I think the #1 issue I take with this is that if you are ML, you should be focused on building a leninist-style party and building its influence such that Marxism-Leninism, or the party itself, has some sort of credibility and legitimacy among the masses of people. MLs shouldn’t waist all of their time being debate bros or arguing. MLs should be putting minor disagreements with individual bad actors aside, and maintaining the most cogent, clear-eyed, and powerful analysis to any political question. Disagreements with “fellow travelers” and other “socialist” or social democrats will happen, but focusing on those differences and constantly confronting other about it is a dead end. Out focus should be connecting with the masses, not arguing in an increasingly small circle of leftists.
If someone agrees with you on things you want to work on, work with them, unless they are racists or fundamentally reactionary. Despite bad takes and a lack of anti-imperialism, I wouldn’t put most anarchists in that camp. From my own experience, the most egregiously bad anarchists, in terms of bad takes, usually won’t work with MLs anyway. They find any excuse they can, because they are fundamentally anticommunist and completely liberal. Then you never have to worry much about them because they usually have a hard time organizing the masses in any sustainable way, often alienating other who might see things even slightly differently. Focus on your own biz, and if anarchists are doing something cool, critical support. It isn’t the job of MLs to micromanage other working class folks organizing, we should be celebrating any working class effort to self organize and to realize their democratic potential. if you want to be the vanguard of the working class, you need to earn it by building the best party possible and winning the tryst of the people. stop squabbling.
I think the #1 issue I take with this is that if you are ML, you should be focused on building a leninist-style party and building its influence such that Marxism-Leninism, or the party itself, has some sort of credibility and legitimacy among the masses of people. MLs shouldn’t waist all of their time being debate bros or arguing. MLs should be putting minor disagreements with individual bad actors aside, and maintaining the most cogent, clear-eyed, and powerful analysis to any political question. Disagreements with “fellow travelers” and other “socialist” or social democrats will happen, but focusing on those differences and constantly confronting other about it is a dead end. Out focus should be connecting with the masses, not arguing in an increasingly small circle of leftists.
If someone agrees with you on things you want to work on, work with them, unless they are racists or fundamentally reactionary. Despite bad takes and a lack of anti-imperialism, I wouldn’t put most anarchists in that camp. From my own experience, the most egregiously bad anarchists, in terms of bad takes, usually won’t work with MLs anyway. They find any excuse they can, because they are fundamentally anticommunist and completely liberal. Then you never have to worry much about them because they usually have a hard time organizing the masses in any sustainable way, often alienating other who might see things even slightly differently. Focus on your own biz, and if anarchists are doing something cool, critical support. It isn’t the job of MLs to micromanage other working class folks organizing, we should be celebrating any working class effort to self organize and to realize their democratic potential. if you want to be the vanguard of the working class, you need to earn it by building the best party possible and winning the tryst of the people. stop squabbling.