List of Left-Wing Parties in the United States

[The Idler]

I have begun a List of Left-Wing Parties in the United States on Anarchopedia. (http://eng.anarchopedia.org/List_of_Left-Wing_Parties_in_the_United_States) It needs cleaning up as the ideologies are wrong.

[Revy]

You should have linked it. Here it is. (http://eng.anarchopedia.org/List_of_Left-Wing_Parties_in_the_United_States)

Yeah, it's not accurate. You put the SPUSA in the Trotskyist parties section, along with the SWP which dropped Trotskyism long ago. You put the ISO in the Stalinist/Maoist section, along with the Socialist Labor Party and the International Communist Current (!).

There's a lot of other inaccuracies, too. It might also not be right to have a "Socialist" section, since that's not neutral. You should put DSA in "Reformist", or something like "Liberal/Reformist/Social Democrat".

[The Idler]

Is it just me or are the US parties on the list less inclined to join internationals?

[Q]

Added Socialist Alternative to the list.

[ZeroNowhere]

The SLP aren't multi-tendency. Crud, they even seem to have taken on a mild case of democratic centralism. :(
Anyways, I don't think one could class them as anti-Leninist, and probably not left communist either... I'm not entirely sure if they're anarchist as of now.
Also, CrimethInc are a party?

[Red October]

Someone should add the two Freedom Road Socialist Organization groups.

[The Idler]

Also, CrimethInc are a party?
Not really but they're the closest thing anarchists have to a party (particularly since their Don't Just Vote, Get Active campaign) and I wanted to include at least two anarchist organizations.

[Asoka89]

this list needs a lot of improvement, i'll fix it a bit. the ISO are still trotskyists, and dont call them "International Socialists" that causes confusion. I dont think th

[Pawn Power]

The Democratic Party is Left wing? :blink:

[The Idler]

The Democratic Party is Left wing? :blink:By US standards, perhaps.

[The Idler]

I just found another one called the Revolutionary Communist Party USA (http://revcom.us/) - I'm not sure under which ideology to put this. There is also a website called VelvetRevolution (http://www.velvetrevolution.us) but I don't think it is a political organization so much as a media organization.

[StalinFanboy]

Not really but they're the closest thing anarchists have to a party (particularly since their Don't Just Vote, Get Active campaign) and I wanted to include at least two anarchist organizations.
You should take them off.

[Kassad]

The Party for Socialism and Liberation isn't ex-Trotskyist. It was never a Trotskyist organization.

[GPDP]

I just found another one called the Revolutionary Communist Party USA (http://revcom.us/) - I'm not sure under which ideology to put this. There is also a website called VelvetRevolution (http://www.velvetrevolution.us) but I don't think it is a political organization so much as a media organization.

The RCP is Maoist, afaik.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Actually the RCP isn't a typical "Maoist" party as it is an Avakianite cult. ;)

[PoWR]

The Party for Socialism and Liberation isn't ex-Trotskyist. It was never a Trotskyist organization.

The PSL split from the WWP, which originated as a tendency based around Sam Marcy in the Socialist Workers Party (when it was still calling itself Trotskyist).

"The Marcyites remained uneasily as a faction within the SWP until the USSR's military invasion of Hungary in 1956, which they supported and the SWP denounced. Depending on whose version you believe, the Marcy-Copeland faction either left (Marcy) or was expelled (Cannon), and formed Workers World Party in 1957. The party newspaper banner debuted with a silhouette of Lenin in one corner and Trotsky in the other, bracing the heading, "Colored and White Unite and Fight for a WORKERS WORLD.... the proletarian left wing (New York waterfront, Cleveland industrial, and California lumber) branches of the Communist Party were being expelled, after delivering their anti-Foster/Dennis resolution, 'Our Reply to the Conciliators of Revisionism,' and Harry Haywood's 'For a Revolutionary Position on the Negro Question' [Black Belt self-determination]. When that group established the Provisional Organizing Committee to Reconstitute a Marxist-Leninist Communist Party in the United States, WW ran a friendly headline directed to them, 'Welcome, Comrades!'.... The POC paper, Marxist-Leninist Vanguard, retorted, 'Trotskyism is Counter- Revolution and Nothing Else!' Smarting at that, the Lenin and Trotsky busts disappeared from the WW paper, never to return, and virtually all mention of Trotsky vanished forever from its pages." http://www.marxmail.org/archives/january99/wwp.htm

[Kassad]

PoWR, I am aware, but that would make Workers World ex-Trotskyist, since the Party for Socialism and Liberation never claimed to be a part of a Trotskyist tendency itself.

[The Idler]

Where would the Workers Party in America (http://www.workers-party.com/) go?

[Atlanta]

Is it just me or are the US parties on the list less inclined to join internationals?

