignore the facts. Whatever the state of the class stuggle, revolutionary parties continue to fragment, as the history of our movement shows. Where do you think all those parties I listed came from? The moon?

And sure, there are enormous pressures on workers to split, but the trend of the last 200 years is unmistakable. All round the earth there are unions where there were none 100 years ago. And this takes place despite the best efforts of union bureaucrats to screw things up.

Contrast that with us Marxists. One International 140 years ago -- 140 years later: 1000s of waring sects, all with the 'correct line'.

The 'real scientific undertanding' you speak of is in fact part of the problem, for every one of the groups listed above has a 'scientific understaning of the problem', but still regards every other group as 'un-dialectical', 'anti-Marxist', 'revisionist' or 'counter-revolutionary'.

Our 'theories' split us apart, the class war drives workers to combine.

A prime example of this being your crass understanding of what the SWP tried to do.

Notice what you did? You allowed some 'theory' or other to force you to make sectarian comments about fellow comrades. You just couldn't resist it, could you? And you have been programmed to do this by the ideolgues in your party, and programmed to think you are right and every one else wrong.

So, thanks for proving my point.

i'm gonna hate myself for saying this...but...i think you have a point.
i'm not a fan of how the swp has gone about its business regarding respect and renewal or its refusal to accept an "equal" role when invited to join the cnwp.
i've tried to give "constructive criticism" of the swp, i know its past and its "potential" should it choose to work alongside those "sectarians" that actually want them on board.
yet, i've been accused of "sectarianism" by yourself!
it is not just him or you, we all leap to defend our personal political position rather than take a step back and think what is in the best interest of our CLASS.
and that,imo, is why the rev left is so fragmented and the bourgeouisie can run amok deceiving our class with lies and shiney shit whilst we sit impotent because of our absolute refusal to accept basic marxist ideology and work towards class unity.
and who did we learn this shit from? it wasn't marx or lenin, we are copying the behaviour of the capitalist politicians! they can afford to make minor differences into major political issues, they are in charge.
we aren't in charge and consequentially cannot afford to allow these minor differences to rule our lives, nor can we allow, bourgeouis notions of "political education" to over rule the actual facts of working class mutual self interest, even when, in these times, it has been reduced, apparently, to giving you neighbour a cup of sugar or watching over each others kids as they play in the street.
imo, despite all you might have been told or believe, socialism has its roots in these simple actions of comon interest and humanity and that is the reason why socialist revolution will always raise its "ugly head" despite thye best efforts of the capitalist class.
cos, it's us workers that will overthrow capitalism, all we need from comrades like ourselves is the practical and political means of doing so.
i've probably gone way "off topic" here:blushing:

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

RAF, no one is afraid of constructive criticism, but what we almost always see are destructive attacks (and I am not pointing the finger here at you).

This just fosters a climate of disrespect and contempt on the Far Left with the ruling-class laughing all the way to the next attack on our side.

And I wouldn't be surprised if they weren't behind some of these attacks, with agents 'argumenteurs' planted in key positions on the left.

And we, idiots that we are, fall for it every time.

And then we wonder why we keep losing! http://www.politicalcrossfire.com/forum/images/smiles/eusa_wall.gif

[chegitz guevara]

Z, thanks for that, but you ignore the facts. Whatever the state of the class stuggle, revolutionary parties continue to fragment, as the history of our movement shows. Where do you think all those parties I listed came from? The moon?

Sometimes I do think that, yes. In any event, we've been in an ebb period for decades. During the revolutionary period how many groups were there? And handful? And of the trillion and a half groups that exist today, how many are more than a dozen comrades? Most of these groups are too small to even count as sects.

For example, in the United States, there are many dozens of self-proclaimed revolutionary organizations. Some groups may feel slighted here, but really, aside from the ISO, the RCP, and WWP/PSL, none of them materially matter. I'm including the three groups in which I do political work as matterially non-existent also: the Socialist Party (too divided), Solidarity (not really revolutionary), and Kasama (too small and too new, although the most exciting thing on the American left to me). So the fact that there are many dozens of other groups really doesn't matter. They have almost no influence, even in the small pond in which the left exists.

[redarmyfaction38]

RAF, no one is afraid of constructive criticism, but what we almost always see are destructive attacks (and I am not pointing the finger here at you).

This just fosters a climate of disrespect and contempt on the Far Left with the ruling-class laughing all the way to the next attack on our side.

And I wouldn't be surprised if they weren't behind some of these attacks, with agents 'argumenteurs' planted in key positions on the left.

And we, idiots that we are, fall for it every time.

And then we wonder why we keep losing! http://www.politicalcrossfire.com/forum/images/smiles/eusa_wall.gif
absolutely not taking this as a personal attack.
time we stopped looking for differences, imo.
i share the same obvious frustrations as you do, time we started looking at our comon interest rather than our respective political allegiances?
i know for a fact that others have adopted this approach regardless of their "party".
i was gonna say "sectarian party". but i'm off the irritate rosa bit:p

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

RAF: Ok so we are beginning to see things the same way, at least here.:)

[Rawthentic]

chegitz:

as far as the Kasama Project, I agree, it is too small and new to write a verdict. But it is the most exciting thing out there, and the one with the most potential of becoming a serious political force.

[Zurdito]

The 'real scientific undertanding' you speak of is in fact part of the problem, for every one of the groups listed above has a 'scientific understaning of the problem', but still regards every other group as 'un-dialectical', 'anti-Marxist', 'revisionist' or 'counter-revolutionary'.

I don't think all other groups are un-marxist or undialectical or counter-revolutionary, I think I looked for the group with the closest understanding to mine of what positions are necessarry today and what reovlutionary politics is, and I tested this against the success of that group in the real class struggle, and on an international level I was impressed, so joined, in order to be able to agitate for the politics which I think the left, students and workers need to hear, rather than with the attitude that "I have joined the party of the the class, and now have to make it come to power by playing clever politics."

I think that the small propaganda organisations which today make up the far left will need to be going through a constant, dynamic series of splits and fusions through a period of global struggle (outside of this I thinksfragmentation is sadly inevitable but it seems we are entering into a heightened period of sturggle on a global level) and that this is part of the process towards the eventual creation of a revolutionary - something which not even the basis of exists today.

I don't fear criticism or debate in the strongest terms, I wlecome it as the only way new factions capable of forming the basis for mass movements will emerge.


Our 'theories' split us apart, the class war drives workers to combine.

but this where I don't agree, workers aren't combining any more that the left is, and the left in times of heightened struggle combines just as workers do - i.e. in an unstable and dynamic way. The idea of a united class which you cna lead today with one-line is a one-way ticket to right-wing politics, it makes you tell the mass of the class what it wants to hear, and in doing so lie to the vanguard of the class and tell them to go back to politics and demands they were/are/had broken/breaking with.

so no, I do not think it's possible wih material conditions that exist today, to speak of a united working class who can be led with clear, common sense policies that the silly intellectual theretical left should shut up and accept. I think the working class is divided, I think there is no possibility of the mass of the working class today supporitng a revolutioanry organisation, and so I think isntead the correct policy needs to be organising, arguing with, and gainign impantation and trust with, the vanguard workers, those hwo want to fight, those who have criticisms of the system, and those who have rejected and advanced beyond the way of thinking and the kind of organisations which the mass of the class still is loyal to.

so I think the idea of a left that should just stop being theoretical and click its fingers and with the right policies gain the mass of the class is unrealistic. sure, you can gain the mass of the class to your party tommorrow if you want - by becoming a reformist who offers policies comaptible with the current ability of capitality of capitalism to provide reforms.

and in doing so you will have to uphold a lvel of politics which the mass of the class in its ocnsciousness todya is comfortable with, and in order to do this you will need to stand against those vanguard workers who go beyond the common sense of the day and strike against the "good capitlaists" and the "fair wages". and in doing so, you would help end any chance of a successfull revolutionary party ever being built, you would help end any chance of the working class ever progressing beyonf the point it was already at when you arrived, and you would help pacify the class struggle until the next wave of attacks was necessarry, until reformism could no longer survive in the industrial downturn, and until the right was ready again to step in and crush a class with no leadership and no alternative.

So I repeat, it is not our job today to "lead the working class", that is completely unrealsitic, and to talk of a unified mass of the working class which the left can go directly to, is to ignore the improtant first obligation we have which is to win over the canguard of the class to revolutionary politics, showing them that we have principles and real, ind epth answers ofr their questions. our job is to organise, debate with and develop these vanguard workers, to reach a synthesis between them and the intellectual left.



