Orgs

  1. MarxSchmarx
    MarxSchmarx
    How many of you are members of a bona-fide political group, like some party or tendency? If so, why did you join that group? How do you envision advancing your understanding of Marxism within your organization? If not, why do you eschew organized action at this time?

    I guess I'll start.

    Right now I don't belong to any group.Where I live, there are tons of liberal reformists, a few ineffectual lifestylist groups, and some really freaky political cults. They also had a deep seated hatred of (insert favorite other leftist group) and the same 5 cadre seem to be sworn enemies of another 7 guys in the other group.

    I was actually seriously thinking of linking up with one of the latter until I found out they weren't kidding around when they spoke of their newspaper quotas. They also had pretty non-negotiable stances on drama over the recent splintering of their sister group in Tahiti or something. And I guess I'm sectarian too, because I drew the line at Maoism (sorry, I buy into all the bourgeois propaganda about the cultural revolution and stuff).

    On and off I help out with the lifestylist stuff, but talking class to people, yeah, well, they're life-stylists for a reason. A few of us started a reading circle, but frankly the debate at revleft is more interesting, and the reading circle quickly became an excuse to drink a few bottles of wine every other sunday.

    Why do you suppose there are few serious "luxembourgist" or non-sectarian Marxist tendencies out there? If you are involved in a group, how are you trying to make them more ecunemical? Or is this a lost cause, do we have to start from scratch yet again?
  2. Die Neue Zeit
    Die Neue Zeit
    Comrade I can ask fellow comrade Paul Cockshott (the "Towards a New Socialism" guy) to include you in our e-mail discussions. We are right now working on dynamic-minimum programmatic collaborations (as evidenced by my USL programmatic material). I myself don't belong to any group, either (dunno what happened to Victus ), but I hope my to-be-published CSR gets the ball rolling.

    In my area, there happens to be a pareconist "circle" of sorts.

    You'll note that there's a difference between principles and program, and between agreement and "acceptance."
  3. Tower of Bebel
    Tower of Bebel
    I belong to the Belgian section of the CWI. It's a small grouping, yet the most active of all revolutionary or leftist parties in the region (stretching from the South of Holland to the North of France). I joined because I wanted to join a party of the Bolshevik tradition (after reading Stalin's biography by Trotsky). I didn't care whether it were stalinist or trotskyist, I just joined one.

    And I stayed, because it was the most actively engaged party of all left or revolutionary parties. Of the trotskyists it was the most revolutionary and less opportunist (the Fourth International seems to flirt with the Green party, while the IMT doesn't do anything outside the Socialist Party), of the revolutionaries it was also one of the most democratic groups.

    But I never stayed because of ideological reasons. I'm always too confused. I always seem to get stuck in between trotskyism and another current (stalinism at first, then came left-communism and now it's something totally different).

    edit: actually; I stay because of ideological reasons: although I tend to be influenced by many different currents, Trotsky(ism) has always been one of these influences while other currents (stalinism and left-communism f.e.) were only temporary stops on my road to marxism.
  4. LUXEMBURGUISTA
    LUXEMBURGUISTA
    Contesto en castellano.

    Tras muchos años militando en diversas organizaciones polÃ*ticas, sindicales y sociales, ahora soy militante de un pequeño (muy pequeño) reagrupamiento internacional de militantes luxemburguistas. Está siendo formado por camaradas de Democracia Comunista (como yo mismo), Tribuna Socialista, Workers Democracy Network y otros a tÃ*tulo individual.

    Es luxemburguista porque, en el conjunto de las tradiciones del movimiento obrero, es con la que estamos de acuerdo. Tradicionalmente ha habido muy pocas expresiones organizadas luxemburguistas (aunque sÃ* ha habido algunas muy interesantes). Pero las ideas luxemburguistas (no sólo las de Rosa L) sÃ* han influido en muchos movimientos y organizaciones. Y se han visto demostradas en las grandes luchas de masas que ha habido.

    ¿Por qué ahora decidimos intentar organizarnos? Porque creemos que puede ser un aporte interesante a la lucha por la emancipación del proletariado. Creemos que hoy más que nunca la consigna de la AIT tiene sentido: sólo el proletariado como clase, sin una dirección separada, puede autoemanciparse. Rechazamos por tanto el bolchevismo (en todas sus expresiones). Además, la lucha hoy sólo puede ser internacional, mundial, de manera coherente a la realidad material de un capitalismo mundial. Por eso nos da igual donde estén los camaradas. En todas partes hay que luchar por un objetivo común.