Well the fact its illigal makes it difficult.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Correction: It's illegal to personally join an international, but it's perfectly legal for some national organization to affiliate itself or become "sections" of some international.

[Ephydriad]

The USA Republican party, obviously, what with the way they suddenly are deciding to socialise banks...
:rolleyes: when capitalism starts to rip off socialism to help concentrate wealth, you know it's time for a change...

[Crux]

Correction: It's illegal to personally join an international, but it's perfectly legal for some national organization to affiliate itself or become "sections" of some international.
Wait...what?

[The Idler]

Wait...what?It would seem the Republican Party are internationally affiliated to the International Democrat Union.

[ZeroNowhere]

The USA Republican party, obviously, what with the way they suddenly are deciding to socialise banks...
:rolleyes: when capitalism starts to rip off socialism to help concentrate wealth, you know it's time for a change...
Except that that has... Nothing to do with socialism? At all?

[Crux]

It would seem the Republican Party are internationally affiliated to the International Democrat Union.
Of course they are. But..it's illegal to join an international as in an individual in the USA? that's a pretty weird law.

[The Idler]

Of course they are. But..it's illegal to join an international as in an individual in the USA? that's a pretty weird law.
I looked up Federal laws and found stuff on Wikipedia here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Red_Scare#Laws_and_arrests).
1950 McCarran Internal Security Act (http://tucnak.fsv.cuni.cz/%7Ecalda/Documents/1950s/Inter_Security_50.html) also seems possibly relevant although much of it has been repealed.

[The Idler]

Someone suggested I add Socialist Viewpoint (http://www.socialistviewpoint.org) (seemingly the Socialist Workers Organization or SWO) and Workers Action (http://www.workerscompass.org) but under what categories?

[Red Heretic]

I just found another one called the Revolutionary Communist Party USA (http://revcom.us/) - I'm not sure under which ideology to put this. There is also a website called VelvetRevolution (http://www.velvetrevolution.us) but I don't think it is a political organization so much as a media organization.

The RCP considers it's ideology to be "revolutionary communism as a science"

I put them under communism.

They came out of Maoism, but their ideology has developed out of that, especially with their leader's (Bob Avakian) "new synthesis" of Marxism, that sums up and upholds the majority of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, which making big breaks with the errors of the communist movement in the past.

[AvanteRedGarde]

The RCP considers it's ideology to be "revolutionary communism as a science"

I put them under communism.

They came out of Maoism, but their ideology has developed out of that, especially with their leader's (Bob Avakian) "new synthesis" of Marxism, that sums up and upholds the majority of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, which making big breaks with the errors of the communist movement in the past.

Maoist, as encapsulated in the history of the past, is too small for the informed thought of Bob Avakian. He has in fact elevated Maoist to a new level, one distinct from previous level, yet redundantly similar at the same time. This break, or rupture if you will, is this synthesis not only of the successes of communism, but more importantly of its failures, into an ideology, of a new type, yet which is firmly rooted in familiar errors of the past. Some may call it the 'new synthesis;' some may- refering to the infamous text- called in Enriched What Is To Be Done-ism. More accurately however, it is the what has been most recently described by Avakian, that fundemental shift, happeneing today, which demands our utmost attentions, that sets Avakians work truly apart from all other, even his own from a few years ago. With resorting to needless banter or hyperbole, it is essential that we name this added layer of revolutionary knowledge, both because it represents a new period of struggle that we- they proletarians and makers of history- are entering into but also a new level of revolutionary understanding which we have attained. Again without casting the message to long or exagerating the dire importance, it is important that we raise high this new revolutionary systhesis, that is Maoism-Newly Enriched Bob Avakianism as expressed by Bob Avakian, Chairman of the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA.

http://revcom.us/sped/2009/newlyenriched..ianism.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

The Democratic Party is Left wing? :blink:

Overall, no.

That said, I'd say that there is a left wing (i.e. Kucinich) of that party.

[crashmcbean]

The Socialist Labor Party should be listed as "De Leonist", which isn't an available category. Or as Marxist anti-Leninist, or left communist. The SLP isn't exactly what we'd consider strictly communist today. One major party not on the page (I didn't see it anyway) is the Progressive Labor Party, which *is* communist. Hope this helps.
Thats a great page, with links, good job.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

I'm surprised at the lack of National Anarchist groups in America, American being a country with over 300 million inhabitants you'd expect there to be more. UK has more than the US.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

I mean groups that have members nationally. Groups that have members all around the USA. For example groups in Britain like AFED have members all around. They aren't just a local group. There isn't really a group with much influence like that in USA.

[Jack]

The New union Party and Socialist Labor Party would fall under "DeLeonist". Stalinist/Maoist would work for most of the "Ex-Trotskyist" section.