You just couldn't resist it, could you? And you have been programmed to do this by the ideolgues in your party, and programmed to think you are right and every one else wrong.



I don't think I am right and everyone else is wrong, I have changed my mind many times, and admitted it. Why? Because I am open to agument, and instead of calling people sectarian when they criticise me, I deal with the criticisms themselves insyead of condemning the act of criticising in itself.

You have a point though, I only put forward positions which I think are right at the time, and that is why I'm not afraid to debate them.

On the other hand, people publicly defending positions which they privately are not convinced of, often do not want to debate.

[Die Neue Zeit]

After all of your reading of my work, I'm not sure you got what I meant by sectarianism, Z. :(

http://www.revleft.com/vb/basic-principles-t87418/index.html

There has to be an impetus, and the caricaturized Bolshevik party model is NOT the model around which to organize. Nor, on the other hand, is the "model" of pseudo-reformist mass parties.


even reformist parties like Labour have been forced to be right-wing, and that this shows why capitalism itself is the problem and why therefore a new classist party was needed

Hence my class-strugglist work :(

Please re-read Chapter 6 for the ultimatist party model that I have in mind.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Z:


I don't think all other groups are un-marxist or undialectical or counter-revolutionary, I think I looked for the group with the closest understanding to mine of what positions are necessarry today and what reovlutionary politics is, and I tested this against the success of that group in the real class struggle, and on an international level I was impressed, so joined, in order to be able to agitate for the politics which I think the left, students and workers need to hear, rather than with the attitude that "I have joined the party of the the class, and now have to make it come to power by playing clever politics."

You my not, but the various sects out there systematically describe one another in just such terms.


but this where I don't agree, workers aren't combining any more that the left is, and the left in times of heightened struggle combines just as workers do - i.e. in an unstable and dynamic way. The idea of a united class which you cna lead today with one-line is a one-way ticket to right-wing politics, it makes you tell the mass of the class what it wants to hear, and in doing so lie to the vanguard of the class and tell them to go back to politics and demands they were/are/had broken/breaking with.

The process is, as you will no doubt admit, complex. But the international trend is quite clear. Workers are more vastly organised now than they were 150 years ago -- whereas we are significantly more fragmented.

And no one is arguing that there is or will be a 'united class', just that the class struggle sends workers one way, and the far left the other.

If we don't see this, and address it, it will just continue.

So, much else that you say, interesting though it was, is not really relevant.


I don't think I am right and everyone else is wrong, I have changed my mind many times, and admitted it. Why? Because I am open to agument, and instead of calling people sectarian when they criticise me, I deal with the criticisms themselves insyead of condemning the act of criticising in itself.

I am sure that that is the way you see yourself, but nevetheless you just could not resist, could you?

In a debate about sectarianism, you just had to have a dig at the SWP. Now the SWP has nothing to do with this thead, but somehow you had to drag it in. That alone should tell you something.

This is so endemic on the left that it is like a knee-jerk reaction, and therein lies part of the reason we fragment so easily.

[Hit The North]

R:
If we don't see this, and address it, it will just continue.So how do you think we can tackle this problem, given that the two planks of your analysis (1. that the class struggle forces divisions amongst the revolutionary left due to 2. that the revolutionary left is comprised of petite bourgeois individuals) seem to point to the conclusion that revolutionary organisations, even during high levels of struggle, will be unable to lead the class?

[communard resolution]

You can always tell the true sectarian. They're the ones that think they can "win" a debate not by a factual and/or philosophical refutation of their opponent's position, but simply by labeling their opponent "opportunist", "revisionist" or "bourgeois". It's particularly the last that cracks me up, because 98% of these people that reflexively label others "bourgeois" are nothing but a bunch of suburban whiteboys.

I couldn't possibly agree more - and if everything else fails, add 'fascist' to that. The moment someone starts throwing these labels at me, I get up and walk away because that discussion will obviously not lead to any result. The sole point of such slurs is to shut somebody up rather make them see where you're coming from.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Duplicate post.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

BTB:


So how do you think we can tackle this problem, given that the two planks of your analysis (1. that the class struggle forces divisions amongst the revolutionary left due to 2. that the revolutionary left is comprised of petite bourgeois individuals) seem to point to the conclusion that revolutionary organisations, even during high levels of struggle, will be unable to lead the class?

1) Recognise the problem.

However, experience over the last 25 years (added to that here) has taught me that comrades refuse even to listen.

2) Ditch the theory (identified below) that tells them there is no problem, or that it is always 'those other guys' who screw up, 'never us'.

3) Acknowledge that Marxism is in long term decline because the working class has learnt to its cost that we can't be trusted not to screw up.

4) That means ditching the theory that tells comrades that 'appearances' contradict 'under-lying essences', so there is in fact no problem.

5) Stop regarding ourselves as superior to the working class, and that they are all lost in 'false consciousness' and that only we have somehow miraculously remained unsullied.

6) Admit that the ideas of prominent comrades (Marx, Engels, Plekhanov, Lenin, Trotsky, Mao...) were heavily influenced by their class position, pre-deposing them to accept mystical explanations for the development of history, to which they alone were privy, making such comrades (and their epigones today) prophets and not revolutionaries.

Since many of these comrades are regarded almost as gods, this step is the killer -- most comrades will not even entertain this sacrilegious thought.

[Hence the problem I have getting my ideas across here, and the irrational, emotive response I receive every time (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rosa.l/RevLeft.htm). The thread on the 'mass line' being the latest example.]

7) Acknowledge that our movement was knobbled from the very beginning by the ideological inheritance we appropriated from Hegel, which 'theory' allows comrades to access fundamental truths about nature and society by means of thought alone (or by copying them from Hegel), making them seem to be in possession of superior, revealed knowledge.

[Trivas is a good example of this malady, but he is not the only one.]

8) Admitting that this allows such comrades to rationalise the substitution of themselves/the party/or whatever for the class (which is seen as made up of deluded individuals who cannot appropriate for themselves the truths that dialectics reveals to the holy prophets, befuddled as they are by 'commodity fetishism', 'common sense' and 'false consciousness', blah, blah -- meaning that they need us to 'teach them'), thus alienating workers even more.

9) Admitting that substitution takes the following forms: (a) domination by an autocratic, unaccountable vanguard (in fact an unaccountable Central Committee, often controlled itself by one or two individuals); (b) the substitution of other forces for the working class, be they the Red Army, Maoist guerrillas, 'charismatic' individuals/'Great Teachers'; third world dictators, 'progressive' regimes, sympathetic nationalists, left-leaning bourgeois parties/politicians, students, peasants, voters, 'rainbow-alliances', websites...

Now, I harbour absolutely no illusions that any of the above will be narrowly, let alone widely, accepted here or anywhere else, for that matter -- or even given so much as a few seconds thought.

So, either the human race is doomed (which is the most likely scenario) or we will have to hope that the working class come to our rescue like they did in 1917.

We sure as hell are soiled goods, so they probably won't trust us ever again.

[Hit The North]

Rosa, thanks for the detailed and interesting reply. I'm at work now and don't have time to address every point you make but the general tenor of it is very pessimistic.

My main problem with your analysis, though, is the one-sidedness of it; placing all the blame on the revolutionary minority (particularly, it would seem, its ideas) and failing to recognise that it is the class and its class enemy which sets the pace of struggle in which revolutionary ideas, activity and organization can either flourish or wither.

In times of low class struggle the gap between the revolutionaries and the vast majority of the class is obviously wider and the deficit in class consciousness felt by the class also impacts on the revolutionaries who, despite your (mis)characterization of them as petite bourgeois, remains a part of the class and cannot be otherwise affected by its general condition. Nevertheless, I think your accusation that comrades feel themselves superior to the class and consider the rest of the class to be mired in false consciousness, although perhaps prevalent in some sects and individuals is not the general attitude which I've experienced amongst comrades.

[chegitz guevara]

chegitz:

as far as the Kasama Project, I agree, it is too small and new to write a verdict. But it is the most exciting thing out there, and the one with the most potential of becoming a serious political force.

I'm not sure that's true, that we have the most potential to become a serious political force. What I do think is that we have the potential to be rather influential and contribute to a rethinking and rebirth of the American left. In other words, I don't think we will be the group, but that our approach may spread throughout the left and re-invigorate and re-unite it. I do expect much of the left to start coming back together, and I think Kasama will likely be subsumed into whatever comes out of that process.