    Consideramos que es preciso huir también del funcionamiento tradicional de los partidos. Nosotros no somos "partido" en el sentido habitual del término (aunque sÃ* lo serÃ*amos en el sentido que Marx diera a esa palabra, como "parte" del conjunto de la clase proletaria). Funcionamos más como una red. Cada uno desarrolla su actividad militante en donde trabaja y en donde vive (esos ámbitos siguen siendo los más importantes). Y nos coordinamos en debates y en las cuestiones que queremos. Con plena autonomÃ*a, sin disciplinas ni nada de eso.

    Ahora mismo nuestros proyectos comunes básicos son el Foro Luxemburguista Internacional (un espacio dedicado expresamente a debatir entre quienes defendemos postulados "luxemburguistas" -hay también camaradas del WSM, la CCI, el CICA y otros-); la edición de un boletÃ*n internacional multilingüe (cuyo primer número esperamos que salga en Octubre); la participación conjunta en las luchas contra las directivas de la Unión Europea; y, sobre todo, la difusión de nuestros postulados y propuestas, porque entendemos que esa labor (teórica y práctica) es lo más básico y fundamental que podemos hacer como grupo.

    Nos da igual ser muy pocos, aunque evidentemente nos gustarÃ*a crecer en número porque permitirÃ*a hacer más cosas. Para nosotros lo importante es la autoactividad de la clase en su conjunto. Por eso tenemos claro que no es la actividad "interna" del grupo lo fundamental, sino la actividad de cada uno en los ámbitos reales de su existencia, junto a los demás proletarios con los que convive diariamente. En eso no somos nada sectarios. En lo concreto colaboramos con todo tipo de proletarios, sin preguntar su afiliación. Pero más allá de lo concreto creemos que sÃ* es posible y conveniente hacer cosas desde una perspectiva "luxemburguista". Sobre todo porque las "uniones" de tendencias, los frentes, demuestran una vez tras otra su inutilidad. Son atajos que el proceso revolucionario no admite. Hay camaradas que participan de otros proyectos más amplios (porque en su entorno los hay y los consideran interesantes) y otros que no lo hacemos. Eso sÃ*: rechazamos (nos repugna) el entrismo o cualquier otra práctica similar. Para nosotros es clave que cada uno pueda desarrollar su praxis de manera autónoma, que no tenga que seguir "órdenes" de ningún comité o cosa parecida. Que cada uno sea un activista con plena capacidad para intervenir en las luchas.

    Sabemos que en cierto sentido es un "salto al vacÃ*o" (comenzar desde cero, como dice MarxSchmarx). Pero la verdad es que todos llevamos muchos años (algunos muchÃ*simos años) militando en organizaciones, y creemos que es interesante agruparnos en base a unos planteamientos comunes que desde hace mucho defendemos.

    No se si esto contesta a todo lo planteado en el hilo (y si podreis entenderlo todos).

    SALUD
  5. chegitz guevara
    chegitz guevara
    Englais, pro favor. Mi espanol es no muy bueno para politica lingua.
  6. MarxSchmarx
    MarxSchmarx
    Gracias por tu contesta, Luxemburguista. Estoy en acuerdo con casi todo lo que dices, y es una experiencia (me imagino) que es profundamente diferente que la de nos. Por esas razones, Chegitz and other non-spanish speakers here, is an attempted translation.
    Englais, pro favor. Mi espanol es no muy bueno para politica lingua.
    Pour le registre, c'est "inglés."

    "After many years as a militant in different political and social organizations and unions, currently I m a militant in a small (very small) international association of militant luxemburgists. This movment was founded by comrades from Communist Democracy (like myself), the Socialist Forum, Workers Democracy Network and others of their own initiative.

    It is Luxemburguist because, we are in agreemement with the tradition of working with the workers movment. Historically there have been few explicitly Luxemburguist organizations (although there have been some interesting ones as well). But the Luxemburgist ideals (not only of Rosa L) have had sway in many movements and organizations. And they have been patently present in the great struggles of the masses in which they have participated.