[Martin Blank]

Someone suggested I add Socialist Viewpoint (http://www.socialistviewpoint.org) (seemingly the Socialist Workers Organization or SWO) and Workers Action (http://www.workerscompass.org) but under what categories?

Trotskyist.

[spritely]

Put them under irrelevant sects that no one outside of leftist trainspotters care or even know about.

[spritely]

The UK is 1/50th the size of America.

[SocialismOrBarbarism]

The Socialist Labor Party should be listed as "De Leonist", which isn't an available category. Or as Marxist anti-Leninist, or left communist. The SLP isn't exactly what we'd consider strictly communist today. One major party not on the page (I didn't see it anyway) is the Progressive Labor Party, which *is* communist. Hope this helps.
Thats a great page, with links, good job.

I know this is off topic, but I was looking at the Progressive Labor Parties website...


Communism means the Party leads every aspect of society. For this to work, millions of workers -- eventually everyone -- must become communist organizers. Join Us! :scared:

[spritely]

A list of swing parties would be more useful than this with the shit state of the "left" in this country.

[OriginalGumby]

International Socialist Organization instead of International Socialist
Our socialistworker.org website is daily now
we are trotskists not multi tendencies

[The Idler]

International Socialist Organization instead of International Socialist
Our socialistworker.org website is daily now
we are trotskists not multi tendenciesBy daily, weekly, monthly and quarterly, I am referring to print editions.


A list of swing parties would be more useful than this with the shit state of the "left" in this country.What are swing parties?

[spritely]

Google is your friend.

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

[Lenin II]

You put the ISO in the Stalinist/Maoist section, along with the Socialist Labor Party and the International Communist Current (!).

Oh, if only. The ISO are trade-unionist Trotskyites, though they renunced Trotsky years ago formally they still bring him up in their meetings. They supported Obama. Hardly Stalinist or Maoist!

[OriginalGumby]

If the SEPs World Socialist Web Site counts as a daily that Socialist Worker should too. They only print out articles from the site as far as I know and we do the same as well as distributing the rest of our lit.

Lenin II: that is a blatant falsehood. We did not support Obama by any stretch of the sect-adled imagination. I don't recall "denouncing" Trotsky but we certainly diverged from his interpretation of the USSR. We still consider to him to be part of the real revolutionary tradition as opposed to stalinism

[OriginalGumby]

In addition the CPUSAs daily is not print either until it comes out of a computer printer from their daily website.

[Jimmie Higgins]

The ISO indirectly supported Obama. They had a celebration in Harlem on the night of the election. They plastered him on the front page of their magazine. They described Obama's election as "a reason to believe that change is possible."


And Newsweek magazine had a cover story proclaiming "We are all socialists now" yet I don't think a worker's council at the Newsweek printers put that issue together.

Reading the articles and understanding the content helps prevent confusion.

The ISO wants to appeal to people who are happy to see bush gone and a black president in a racist country like the US and tell them they are correct to want change but that it won't come from Obama or any president.

The celebration in harlem (and many other cities) was huge and not caused by the ISO. Any revolutionary that would not want to be in Harlem that night talking to working class people about socialism and what it will take for real change and real anti-racism is crazy.

If you think that the ISO is not going about the task of trying figure out how to turn working class expectations for change into class and socialist consiousness correctly, that is one thing, but saying they support Obama explicitly or implissitly is either ignorent or disengenious.

These are serious times, let's get serious comrades.

[Blackscare]

A list of swing parties would be more useful than this with the shit state of the "left" in this country.

Erm.... what? Swing parties? What do you mean? I've heard the term swing voter, but parties? Aren't parties usually based around, you know, a common platform or ideology of some sort? So how on earth would you have a swing party (one that presumably switches allegiance based on circumstances)?


Sounds dumb.

[OriginalGumby]

The ISO indirectly supported Obama. They had a celebration in Harlem on the night of the election. They plastered him on the front page of their magazine. They described Obama's election as "a reason to believe that change is possible."

They have little to do with Trotsky anymore. They could be better described as followers of Tony Cliff.

http://www.isreview.org/issues/61/61.shtml
Read the article it's not supportive, Jesus just look at the cover....

What gravedigger said is right. I was exited at people's excitement about politics. Obama's election represented something more that just the american ruling classes B team in office again. It has changed things for the socialist movement.

I don't know what I think about a Cliff category but we are definitely on broad/multi tendancy like solidarity or like the SPUSA.

[crashmcbean]

The New union Party and Socialist Labor Party would fall under "DeLeonist". Stalinist/Maoist would work for most of the "Ex-Trotskyist" section.

The New Union Party may have espoused DeLeonist views in the past, but not
in years. If the NUP even really still exists is questionable.