When comrades from the Socialist Party (other than me) are re-posting Kasama pieces on our mailing list, you know that we're making a splash.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

BTB:


My main problem with your analysis, though, is the one-sidedness of it; placing all the blame on the revolutionary minority (particularly, it would seem, its ideas) and failing to recognise that it is the class and its class enemy which sets the pace of struggle in which revolutionary ideas, activity and organization can either flourish or wither.

It was one-sided to some extent, but we are here discussing our failures not those of workers.

And sure, the class enemy is a huge factor; but we have only made their job easier by shooting ourselves in the foot, time and again.

In the end, I am not really blaming our ideas so much as tracing the problem to the class origin of prominent Marxists and the ruling-class theory they locked into (and they were largely pre-disposed into doing this by their education and socialisation -- it was not something they could avoid, had they been smarter or born at a different time; the crucial thing is that they all tended to think the same way).

So, this is not an idealist criticism, but one that is materially-based in the class system.


Nevertheless, I think your accusation that comrades feel themselves superior to the class and consider the rest of the class to be mired in false consciousness, although perhaps prevalent in some sects and individuals is not the general attitude which I've experienced amongst comrades.

Well, you and I come from the same political background, and I can tell you that I have witnessed it (although, I must add that in the organisation to which I used to belong, and to which you now belong, this was very attenuated) and it is getting worse.

For example, if you raise the issues I raise, and you'll be accused of being a 'workerist'! And the idea that Marxism is in long term decline will be brushed aside, almost contemptuously. You will also begin to be ostrascised, as I was. There is only one hymn sheet, and we all sing along, or you are out.

The party 'knows best', and that's the end of it.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

CR:


Rosa your talking like a demagogue and no better than any common leftie attacking the 'vanguard'. Your stereotype of 'The Party' is contemptuous at best, the fact is that democratic centralism ensures an efficient method for organization for the working class, as I have been apart of a party run along democratic centralist lines I can clearly say that they are very democratic, they just don't allow whinging irrelevant minorities hacks to hijack the discussion

This just means that you too are part of the problem.

[Since I replied to him, CR's post has been trashed, since he was a sock puppet for a banned member.]

[chegitz guevara]

not so much.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

CG, I'm sorry, but was that adressed to me? If so, what does it mean?

[chegitz guevara]

That CR wasn't so much a part of the problem. Disagreeing with you doesn't make us part of the problem.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

CG, no you are right --, but refusing to see the problem, and offering a lame excuse is indeed part of the problem (as I predicted).

[chegitz guevara]

Speaking of sectarianism, Led Zeppelin just threw me out of the Trotskyist group because I said Trotskyism was inherently sectarian. :lol: He also seems to be under the delusion that I'm a Maoist. :confused: Probably because I'm not implacably hostile to Maoism.

[Rawthentic]

Chegitz: thats classic. Typical.

[redarmyfaction38]

After all of your reading of my work, I'm not sure you got what I meant by sectarianism, Z. :(

http://www.revleft.com/vb/basic-principles-t87418/index.html

There has to be an impetus, and the caricaturized Bolshevik party model is NOT the model around which to organize. Nor, on the other hand, is the "model" of pseudo-reformist mass parties.



Hence my class-strugglist work :(

Please re-read Chapter 6 for the ultimatist party model that I have in mind.
i beg to differ, despite the obvious uniqueness of the bolshevik position in the development of the russian revolution, the militant tendancy in the 1980s was able to lead a working class rebellion against the dominant neo liberal policies of a "popular govt." using precisely the same tactics as the bolsheviks in russia prior to the russian revolution.
unfortunately, the roots of the militant tendancy in the working class were not as deep nationally as they were in liverpool.
if they had been, we could at the very least enjoyed the overthrow of thatcherism, at best the overthrow of capitalism in britain imo.

[chegitz guevara]

You did eventually overthrow Thatcher. :thumbup1:

[Zurdito]

Speaking of sectarianism, Led Zeppelin just threw me out of the Trotskyist group because I said Trotskyism was inherently sectarian. :lol: He also seems to be under the delusion that I'm a Maoist. :confused: Probably because I'm not implacably hostile to Maoism.

trotskyists, sectarian against people who want to establish a bureaucratic dictatorship over the working class and liquidate all opposition, or those who are npot "implacably hostile" to the idea.

personally my real life experience of stalinists (including maoists) is violent scum dedicated to trashing anyone on the left who criticises the section of the bourgeosie they work for today. this includes of course violently attacking meetings, militants on demos etc. my view is fuck them, if that makes me a sectarian then:tt2:

[chegitz guevara]

Trotskyists aren't just sectarian against everyone else. Trotskyists are sectarian against everyone. They aren't alone in that bad habit, however. Maoists are the same, as are anarchists and Stalinists. The ruling class is laughing all the way to the bank. Congrats.

When you're ready to fight the ruling class, instead of other comrades, why don't you join us? You'll be welcome among your comrades.

[mikelepore]

People on the left do not agree on what social goals to adopt, nor how best to attain goals, what sort of structures and organizations and methods. One of the main things that people on the left often argue about is: "the objectives and strategies you think would be effective, I think would be disasterous" (and vice versa); "the methods you believe would make us stronger, I believe would make us weaker." (and vice versa). If that's the argument, how shall we overcome our sectarianism? How would anyone know what to do? If I may make an analogy, how could two surgeons just skip over their disagreement about which bodily organ needs to be cut out, and, for the sake of cooperation, just cut something out? How could sailors of a ship rush past the step of deciding what destination to steer toward, and, for the sake of getting something done, begin sailing to anywhere? Leftists who say to others "just stop being so sectarian" are underestimating the difficulty of the problem.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ All it takes is a fresh approach to the problem (since you've read my work):

http://www.revleft.com/vb/basic-principles-t87418/index.html
http://www.revleft.com/vb/basic-principles-sectarian-t87880/index.html

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

I'm afraid CG is quite right -- we all living examples of Monty Python's 'People's Front of Judea' syndrome.

We are the non-existent deity's gift to the ruling-class!:(

[Zurdito]

Trotskyists aren't just sectarian against everyone else. Trotskyists are sectarian against everyone. They aren't alone in that bad habit, however. Maoists are the same, as are anarchists and Stalinists. The ruling class is laughing all the way to the bank. Congrats.

Don't devalue the word "comrade", please! in what sense is a moaist or a stalinist a comrade? when I call someone a comrade I mean it as a genuine gesture of solidarity, not just some formal way of addressing any reactionary wanker who claims to be a communist.


When you're ready to fight the ruling class, instead of other comrades, why don't you join us? You'll be welcome among your comrades

I would be welcomed by stalinists and maoists?

welcomed to stand against a wall, maybe...

when you understand that in real life struggle, stalinists and maoists job is to stand beside the section of the bourgeosie they work for today and help them crush my comrades - my real comrades - then you'll be welcome to join real comrades

until then, you can keep dreaming that there's a possibility of any genuine class activist working alongside people who support a lockout by landowners which drives a large part of the working class into hunger and who then go out to destroy any other left front or meeting which doesn't support that lockout, or who think China or Zimbabwe have progressive governments, or who support Fidel castro or Hugo Chavez's right to stamp down on workers who strike against them or orgasnise independent of officialist bureaucrats.

IMO the day that we make the mistake again of entering into fronts with those kinds of "communists" is the day that the "ruling class is laughing all the way to the bank" as they have been with every popular front which avoided a revolution by wiping out the left, or with every stalinist state which ended a revolutionary situation and then reintroduced capitalism (i.e. all of them)

[chegitz guevara]

That's what democracy is for. It's not like any of us can get anything accomplished with our tiny sects anyway, so even if we take a chance on something we oppose, and it turns out not to work, we haven't really lost anything. And, we have proof that that particular tactic doesn't work, instead of mere rhetoric that it won't work. Even if we fail, we've moved forward. That's how science works. And if it turns out to work, then we learned something also.

Here's the thing. I have no idea if this will work. Maybe it will fail spectacularly. But then at least we'll know. But not trying it hasn't worked. And in the past, when a group of people who had opposing ideas on how to carry out politics agreed to work together and make decisions democratically, they overthrew the Tsar. The Bolsheviks squabbled every bit as much as we do now, but they did it within a single organization, and they agreed to abide by democratic decisions. We call ourselves Leninists, but we don't follow Lenin.

I think someday it's going to happen. Why not now? Why don't we go first? We're going to be burned a few times, but eventually we will build up trust. Then it will happen. It's up to us. We can cling to old methods that don't work, or we can try something scary and new, that probably won't work, but it just might.

