Because I feel like I'm in one.

I believed in the necessity of a vanguard party for a long time, but...material conditions. If there were a well-defined leader—even of something like the protests in PDX—they would have already been imprisoned on trumped up charges or Fred Hampton'd. Likely the former at this time. Historical evidence suggests this is the case, as do present conditions. Based on how brutally we're seeing the police treat anonymous members of the antifascist resistance, it's getting really hard to imagine how it could be possible to have anything remotely resembling a leader, or even a party with a membership list and regular meetings.

I understand the implications the lack of a central organizing structure has on our ability to effectively resist the state, but because of how everything has played out so far it seems like this might...actually be working in our favor. At least, considering what's unfolded up to the present moment I have a hard time picturing it going better if we had defined leadership that the state was able to target right out of the gate.

There's also the fact that (at least I'm ready to concede this at this point) that the US in its entirety isn't going to undergo a socialist revolution backed by the masses, and that the most likely scenario heading in that direction is a balkanization with the emergence of something better as one of its fragments (most likely west coast/PNW). Such a something better would be more likely to (successfully) take the from of an autonomous region similar to Chiapas or Rojava, versus a traditional socialist state amidst a sea of late/post-war capitalism.

Finally, another thought regarding material conditions...who are the people out there at this very moment resisting the state? It's anarchists. No one, myself included, is effectively organizing any type of meaningful ML resistance to meet this moment, but there are folks out in the street fighting cops every single night. They are the ones doing the work, and all we can say about it is "hmm, sure looks like we are approaching revolutionary conditions". But...it's other folks doing the work, and we're sitting around hoping to cash in on it later.

I'm getting ready to jump ship.

  • blobjim [he/him]
    7·
    4 years ago

    their insistence that any and all non western aligned countries should be defended even from resistance from the general population is not great

    This just means you don't understand geopolitics or really care about western imperialism or understand how it works.

    They also tend to have a rather flexible definition of what ‘socialism’ means after decades of bastardiation of the term by Soviet and Chinese ideologues

    Bashing actually existing socialist states to advance socialism

    As a result I see people calling Belarus and Venezuela socialist

    Literally nobody is calling Belarus socialist. And Venezuela has been led by socialists for the last 17 years or so but it's obviously not a socialist economy, a revolution is needed to implement that. Nobody claims that Venezuela has a socialist economy.

    China ‘is using capitalism to build socialism’ which doesnt make sense at all.

    It makes sense if you look at China's actions in the world and who they help out geopolitically and how their government functions and what happened to the Soviet Union, etc. anything beyond just "communist billionaires haha" memes.

    • Classic_Agency [he/him,comrade/them]
      8·
      4 years ago

      This just means you don’t understand geopolitics or really care about western imperialism or understand how it works.

      No I think that a lot of MLs dont understand geopolitics and internal contradictions actually. Non western aligned countries are not in some united opposition to US imperialism, they will align with imperialism when it suits their interests and go against it when it doesnt, Syria and Iraq are good examples in this regard. Not only that but given the capitalist nature of these countries it is inevitable that they will enter crisis that will cause the proletariat in these countries to rise up and seek better arrangements. These movements are then co opted by western imperalists to install a regime that often times is worse than the previous one. As a result it is silly in my opinion to try to uphold some sort of anti imperialist united front which doesnt exist with countries that are not only unwilling to be anti imperialist, but actually cannot be due to the nature of their societies.

      Bashing actually existing socialist states to advance socialism

      The onus is on them to prove themselves socialist according to Lenin's definition. If they have to revise Lenin along Stalins lines in order to declare themselves socialist then they arent upholding Lenin at all.

      Literally nobody is calling Belarus socialist. And Venezuela has been led by socialists for the last 17 years or so but it’s obviously not a socialist economy, a revolution is needed to implement that. Nobody claims that Venezuela has a socialist economy.

      I have absolutely seen people say Venezuela has a socialist economy, is a DOTP etc. I have also seen people praise Belarus for having a welfare state as if that is something that is exceptional by european standards.

      It makes sense if you look at China’s actions in the world and who they help out geopolitically and how their government functions and what happened to the Soviet Union, etc. anything beyond just “communist billionaires haha” memes.

      Chinas actions today are not those of a revolutionary state determined to crush capitalism. They are those of a bourgeois state trying to expand and secure its interests by being more benevolent than its competitors.