I’m mostly in agreement. However I think the issue that started this discussion is this idea of a united front and that we should follow a shared strategy. Personally, I saw the comments just trying to dunk on eachother when discussing what each feels is a good way yo move forward. I just simply don’t believe it’s possible achieve that unified movement when it is truly grassroots. We are not a hivemind, we all have our own opinions even if they are based on incomplete or factually wrong information. Ideally, we would not need to spend the required time trying to make everyone in the movement think the same or even agree on the same strategies. The time that we have to plan or engage in a fight against oppression would be better used actually planning or fighting oppressors.
Again, I think our strength is our diversity of opinion, philosophy, strategy, and tactics. Perhaps rather than trying to control which strategies are used, we should add each as a tool in a wide arsonal of resistance strategy. We shouldn’t be belittling strategies that we benefit from. We should try to keep goal in mind.
Its really interesting to come back to the united vs popular front part of the discussion, because like I got my political education (partially, but in large measure) from a group that was formed in opposition to Stalinism, and who was the victims of purges carried out by popular fronts, so we are very pro united front, and very anti popular front. I could argue with you all day, I am well equipped to address certain positions.
But in no way is it a historically settled issue. I see it play out in my organizing work, where I am part of a partyist trend; whereas a sizeable minority, though only recently and quite conditionally, are more in favor of mass politics. But if we wanna get shit done, the mass movement people have to work with the partyist people, and vice versa; and if the partyist fuck up then the mass movement tendency will be able to tip the balance back the other way.
I think you are absolutely correct to value diversity of opinion and democracy. To me, as long as actual democracy, not just votes but people being able to voice their opinions and make meaningful contributions, then we are on a good path. We shouldn’t focus too much on intellectual difference, but engage in practical work to determine the actual conditions of oppression. I like your framing of “a wide arsenal of resistance strategies”. History will sort out our wrong headedness, as long as we engage in actual struggle, actual resistance. Because the win condition is to get the masses on the side of revolutionary change. But the masses aren’t dumb. Maybe some people are backward in this way or that, more true for intellectuals than actual exploited workers but its def a global condition.
But the people who experience oppression firsthand are the experts, not the intellectuals who analyze it from the outside. We need to get better at listening and interpreting people rather than retreating to whatever camp our rationalism leads us.
I’m mostly in agreement. However I think the issue that started this discussion is this idea of a united front and that we should follow a shared strategy. Personally, I saw the comments just trying to dunk on eachother when discussing what each feels is a good way yo move forward. I just simply don’t believe it’s possible achieve that unified movement when it is truly grassroots. We are not a hivemind, we all have our own opinions even if they are based on incomplete or factually wrong information. Ideally, we would not need to spend the required time trying to make everyone in the movement think the same or even agree on the same strategies. The time that we have to plan or engage in a fight against oppression would be better used actually planning or fighting oppressors.
Again, I think our strength is our diversity of opinion, philosophy, strategy, and tactics. Perhaps rather than trying to control which strategies are used, we should add each as a tool in a wide arsonal of resistance strategy. We shouldn’t be belittling strategies that we benefit from. We should try to keep goal in mind.
I am going to prioritize reading Paolo Friere.
Its really interesting to come back to the united vs popular front part of the discussion, because like I got my political education (partially, but in large measure) from a group that was formed in opposition to Stalinism, and who was the victims of purges carried out by popular fronts, so we are very pro united front, and very anti popular front. I could argue with you all day, I am well equipped to address certain positions.
But in no way is it a historically settled issue. I see it play out in my organizing work, where I am part of a partyist trend; whereas a sizeable minority, though only recently and quite conditionally, are more in favor of mass politics. But if we wanna get shit done, the mass movement people have to work with the partyist people, and vice versa; and if the partyist fuck up then the mass movement tendency will be able to tip the balance back the other way.
I think you are absolutely correct to value diversity of opinion and democracy. To me, as long as actual democracy, not just votes but people being able to voice their opinions and make meaningful contributions, then we are on a good path. We shouldn’t focus too much on intellectual difference, but engage in practical work to determine the actual conditions of oppression. I like your framing of “a wide arsenal of resistance strategies”. History will sort out our wrong headedness, as long as we engage in actual struggle, actual resistance. Because the win condition is to get the masses on the side of revolutionary change. But the masses aren’t dumb. Maybe some people are backward in this way or that, more true for intellectuals than actual exploited workers but its def a global condition.
But the people who experience oppression firsthand are the experts, not the intellectuals who analyze it from the outside. We need to get better at listening and interpreting people rather than retreating to whatever camp our rationalism leads us.