[redarmyfaction38]

That's what democracy is for. It's not like any of us can get anything accomplished with our tiny sects anyway, so even if we take a chance on something we oppose, and it turns out not to work, we haven't really lost anything. And, we have proof that that particular tactic doesn't work, instead of mere rhetoric that it won't work. Even if we fail, we've moved forward. That's how science works. And if it turns out to work, then we learned something also.

Here's the thing. I have no idea if this will work. Maybe it will fail spectacularly. But then at least we'll know. But not trying it hasn't worked. And in the past, when a group of people who had opposing ideas on how to carry out politics agreed to work together and make decisions democratically, they overthrew the Tsar. The Bolsheviks squabbled every bit as much as we do now, but they did it within a single organization, and they agreed to abide by democratic decisions. We call ourselves Leninists, but we don't follow Lenin.

I think someday it's going to happen. Why not now? Why don't we go first? We're going to be burned a few times, but eventually we will build up trust. Then it will happen. It's up to us. We can cling to old methods that don't work, or we can try something scary and new, that probably won't work, but it just might.

if you don't try then you lose the chance of achievement.
your post is spot on. comrade.

[Yehuda Stern]

I back Zurdito in this completely. The sort of 'unity' that people like Jacob Richter suggest is very appealing to the Stalinists, because it gives the reformists the option of stabbing the revolutionaries in the back when they can - like they did to the Bolsheviks in Hungary, and like they did to the Trotskyists in Indonesia, and like they did in many many places where the advice given by local Jacob Richter's was taken.

[Die Neue Zeit]

You really need to stop being ignorant of the material that I've written regarding "reformists" (and thereafter being less slanderous). I'll give you two more links:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/non-reformist-reforms-t86845/index.html
http://www.revleft.com/vb/popular-vs-united-t88559/index.html

[Yehuda Stern]

To recap what I said on your profile page: combining revolutionary rhetoric in writings and opportunism in practice is what characterizes all centrists.

[Zurdito]

That's what democracy is for. It's not like any of us can get anything accomplished with our tiny sects anyway, so even if we take a chance on something we oppose, and it turns out not to work, we haven't really lost anything. And, we have proof that that particular tactic doesn't work, instead of mere rhetoric that it won't work. Even if we fail, we've moved forward. That's how science works. And if it turns out to work, then we learned something also.

Here's the thing. I have no idea if this will work. Maybe it will fail spectacularly. But then at least we'll know. But not trying it hasn't worked. And in the past, when a group of people who had opposing ideas on how to carry out politics agreed to work together and make decisions democratically, they overthrew the Tsar. The Bolsheviks squabbled every bit as much as we do now, but they did it within a single organization, and they agreed to abide by democratic decisions. We call ourselves Leninists, but we don't follow Lenin.

I think someday it's going to happen. Why not now? Why don't we go first? We're going to be burned a few times, but eventually we will build up trust. Then it will happen. It's up to us. We can cling to old methods that don't work, or we can try something scary and new, that probably won't work, but it just might.

You are missing the class character of stalinism. We can't all sit down and work it out with the Stalinists through rational science, because the aims of the ideolgoy are different. Stalinism doesn't want communism to work, it is an ideology which represent the interests of the working class' bureaucracy - i.e. in the trade unions and the reformist parties/movements, and it's job is to contain and control the class struggle at every turn, in the name of doing the work of the particular section of the bourgeoisie which it happens to be working for at the time. At it's most radical, i.e. when despite the efforts of the Stalinists, the working class grows strong enough to overthrow the bourgeosie, then Stalinism exists to contain this within one country and to keep it under the control of the bureaucracy. A bureaucratic stalinist state is the most stalinism aspires to - and in most cases not even this.

I repeat, you can't sit down and "work out" the way to acheive your common goals with an enemy who you don't share common goals with. The Communist Party in Argentina, the PC, supported the 1976 miltiary coup, claiming that this could help the defence of natural resources. This coup led to the deaths of 30 000 leftists and the crushing of the labour movement. The Maoists, the PCR, didn't support the coup, but did support urging the working class to uphold the previous government, of Isabela Peron, which was managing the Argentine Anticommunist Alliance and abducting, torturing and murdering around a thousand leftists under her rule. But the Maosits suppotted this government, and its attacks on wages and rights, in the name of supposedly strengthening some kind of "national project" which could lead to greater independence from imperialism.

So tell me seriously, you agree with inviting these people into a classist party, a revolutionary party? When they haveproved themselves complicit to the murder of revolutionaries and attacks on workers wages and rights? Are you serious?

As for sectarianism - what would be sectarian would be for me not to respect well-intentioned Stalinist ground level activists, or the working class, enough to say this openly.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Z, I have to agree with you on the nature of Stalinism, but while doing so, it is equally clear to me that it us Trotskyists who are among the most sectarian of Marxists, and with the least success to boast about, too.

These two are not unconnected.

[Die Neue Zeit]

To recap what I said on your profile page: combining revolutionary rhetoric in writings and opportunism in practice is what characterizes all centrists.

OK, so what kind of immediate reforms do you suggest then (assuming you have an orthodox position on the Transitional Programme and still fight for "minimum" demands)? :confused:

Please, please prove my "opportunism." :glare:

[Yehuda Stern]

I would expect a person who blabs as much at you about the need to not be dogmatic to know that no Marxist attempts to think up immediate minimum demands that would apply anywhere and everywhere. Minimum demands are conditioned by the level of class struggle and the consciousness of the workers, i.e. what they are capable of and are willing to fight for in any given time. From this perspective, asking me what minimum demands I make in general is nonsense.

Your opportunism in this case, by the way, stems not from the minimum or transitional demands you made, but in your suggestion that different left groups should forget about their differences in order to build up some hybrid 'party' (which would in reality be a multi-tendency front). Otherwise your accusation of 'sectarianism' makes little sense (though admittedly, the same can be said either way).

[Die Neue Zeit]

I would expect a person who blabs as much at you about the need to not be dogmatic to know that no Marxist attempts to think up immediate minimum demands that would apply anywhere and everywhere. Minimum demands are conditioned by the level of class struggle and the consciousness of the workers, i.e. what they are capable of and are willing to fight for in any given time. From this perspective, asking me what minimum demands I make in general is nonsense.

Not necessarily, considering the "social-democratic" competition for such demands. Try these instead:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/program-new-type-t83818/index.html
http://www.revleft.com/vb/32-hour-workweek-t88097/index.html
http://www.revleft.com/vb/worker-buyouts-t88629/index.html


Your opportunism in this case, by the way, stems not from the minimum or transitional demands you made, but in your suggestion that different left groups should forget about their differences in order to build up some hybrid 'party' (which would in reality be a multi-tendency front). Otherwise your accusation of 'sectarianism' makes little sense (though admittedly, the same can be said either way).

Um, mine isn't a mere front in any way. Lots of "unity" causes are unprincipled, but not this one:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/basic-principles-t87418/index.html

[Yehuda Stern]

Unity on the basis of anything but political agreement is a lie. Call it whatever you want - you are suggesting a political bloc.

[Winter]

You are missing the class character of stalinism. We can't all sit down and work it out with the Stalinists through rational science, because the aims of the ideolgoy are different. Stalinism doesn't want communism to work, it is an ideology which represent the interests of the working class' bureaucracy - i.e. in the trade unions and the reformist parties/movements, and it's job is to contain and control the class struggle at every turn, in the name of doing the work of the particular section of the bourgeoisie which it happens to be working for at the time. At it's most radical, i.e. when despite the efforts of the Stalinists, the working class grows strong enough to overthrow the bourgeosie, then Stalinism exists to contain this within one country and to keep it under the control of the bureaucracy. A bureaucratic stalinist state is the most stalinism aspires to - and in most cases not even this.

I repeat, you can't sit down and "work out" the way to acheive your common goals with an enemy who you don't share common goals with. The Communist Party in Argentina, the PC, supported the 1976 miltiary coup, claiming that this could help the defence of natural resources. This coup led to the deaths of 30 000 leftists and the crushing of the labour movement. The Maoists, the PCR, didn't support the coup, but did support urging the working class to uphold the previous government, of Isabela Peron, which was managing the Argentine Anticommunist Alliance and abducting, torturing and murdering around a thousand leftists under her rule. But the Maosits suppotted this government, and its attacks on wages and rights, in the name of supposedly strengthening some kind of "national project" which could lead to greater independence from imperialism.

So tell me seriously, you agree with inviting these people into a classist party, a revolutionary party? When they haveproved themselves complicit to the murder of revolutionaries and attacks on workers wages and rights? Are you serious?

