chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
Agreed. There is no "rest of the left", not in any meaningful, organised sense.
Well except the SP, who to be frank are more influential and significant than the SWP. Albeit on a very small/lw level.
Life after the SWP?
- Thread starter chilango
- Start date
Agreed. There is no "rest of the left", not in any meaningful, organised sense.
Well except the SP, who to be frank are more influential and significant than the SWP. Albeit on a very small/lw level.
TremulousTetra
prismatic universe
IWCA "Working Class Rule, In Working-Class Areas." How can that happen?
chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
Self-organisation and taking over the functions of the state?
TremulousTetra
prismatic universe
Agreed. There is no "rest of the left", not in any meaningful, organised sense.
Well except the SP, who to be frank are more influential and significant than the SWP. Albeit on a very small/lw level.
Indeed.People think I'm partisan. but I aint. I would love to see any style of organised opposition to capitalism be more successful.
TremulousTetra
prismatic universe
the ruling class won't allow it.
TremulousTetra
prismatic universe
In the entire history of human society, has there ever been anywhere where those who have controlled the means of production, have not controlled society? Serious question. I'd love to hear if there was an example.
chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
Of course they won't allow it. I don't think the IWCA are looking for their permission!
chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
I think you're right, but need to look at "means of production" in a slightly broader way. Social reproduction etc etc.
TremulousTetra
prismatic universe
don't get me wrong, I'm not against community work. It is taken on a case-by-case outlook. If the working class organise anything, then revolutionaries should be doing anything they can to sustain strengthen and cultivate the self activity of the working class.
I just see , given the limited resources, of revolutionaries , it makes more sense to concentrate our efforts where the working class is already organised, and where control of, would give the working class control over society.
Without control of the means of production, the working class could control every working class area in Britain, and I would be starved out in no time through failure to control the means of production, and so its produce.
TremulousTetra
prismatic universe
Plus, we don't just want control of working class areas, we want the whole cake. Have to have the whole cake, to survive.
TremulousTetra
prismatic universe
Forget revolutionaries. [I'm sure you want to :-D ] the working classes organised at work, it isn't in its community.
TremulousTetra
prismatic universe
october_lost chilango etc http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=13412
Of Lenin . "But he did not come to any situation with all the answers. He listened to workers own experiences. His strength as a leader was his ability to learn from the class and to be prepared to change tack."
LOLJust read this "
Some falsely characterise Leninist parties as having an autocratic leadership that goes around giving orders, which every member has to automatically and mindlessly obey. "
Of Lenin . "But he did not come to any situation with all the answers. He listened to workers own experiences. His strength as a leader was his ability to learn from the class and to be prepared to change tack."
LOLJust read this "
Some falsely characterise Leninist parties as having an autocratic leadership that goes around giving orders, which every member has to automatically and mindlessly obey. "
chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
You can't, and shouldn't, separate the two.
Capitalism has moved on. There's plenty of good Marxist theory out there about the "social factory". Worth reading some of it.
chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
I agree.
chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
ResistanceMP3. Don't get too hung up on the IWCA slogan. It's just a slogan, and you already know I'm not h keen on them.
I'm also not saying the IWCA is the perfect blueprint. It's not. But useful to consider.
I'm also not saying the IWCA is the perfect blueprint. It's not. But useful to consider.
TremulousTetra
prismatic universe
socialist worker agree.
TremulousTetra
prismatic universe
damn! How do you do that tagging thing
chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
Good for them.
chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
You type @ then the posters name, without a space.
october_lost
It's not hip any more...
An objective reading of the Bolsheviks history would show they were quite ruthless, but the problem remains the system they brought about was a consequence of their actions and theory.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Don't help him.
TremulousTetra
prismatic universe
TremulousTetra
prismatic universe
that is a fact, the only interpretation of events?
The fact is, the SWP in their own publications completely contradict what you say they are. what they inculcate into their members, is completely the opposite of what you describe.
As I have said all the way through to everybody, I have no problem with you attacking the politics of the SWP . It just undermines your argument if you just make shit up.
october_lost
It's not hip any more...
What are you talking about? Go read the Menshevik, SR, and anarchist histories, they will elaborate in detail the achievements of the Bolsheviks. Iain McKay seems to have done a good job recently collating a lot of new information, which should be a contrast to uncritical praise put on him by apparatchiks in the SWP.
You can't have the whole cake without having control of working class areas first.
What the SWP teach their members about the Bolsheviks is, at best, distorted and biased. At its worst, outright lies.
TremulousTetra
prismatic universe
What the SWP teach their members about the Bolsheviks is, at best, distorted, to say;
1. revolutionaries should listen to the working class.
2. revolutionaries should learn from the working class.
3. Revolutionaries should change because of those lessons from the working class.
I don't accept it, but let's say you're right. Out of those three suggestions as to what revolutionaries should do, which do you object to?
Why would they need to distort what the Bolsheviks have done, in order to suggest those three things? they could just say them without reference to the Bolsheviks.
Could it be possible they actually believe these are the lessons from the Bolsheviks?
TremulousTetra
prismatic universe
it's therein black-and-white. Not just in this article, but in thousands of others.
TremulousTetra
prismatic universe
I'm questioning how you can categorically state, as if scientific fact, that " the system they brought about [.....]" state capitalism, "was a consequence of their actions and theory."?
There were no other factors? There can be no other interpretation of the events, than the one you subscribe to?
Similar threads
