Results 1 to 5 of 5
Luxemburgism.
Are there any parties that could be described as "Luxemburgist" in the world today (i.e. not upholding the right of nations to "self-determination", the dialectic of spontaneity, etc.)? If not, do any come close (this may be difficult as many like to claim Luxemburg as their own, even Stalin).
The Communist Left, particularly the ICC; to a lesser extent the ICT.
Neither of these are 'parties' in any real sense though.
There was a 'Luxemburgist' group in Spain but I think if those two in particular are your criteria you will be disappointed.
Critique of the Gotha Programme, Pt IV: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch04.htm
No War but the Class War
Destroy All Nations
Lucius Accius (170 BC - 86 BC): "A man whose life has been dishonorable is not entitled to escape disgrace in death."
I've got in contact with the ICT; not heard back from the ICC yet. In what way are the ICC more Luxemburgist (since I don't currently have time to browse their political platform)?
As a side note, could anyone give me a brief differentiation between Luxemburg's theory on Imperialism and Lenin's? (seeing as this topic is titled "Luxemburgism" in general).
What makes the ICC more 'Luxemburgist' is that the majority of the ICC defends an understanding of capitalism's crises that is derived from their reading of Rosa's work in 'The Accumulation of Capital'.
Both the ICC and ICT sees Luxemburg's rejection of the 'theory of the right of nations' as the foundation of their own internationalist positions. However I think in both organisations there is a recognition that, had Rosa lived to see the foundation of the 3rd International, she might not have been on the 'left' of it.
Critique of the Gotha Programme, Pt IV: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch04.htm
No War but the Class War
Destroy All Nations
Lucius Accius (170 BC - 86 BC): "A man whose life has been dishonorable is not entitled to escape disgrace in death."