As for sectarianism - what would be sectarian would be for me not to respect well-intentioned Stalinist ground level activists, or the working class, enough to say this openly.

This quote I came across sums up my feelings perfectly:




Dwalters provides perfect evidence for why we Maoists refer to
the best of the Trotskyists as Christians--principled people
with certain ideals that they worship instead of people with
a science of how to get to communism. Indeed, here we see that
the dwalters kind of Trotskyism is a 20th century version
of Anglo-Saxon individualism (a.k.a. Protestantism).
Like the Protestants, dwalters tells us that we should be concerned
with individuals, not classes. Hence, dwalters tells us that
Stalin was a "grey blur" compared with Trotsky's flashy leadership
in the Russian Revolution. He fails to understand that Marxist
materialists do not care about such individual differences, only
what line and corresponding strategy advances the cause of the
international proletariat. That means formulating a line on classes,
nations and genders (gasp gasp).

After starting with the importance of the individual's
possibilities of reaching God (a.k.a. "principles" in Trotskyist
language), dwalters goes on to name Stalinist history profanity
based on its failure to live up to God's will (a.k.a. "principles").
What he fails to notice is that while Trotskyists were
mouthing principles, IN PRACTICE, it was the Trotskyists
who fell more egrigiously in front of the almighty goals of
communist revolution.

The Christians have been telling us to feed the hungry etc.
for 2000 years, but the lot of them never notice what happens
to Christianity in practice. It gets no where.
The Trotskyists tell us the principle of socialism is carried
out in world revolution, not one country at a time. They think
they are really saying something brilliant with this, but they
haven't noticed that IN PRACTICE (a.k.a history, the material
world, reality) it has been the Stalinists who have led
revolutions in more than one country (simultaneously in the midst
of World War II in Albania, China, Vietnam and elsewhere with
varying degrees of success). The Trotskyists meanwhile have
complained without accomplishing a single revolution, unless
you count the Russian Revolution, which would be one revolution
in one country.

So like any idealist or Christian, Trotskyists have their
litany of crimes that they recite. Dwalters points to Shanghai
in 1927, the rise of the Nazis, Greece, Spain and Vietnam.
1. What did the Trotskyists do to stop the massacre in Shanghai?
Answer: nothing. They didn't even get to the stage of CONSIDERING
the strategic and tactical questions that the Stalinists had
to confront in Shanghai. The Trotskyists mouthed off in principle
like the anarchists, but demonstrated no superior practice. So
once again, in Shanghai in 1927, as in the rest of the world,
Trotskyism amounted to an ideology of the status quo.
2. What did the Trotskyists do to stop the rise of Hitler?
Answer: aid the Nazis (in effect if not always in intentions).
The last straw that caused the Bolshevik Central Committee
to purge Trotsky and stop putting up with his undisciplined
activities was his Clemenceau declaration.

At the time of this declaration, Trotsky was trying to enlist
the support of various military officers in the Red Army. Trotsky
then said in the summer of 1927 (twice and without repentance)
that he would support invading armies in order to wrest
control of the Soviet government from Stalin. He hoped to gain
control of the Soviet government just before the invaders
reached Moscow. (Those invaders turned out to be the Nazis.)
To this day, I don't think you are going to find many people
who think it is sensible to have a Civil War before or during
an imperialist invasion. The Central Committee demanded Trotsky's
discipline within the party, but Trotsky would have nothing
of democratic centralism, which is the fundamental rule of
a Leninist party. Not surprisingly, the would-be Protestant
leader put himself above the party with all the noisy
justificatons of his individual superiority to Stalin.

Not surprisingly, the Central Committee appreciated Stalin's
quiet Central Committee level work, work that was over
a long period of time and in clandestine conditions. Dwalters
makes it sound like Stalin personally and individually
managed a military assault on the "Old Bolsheviks," once
again demonstrating his incapacity for anything but
Christian moralizing about individuals. We Marxists believe
that classes make history and that various LINES won out
inside the Bolshevik party.

(For more on Trotsky's Clemenceau Declaration, read pro-
Trotsky scholar Isaac Deutscher, including page 310 of
Stalin: A Political Biography).

While Stalin was working hard in jobs assigned to him by the
party and taking on ever more bureaucratic responsibility,
Trotsky and Trotskyists were claiming their personal superiority
for rule. When it came time to act in unity through democratic
centralism, Trotsky did what he knew would cause his expulsion
from the party. For that matter, in the late 1930s, when Hitler
was making his moves all across Europe, instead of calling for
a united effort and instead of lending every effort to support
military work against Hitler, Trotsky was calling again for
civil war to overthrow Stalin.

We believe that Stalin was right to have Trotsky
assassinated once Hitler did start his invasions of
bordering countries. It is clear that Trotsky was willing
to come to power at the front of a Nazi army. Trotsky
had no use to the proletariat. He was all principled talk
and unprincipled action.

3. Vietnam. Trotskyists have never had a chance of leading
a Third World revolution because they have opposed guerrilla
warfare and because they believe feudal modes of production
can be changed directly to socialist modes of production, as
long as the Third World waits for the West.

In any case, after seeing what the Trotskyists were up to
in Europe, it does not surprise anyone who is serious about
social change that Ho saw the Trotskyists as enemies to be
wiped out. By 1945, it was clear that Trotskyism had nothing
concrete to contribute to fighting Nazism and fascism and
everything to do with dividing the proletariat.

Armchair Trotskyists can talk about principles, but people
who are risking their lives in revolutionary struggle against
colonialism and fascism are rightly going to view Trotskyists
as enemies, especially in 1945. (We make more allowances for
the 1992 situation in the United States because we realize
that the youth are not informed of the historical context in
which Trotskyism became anathema to the proletariat.)

4 and 5. Spain and Greece. What Trotskyist governments gave
aid to the proletarian forces in Spain and Greece? Answer:
none.

Stalin's government was the only government to lend any material
aid to the forces fighting Franco in Spain. Again given the
irresponsible attitude of Trotsky previously demonstrated in
terms of his willingness to abide an invasion of the Soviet Union,
and given the history of the anarchists' INITIATING fighting (that
they lost in Krondstadt and the Ukraine), the Stalinists had no
reason to especially trust the Trots and anarchists in Spain. From
every act in history they had every reason to think that the
Trots and anarchists would go on screwing up chances at revolution
just as they have in every country in the world this century.
In any case, the mistakes of the Stalinist line are the mistakes
of a line with some proven effectiveness, whereas the Trotskyist
and anarchist line have no proof on their side of effectiveness,
only religious-type reasoning to back them up.

Spain and Greece are also interesting in terms of how the idealists
treat individuals once again. As in Christian theology the Devil is
a powerful actor, so it seems that Stalin sitting in the Kremlin had
divine powers to screw up revolutions thousands of miles away,
according to the hard-core Trots.

We can also thank Trotsky for using the term "totalitarianism" in
connection to both Hitler and Stalin. Stalin the bogeyman puts
down revolutions just as Mao did later according to the Trots.
But the Trots don't understand the difference between words and
action or diplomacy and armed struggle. Stalin did not have the
option of forcing the Greek communists to lay down their arms.
Nor Indonesia by Mao for that matter. If President Gonzalo in
Peru says we should lay down our arms, do you really think
it matters?

Stalin made an agreement with the World War II victors on
how to divide up Europe. He made revolution in several countries
just as the Trots had been howling for him to do all along.
That is why his policy toward Greece was what it was. It does not
say a thing about the necessity for revolutionaries abroad to
listen to Stalin, Mao or anyone else engaged in diplomacy and
Stalin and Mao were always the first to point that out.

[Hit The North]

I'm sorry Winter but the article you quote is sheer bullshit and a good example of how lies and slander are used to increase the sectarianism in the workers movement.

First this:
At the time of this declaration, Trotsky was trying to enlist
the support of various military officers in the Red Army. Trotsky
then said in the summer of 1927 (twice and without repentance)
that he would support invading armies in order to wrest
control of the Soviet government from Stalin.Is a lie with no corroborating evidence.

Secondly this:
It is clear that Trotsky was willing
to come to power at the front of a Nazi army. Clear from what evidence? Again this is another lie.

Thirdly, the article begins by accusing Trotskyists of being individualists and ends with this classic piece of 'great man history':

He [Stalin] made revolution in several countries...Yeah, no need for the proletariat to do get involved, just leave it to Great Comrade Stalin! Now, remind me where Marx and Engels claimed that "The emancipation of the working class must be the act of comrade Stalin himself."

This shows that the author is not only a slanderer and a liar, but also intellectually inept.