    So why did we decided to try to organize ourselves now? Because we believe that we can be a useful resource for the struggle for proletarian liberation. We believe that now, more than ever, the slogan of the AIT makes sense: only the proletariat, as a class, without a external control, can emancipate itself. We reject Bolshevism, in all its forms. Moreover,
    today's struggles cannot help but be international, global, and in a fashion befitting the material reality of global capitalism. Thus we it is of no matter to us wherever there are comrades. We have to fight for our common objective everywhere.

    We also recognize the traditional value of parties. We are not a party in the common understanding of the term (although yes we are in the sense that Marx considered this term, as a "component" of proletarian class unity. But we work more like a network. Each person develops their militant activity where they work and where they live (these two are considered the most important). We also organize debates and engage the questions we are interested in. All with obvious autonomy, with neither punishments nor anything of the sort.

    Currently, our basic communal projects are the international Luxemberguist Forum (a space explicitly dedicated to debate between those whom defend Luxemburguist positions - where there are comrades from the WSM, la CCI, el CICA y otros and others); editing a multilingual international bulletin (of which we anticipate the first edition will be released in October); the joint participations in the struggles against the EU directives; and, above all, the spreading of our positions and recommendations, because we understand that
    this work (theoretical and practical) is the most basic and foundational work that we can perform as a group.

    We would obviously like to increase in number because it allows us to take more actions, but right now this is not heavily emphasized. For us, what is important is that the class takes initative in unity. Thus, clearly "internal" actions are not the focus of our group, without tying it to both real facets of everyone's existence, jointly with the conditions in whcih the proletarians live everyday. Of this we make no secretes. We concretely collaborate with all kinds of proletarians, without question as to their affiliation. But more to the point of concreteness, we believe that yes it is possible and convinient to do things from a "Luxemburguist" perspective. Above all, because of the "union" of tendencies, the fronts, have shone before their ineffectivness. They are setbacks that the revolutionary process cannot allow. there are comrades who participate in plenty of other projects (because they are there, and, considered as a whole, interesting in their own right) and others that don't do so. But this is true. We denounce (we find repugnant) entryism or other similar practices. For us, it is of paramount importance for everyone to develop their praxis in an autonomous fashion, that they don't have to follow orders or similar things. That each is an activist in their own right with the full capacity to engage in the struggles.

    We are fully aware of the notion that it is "Back to the beginning" (begining from zero, as MarxSchmarx says). But the truth is that all of us bring many years (and a few many, many years) of militant work in organizations, and we believe that it is promising to join together and form a foundation and plant roots out of which much can come.

    I am unsure if this answer got to the original point (or if you were able to follow it in its entirety).

    Cheers.
  7. LUXEMBURGUISTA
    LUXEMBURGUISTA
    Thanks for translation, MarxSchmarx. I write bad in english.
    SALUD
  8. Die Neue Zeit
    Die Neue Zeit
    IF all goes well, a Republican Socialist Demarchic Left Party (RSDLP ) "electorally registered" as a "Socialist Left Party" (Die Linke ) will come about:

    What I don't understand is why there isn't a non-Stalinist socialist party running in elections in Canada. And I really have no confidence in the "socialist faction" of the NDP ability to wrestle control from their right-moving social democrat party.

    The name "Socialist Party of Canada" just to happens to be taken by a group explicitly against any form of agitation, demonstration, or electoral action. Harrumph! Maybe it's time for a coup within the Socialist Party of Canada? Is that possible?
    Should the left split from the NDP?
    No left parties in Canada? Sigh

    While I wrote on the need for a Canadian organization of a larger, international Class-Strugglist Social Labour party, I came up with this compromise:

    Republican Socialist Demarchic Left Party (RSDLP), to be informally known as the Socialist Left Party (a la Die Linke)

    "Republican" refers to an explicit need to abolish the Canadian monarchy, and "Demarchic" refers to an explicit need for this.
  9. Zeus the Moose
    Zeus the Moose
    IF all goes well, a Republican Socialist Demarchic Left Party (RSDLP ) "electorally registered" as a "Socialist Left Party" (Die Linke ) will come about:
    I don't see why positions like that need to be enumerated right in the name of a party; isn't that what a statement of principle is for? Otherwise, the SP-USA could change its name to the Revolutionary Democratic Socialist Feminist Party, which seems a bit excessive. Personally I'd suggest the "Republican Socialist Party of Canada" or something to that effect.
  10. Die Neue Zeit
    Die Neue Zeit
    Comrade, that's the purpose of the "Socialist Left Party" registration. The RSDLP abbreviation is a historical tribute.