If this sums up your "feelings", I feel sorry for you and ashamed of you in equal measure.

Let's hope Project Kasama has more to offer than this. :rolleyes:

[Zurdito]

Thanks Winter for the comedy.:lol: Have you ever read anything by Trotsky?

Also I think you'll find that Trotskyists have been part of many third world revolutions. Being murdered afterwards by the bureaucracy doesn't mean they weren't there in the first place. Talk about revisionism eh.:rolleyes:

[Die Neue Zeit]

Back on topic:


Unity on the basis of anything but political agreement is a lie. Call it whatever you want - you are suggesting a political bloc.

Again, what in the links above suggest the absence of principled "political agreement"? As for "political blocs," go call the massive reformist and liberal parties that. :lol:

[Yehuda Stern]

They aren't blocs - as bad as they are from a revolutionary point of view, at least they don't have to lie about their politics to get their size.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ OK, so how does my suggestion involve "lying about our politics," especially when it's clear that each tendency will act like a faction (some agreements but also clear disagreements beyond the fundamental principles)? Unless you're in agreement with the Bolshevik ban on factions, that is...

[chegitz guevara]

You are missing the class character of stalinism

The problem with this statement is that you treat Stalinism as monolithic, when it is as riven by different classes and individuals and ideologies as Trotskyism. Clearly, in the US, the CPUSA is utterly useless, reactionary, and hostile to any attempt to free the worker class from the grip of the Democratic Party.

But there is a revolutionary wing of the CPUSA, of comrades who sincerely believe that Stalin was not merely a revolutionary, but the democratic expression of the worker class in the USSR. They don't support him because they are "yay, mass murder and dictatorship!" The Hoxhaists are the same. You cannot win these comrades over by shouting at them that they are counter-revolutionary supporters of a mass murdering dictatorship any more than they will win you over by calling you CIA backed fascist-wreckers. They want the same thing we want and they do the same work we do.


We can't all sit down and work it out with the Stalinists through rational science, because the aims of the ideolgoy are different.Solidarity seems to be be able to do so with FRSO and LRNA. Workers World did it when it convinced some Maoist comrades to join them. Yours is a pessimistic outlook. It is difficult to be pessimistic and a revolutionary.


Stalinism doesn't want communism to work, it is an ideology which represent the interests of the working class' bureaucracy - i.e. in the trade unions and the reformist parties/movements, and it's job is to contain and control the class struggle at every turn, in the name of doing the work of the particular section of the bourgeoisie which it happens to be working for at the time.There are Trotskyist groups that are just as bad. Pretty much the whole USec tendency seems to be thoroughly reformist and opportunist. Let us declare that there is nothing to be gained by talking with Trotskyists then. What does that leave us?


At it's most radical, i.e. when despite the efforts of the Stalinists, the working class grows strong enough to overthrow the bourgeosie, then Stalinism exists to contain this within one country and to keep it under the control of the bureaucracy. A bureaucratic stalinist state is the most stalinism aspires to - and in most cases not even this.Maoism was quite the internationalist movement and still is today. I dare say that Maoists have done more to spread revolutionary world wide than any other tendency. Maoists are Stalinists. Thus, at least one aspect of Stalinism is, in real, practical terms, more revolutionary than Trotskyism, as they've actually accomplished revolutions. Furthermore, the Stalinists in the Vietnamese revolution (who were not Maoists) worked to spread the revolution throughout South East Asia.


The Communist Party in Argentina, the PC, supported the 1976 miltiary coup, claiming that this could help the defence of natural resources. This coup led to the deaths of 30 000 leftists and the crushing of the labour movement. The Maoists, the PCR, didn't support the coup, but did support urging the working class to uphold the previous government, of Isabela Peron, which was managing the Argentine Anticommunist Alliance and abducting, torturing and murdering around a thousand leftists under her rule. But the Maosits suppotted this government, and its attacks on wages and rights, in the name of supposedly strengthening some kind of "national project" which could lead to greater independence from imperialism.I'm not an Argentinian. I don't argue my idea is universal. Certainly there are groups and individuals we simply are not going to be able to work with. There are definitely American Stalinists, Maoists, and anarchists, as well as Trotskyists, Luxemburgists, Council Communists, and Social Democrats with whom I can do good political work. At the same time I'm doing this, I can show them that Trotskyism isn't inherently sectarian and try and win them, if not to my particular perspective, then at least to a position where they don't automatically reject work with other comrades.


So tell me seriously, you agree with inviting these people into a classist party, a revolutionary party? When they haveproved themselves complicit to the murder of revolutionaries and attacks on workers wages and rights? Are you serious?In the United States, the Trotskyist movement is almost completely white. It is largely composed of college students and former college students. Maoism has shown an exceptional ability to expand beyond, not merely the white male college student, but the white working class. Many Maoist groups and Stalinist groups have a very significant portion of workers of color. I'd really like to know how that was accomplished. Do you think I'll learn that by sitting on the outside and throwing stones or by overcoming my own sectarianism and going and learning from them. The anarchist movement in the U.S. has shown an amazing ability to organize youth. I'd like to learn that also. I'm not going to learn from them by telling them that the only way to make a revolution is for them to stop doing what's working for them and to come follow my answers written down 70 years ago.

I'm a rebel, not an acolyte. If other comrades who don't follow my perfect ideas are doing something successful, maybe I should learn from them, rather than tell them they're doing it all wrong. I want to make a revolution, not a another cult of Trotsky.


As for sectarianism - what would be sectarian would be for me not to respect well-intentioned Stalinist ground level activists, or the working class, enough to say this openly.Where has this approach led besides continued diminishment of our movement and failure? At what point will this seven decade old policy that has resulted in nothing but failure magically work?

[chegitz guevara]

Unity on the basis of anything but political agreement is a lie. Call it whatever you want - you are suggesting a political bloc.

So Lenin was a liar?

[Yehuda Stern]

OK, so how does my suggestion involve "lying about our politics," especially when it's clear that each tendency will act like a faction (some agreements but also clear disagreements beyond the fundamental principles)?

When we clearly disagree with each other, but you still suggest that we all unite, that unity is a lie. To be at the same party together is to mislead the workers. In fact, that you recognize that we will still have differences makes you even more hypocritical than the common opportunists, who at least want to try to make the differences go away.


But there is a revolutionary wing of the CPUSA, of comrades who sincerely believe that Stalin was not merely a revolutionary, but the democratic expression of the worker class in the USSR. They don't support him because they are "yay, mass murder and dictatorship!" The Hoxhaists are the same. You cannot win these comrades over by shouting at them that they are counter-revolutionary supporters of a mass murdering dictatorship any more than they will win you over by calling you CIA backed fascist-wreckers.

Well, anyone who thinks that these mass murderers are great democrats and Marxists is no way a revolutionary. And I certainly have no interest in "winning him over."


Thus, at least one aspect of Stalinism is, in real, practical terms, more revolutionary than Trotskyism, as they've actually accomplished revolutions.

That is such a bullshit argument. The Stalinists have made their revolutions only after the workers were crushed, only after there was no danger to the Stalinists themselves, so that they can rule over and oppress the workers. How is this revolutionary? It is the most cynical exploitation of a revolutionary movement!


In the United States, the Trotskyist movement is almost completely white. It is largely composed of college students and former college students. Maoism has shown an exceptional ability to expand beyond, not merely the white male college student, but the white working class.

It has - in the 70s. At the dawn of the 21st century, however, other than the remnants from the past (which the Trotskyist groups have too), Maoism is as much white student based as any other left group.


So Lenin was a liar?

I am certain that you had thought this to be an incredibly smart remark, but I fail to see the wisdom in it. The answer is no, by the way.

[INDK]

To the OP;

Sectarianism isn't just a cop out label given to the opposition like how you've put it, Sectarianism, for me and for most people on this board is an aggressive and verbally abusive opposition to a person based on their ideology. Now, I'm not saying by this that Anti-Fascism, for example, is Sectarian. I help myself differentiate Sectarianism and opposition through the word; 'Sectarianism'. The base word is 'Sect', which helps me remember that 'Sectarianism' is a an aggressive and biased opposition, such as verbal abuse or insults without political backing though based on political affiliation, towards someone in your own political 'sect', such as revolutionary leftism or whatever.

So if an Anarchist spits at and curses at a Fascist on the street, that's because that's polar opposites in political affiliation and is aggressive opposition. But if an Anarchist is aggressive to a Trotskyist because they're a trotskyist and does things like icepick jokes, etc. that can be considered sectarianism. As a matter of fact, look at the member 'icepick'. That is a classic example of a sectarian. Look at his anti-Trotskyist posts and you'll understand the difference.

I know this post is kind of all over the place but I can't word it very well... I hope it's at least understandable...

[Yehuda Stern]

No, I'd say you're pretty wrong. There's nothing wrong with having enmity for a person for his political positions. The problem with sectarianism is that it detaches revolutionaries from the mass movement, thus isolating them and preventing them from being able to reach revolutionary minded people. Sectarianism isn't not participating in farces like the Socialist Alliances or other fronts - it's refusing to talk to a person because he belongs to a rival left group, or to refuse to participate in actions not organized by your group.

[Die Neue Zeit]

When we clearly disagree with each other, but you still suggest that we all unite, that unity is a lie. To be at the same party together is to mislead the workers. In fact, that you recognize that we will still have differences makes you even more hypocritical than the common opportunists, who at least want to try to make the differences go away.

So the Bolsheviks were hypocritical and misled the workers by co-existing with the Bund, the liquidationist Mensheviks, the pro-party Mensheviks, and conciliationists like Trotsky?

[redarmyfaction38]

You are missing the class character of stalinism. We can't all sit down and work it out with the Stalinists through rational science, because the aims of the ideolgoy are different. Stalinism doesn't want communism to work, it is an ideology which represent the interests of the working class' bureaucracy - i.e. in the trade unions and the reformist parties/movements, and it's job is to contain and control the class struggle at every turn, in the name of doing the work of the particular section of the bourgeoisie which it happens to be working for at the time. At it's most radical, i.e. when despite the efforts of the Stalinists, the working class grows strong enough to overthrow the bourgeosie, then Stalinism exists to contain this within one country and to keep it under the control of the bureaucracy. A bureaucratic stalinist state is the most stalinism aspires to - and in most cases not even this.

I repeat, you can't sit down and "work out" the way to acheive your common goals with an enemy who you don't share common goals with. The Communist Party in Argentina, the PC, supported the 1976 miltiary coup, claiming that this could help the defence of natural resources. This coup led to the deaths of 30 000 leftists and the crushing of the labour movement. The Maoists, the PCR, didn't support the coup, but did support urging the working class to uphold the previous government, of Isabela Peron, which was managing the Argentine Anticommunist Alliance and abducting, torturing and murdering around a thousand leftists under her rule. But the Maosits suppotted this government, and its attacks on wages and rights, in the name of supposedly strengthening some kind of "national project" which could lead to greater independence from imperialism.

So tell me seriously, you agree with inviting these people into a classist party, a revolutionary party? When they haveproved themselves complicit to the murder of revolutionaries and attacks on workers wages and rights? Are you serious?

As for sectarianism - what would be sectarian would be for me not to respect well-intentioned Stalinist ground level activists, or the working class, enough to say this openly.

that's the point surely? soz, last paragraph of your post, dismissing individual comrades because of their membership of this or that reformist/stalinist party is not constructive.
personal experience should teach all of us that despite the "party line" most activists actually work quite happily together in common cause.
it is only when individuals put party interest or self interest to the fore that the divisions we all despise comne to the fore. imo.

[redarmyfaction38]

oops, will you define "the class character of stalinism" please.

[chegitz guevara]

Well, anyone who thinks that these mass murderers are great democrats and Marxists is no way a revolutionary. And I certainly have no interest in "winning him over."

This is an idealist and dogmatic position. For you, unity is based on adherence to a particular set of ideas (and a particular interpretation of those ideas) rather than the material fact that these people want to overthrow capitalism and establish proletarian democracy and in their own way, are working towards it. Your sectarianism separates you from from people who are far closer to your point of view than anyone else. If you have no interest in winning over people who call themselves communists, who could you possibly have an interest in winning over, except people who already agree with you. You are proclaiming your sectarianism and saying you're proud to be a sectarian. And then you wonder why others call Trotskyists enemies of the working class?


That is such a bullshit argument. The Stalinists have made their revolutions only after the workers were crushed, only after there was no danger to the Stalinists themselves, so that they can rule over and oppress the workers. How is this revolutionary? It is the most cynical exploitation of a revolutionary movement!

Maybe if you spent less time reading the pamphlets that your group gave you, and more time actually studying real world revolutions, you could move to a scientific and materialist viewpoint, instead of your faith based idealism. This is an utterly false statement. In Cuba, for example, it was the general strike that overthrew Batista and made the revolution. A workers revolution brought Stalinists to power.


It has - in the 70s.

Coming from a movement that hasn't learned anything since the 1930s, that's a laugh. When you can catch up to the 70s, that would be a major advance. From there, you can try and join us in the 21st Century.


At the dawn of the 21st century, however, other than the remnants from the past (which the Trotskyist groups have too), Maoism is as much white student based as any other left group.

Well, there is a reason why IS is referred to as the International Students. You might consider learning from older comrades sometime.

And there are still Black Maoist groups in the United States.


I am certain that you had thought this to be an incredibly smart remark, but I fail to see the wisdom in it. The answer is no, by the way.

Lenin's organization did not unite with others on the basis of political agreement but on the basis of democracy. You might want to pick up a book your own tendency is publishing, Lenin Rediscovered, and learn something.

[Led Zeppelin]

So the Bolsheviks were hypocritical and misled the workers by co-existing with the Bund, the liquidationist Mensheviks, and (albeit) conciliatory pro-party Mensheviks like Trotsky?

Trotsky hadn't been a Menshevik for over a decade when he joined the Bolsheviks....

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ My mistake. :( The conciliationist label still applies, though.

[Yehuda Stern]

So the Bolsheviks were hypocritical and misled the workers by co-existing with the Bund, the liquidationist Mensheviks, the pro-party Mensheviks, and conciliationists like Trotsky?

Co-existing? One can't help "co-exist" with other left groups, but we're talking about organizational unity.


And then you wonder why others call Trotskyists enemies of the working class?


I don't "wonder" why reformists hate revolutionaries.


You might want to pick up a book your own tendency is publishing, Lenin Rediscovered, and learn something.

Look, you obviously believe yourself to be pretty smart. Well, wise up - I don't know what tendency you speak of, but I am not a member of any tendency.

[chegitz guevara]

My mistake. I thought I saw somewhere you mentioned you were in the IS tendency.

[chegitz guevara]

Trotsky hadn't been a Menshevik for over a decade when he joined the Bolsheviks....

Actually, it was worse than that. Trotsky led only his little sectlet of a handful of people. One shouldn't hold this against him. He saw his error and corrected it long before it became obvious the Bolsheiks would be leading a revolution in Russia.

Interesting Trivia point. Comrade Trotsky was an actual member of my party, the Socialist Party, when he was living in Brooklyn. :trotski:

[Zurdito]

The problem with this statement is that you treat Stalinism as monolithic, when it is as riven by different classes and individuals and ideologies as Trotskyism. Clearly, in the US, the CPUSA is utterly useless, reactionary, and hostile to any attempt to free the worker class from the grip of the Democratic Party.

But there is a revolutionary wing of the CPUSA, of comrades who sincerely believe that Stalin was not merely a revolutionary, but the democratic expression of the worker class in the USSR. They don't support him because they are "yay, mass murder and dictatorship!"


Subjectively revolutioanry yes. I don´t think most ground level stalinist activists have bad intentions, but that´s not the point. I don´t think you can work with the leadership on most issues. Also you can´t exaggerate the extent to which the militants are revolutioanry. I believe they want a better world, but I´m against the vague metaphysical attitude that deep down they want the same thing as Trotskyists, but that they don´t yet know it. No. They want socialism in one country. They want what existed in the Soviet Union and will fight to create that. I am prepared to argue on the basis that they want as a final goal a stateless classles global communist society and that stalinism is not the best way to acheive that. IT would be sectarian to refuse to have that argument with stalinist ground-level militants. In fact I do ocnstantly argue with the Maoist base members here. But the point is that whatever they might want in some distant future, today int he here and now they consciously fight for the interests of a section of the bourgeoisie and for the bureaucracy, and against many of the struggles of the existing vanguard, in order to hold up their particular borugeois ally of the time. I thinkt hat´s a problem. Don´t you?

Also by tellignme stalinism is not monolothic: the point I was making was that the ideolgoy has a class character. Most Stalinists are not bureaucrats or bourgeois, obviosuly. And most reformists aren´t either. But I am tlaking about the intetions of the leasership and the interests which the ideology serves.


The Hoxhaists are the same. You cannot win these comrades over by shouting at them that they are counter-revolutionary supporters of a mass murdering dictatorship any more than they will win you over by calling you CIA backed fascist-wreckers.

I don´t do that, I never said I did. I say that their leadership is that.


They want the same thing we want and they do the same work we do.

On some issues. In many cases this is not true. As I said above, it´s easy to want "comunism" as the end goal. Int he immediate often they work for very different things.



Solidarity seems to be be able to do so with FRSO and LRNA. Workers World did it when it convinced some Maoist comrades to join them. Yours is a pessimistic outlook. It is difficult to be pessimistic and a revolutionary.


I don´t have a pessimistic outlook at all, but I try to make realistic assessments of reality according to what I live and what I read. I don´t think stalinist and maoist activists are that importan to the future of a revolutionary movement, I think the working class vanguard is, and in no country today (except maybe Nepal) do stalinists or maoists lead the working class vanguard.


There are Trotskyist groups that are just as bad. Pretty much the whole USec tendency seems to be thoroughly reformist and opportunist. Let us declare that there is nothing to be gained by talking with Trotskyists then. What does that leave us?

Lots of self-proclaimed trotskyists groups are not owrht talkign to. Hoenstly, I judge a group by what it does and not by what it calls itself. Many "trotskyist" groups I know in no way resemble anything Trotsky wrote or did, and today are no more than tools used by the bourgeosie to attack workers. Like trotsko-chavistas who call to vote for Chavez.



Maoism was quite the internationalist movement and still is today. I dare say that Maoists have done more to spread revolutionary world wide than any other tendency. Maoists are Stalinists. Thus, at least one aspect of Stalinism is, in real, practical terms, more revolutionary than Trotskyism, as they've actually accomplished revolutions. Furthermore, the Stalinists in the Vietnamese revolution (who were not Maoists) worked to spread the revolution throughout South East Asia.


Maoists tookt he leadershi of those revolutions yes, but then what happened? Would you have fought against or for the brueaucracy back then, if you had been there? Simplyasked, which side are you on?


I'm not an Argentinian. I don't argue my idea is universal. Certainly there are groups and individuals we simply are not going to be able to work with. There are definitely American Stalinists, Maoists, and anarchists, as well as Trotskyists, Luxemburgists, Council Communists, and Social Democrats with whom I can do good political work

I´ll work with any rank and file individual who wants to join a common front on a progressive cause. Honestly, I have worked with people who class themselves as maoists, stalinsits, anarchists, reformists, trotskyists, reofrmists, populist. This is not the same as telling lies to beautify their leadership.



In the United States, the Trotskyist movement is almost completely white. It is largely composed of college students and former college students. Maoism has shown an exceptional ability to expand beyond, not merely the white male college student, but the white working class.


"exceptional"? I don´t argue it might have more implantation than trotskyism, but really are you sure they have "exceptional" implantation?


Many Maoist groups and Stalinist groups have a very significant portion of workers of color. I'd really like to know how that was accomplished. Do you think I'll learn that by sitting on the outside and throwing stones or by overcoming my own sectarianism and going and learning from them.

I think you would learn by talking to vanguard workers and fighters against racism, and preferably working amongstthem. HowveerI don´t see what this has to do with telling lies about Maoism or its historical role or the current reactionary roleof its leadership. these really are two different questions.


I'm a rebel, not an acolyte. If other comrades who don't follow my perfect ideas are doing something successful, maybe I should learn from them, rather than tell them they're doing it all wrong. I want to make a revolution, not a another cult of Trotsky.

I also want to make a reovlution and not another cult of trotsky (or mao or stalin), and this is why I know from firt hand struggle that stalinism is counter revolutionary and helps the bourgeosie repress the vanguard. You can talk about "cult of trotsky" all you want, but Trotsky´s theoretical work simply continued the Bolshevik tradition against Menshevik stalinism, and he was ismply the leader of an international opposition which was based on debate and demosntrating its arguments clearly. When I talk about trotskyism that is the tradition I refer to and it stretches back to Marx and Engels. It really is ntoihng to do with a personality cult, and if you htink so, you can search through all my posts and find where I refer to trotsky in that way.


Where has this approach led besides continued diminishment of our movement and failure? At what point will this seven decade old policy that has resulted in nothing but failure magically work?

Actually, this approach hasn´t been the approach of most "trotskyists" at all,a nd you would have a hard time showing that the historical defeat of the working class revolution had anything to do with trotskyists being too critical of stalinists. It looks to me that all you ar ehtinking of is the best way to gai a few members in the US, and if this means being an apologist for Stalin or Mao or Castro or god knows who, you will do so just for the sake of being partof a slightly bigger movement. Personally I don´t think that´s a serious argument. Even if it did help you grow I wouldn´t agree, but I doubt it, because in reality most progressive and vanguard workers hate Stalinism, and their association of it with "communism" is one of the main things turning them away from the far left.

[Zurdito]

Jacob: demands depend on the realityof the time. For example in bolivia today I think it would be appropriate to demand the immediate expropriation of the Cruzeño oligarchy, under workers control.

[Led Zeppelin]

Actually, it was worse than that. Trotsky led only his little sectlet of a handful of people.

Trotsky wasn't "leading his own little sectlet [sic]", he was a conciliator, meaning that he did not formally choose a side between the Bolshevik-Mensheviks factions, because he believed that a rise in the class-struggle would bring them together.

In most theoretical and political issues he was on the side of the Bolsheviks. Read part one of Deutscher's biography on Trotsky for more on this, it's called The Prophet Armed if I recall correctly, it's a great read.

[Tower of Bebel]

The polemical disputes between Lenin and Trotsky were not only based on some misunderstanding but also on the fact that the Bolsheviks saw a serious "threat" in Trotsky and other conciliators: The split between Bolsheviks and Mensheviks in 1912 was handled against the rules set up by the 2nd International (their definition of democratic-centralism even allowed Bernstein and opportunists like Vandervelde to stay, while the Mensheviks were far more revolutionary than Bernstein). The problem with Trotsky - in the eyes of Lenin - was that he created a theoretical foundation to support his position in between both factions. A set of ideas that could possibly undermine Lenin's own theoretical foundations for his actions. So (all of) Trotsky's theories had to be attacked accordingly. Btw, Trotsky was one of the most outstanding revolutionaries, which is another reason for Lenin's polemical assaults.

Lenin proved correct in many aspects, and the practical failure of Trotsky's organizational theories/position made him finally join the Bolsheviks in 1917. Trotsky's outstanding role within the Bolshevik party again confirms the fact that Lenin and Trotsky were not that far apart from each other as some might conclude from early confrontations. So Trotsky came not from a sectarian tradition, though that does not exclude the possibility that some of his theories may provoke sectarianism within parties that follow these theories.

[chegitz guevara]

Let me point to something that I think illustrates the kind of effort we need to get beyond our oft sterile attacks on those who don't share our particular politics. On Kasama, someone made a cheap shot against "Trotskyites." The Kasama comrades not only critiqued it, but elevated the discussion to it's only special section. What I want to emphasize here is that we have Maoists standing up to defend Trotskyism. Obviously they have differences, but that's not the point. The point is that they don't reject Trotskyism.

http://mikeely.wordpress.com/2008/09/11/exploring-a-cheap-shot-on-baiting-trotskyites/

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

CG, I have to say, that Kasama comrades treat me with far more comradely respect than fellow Trotskyists do!

Although they (the former, that is) will argue their corner forcefully, they seem to me to be open to new ideas -- unlike us Trots!:(

[Die Neue Zeit]

The polemical disputes between Lenin and Trotsky were not only based on some misunderstanding but also on the fact that the Bolsheviks saw a serious "threat" in Trotsky and other conciliators: The split between Bolsheviks and Mensheviks in 1912 was handled against the rules set up by the 2nd International (their definition of democratic-centralism even allowed Bernstein and opportunists like Vandervelde to stay, while the Mensheviks were far more revolutionary than Bernstein).

Comrade, there is nothing "revolutionary" whatsoever about trying to dissolve one's party into a broad Labour congress like in Britain. Kautsky wrote about this in Sects or Class Parties (hence my quote in Chapter 6). Even Bernstein-as-revisionist wasn't a liquidationist (I think there's a Lars Lih quote of Bernstein's still-ongoing belief in the merger formula towards the end of Chapter 1 of his book).

[UlyssesTheRed]

I also hate the word. It typically gets thrown around by people who would rather "build a broad tent" rather than have any kind of programmatic clarity. In particular, the ISO (big surprise) clings to this to shut down any serious examination of their operationally pro-imperialist and petit-bourgeois line.