We need more education and we need to be more flexible to consider political projects that aren't just unions because we are likely missing something considering that our present failures indicate that our ideas need to be developed further to discover the "right" ones.
If it really just comes down to "waiting until the proletariat come around to socialism more" as it seems like they are doing, then one of the most important roles we can play is in education: education about theory, and education about organizing.
In either case, education is vital. There are plenty of agitprop outlets out there and lots of organizations. Certainly we can have more, and why would I want to limit that anyways, but in my experience the lack of education in the US is massively hindering.
consider political projects that aren’t just unions
I’d put forward that dedicating only to union organising in the current climate of captured bourgeois unions (often intimately affiliated with whatever centrist political party inhabits a certain country) is even less effective than the economism that Lenin warned against.
waiting until the proletariat come around to socialism more
Lenin also warned against this tendency. He correctly highlighted that while the workers most definitely WILL spontaneously struggle with the bourgeoisie for economic gains, this spontaneity will never magically create hordes of dedicated, ideologically sound Marxists. It’s our job as more conscious and developed workers to form and build a communist party that can insert itself into that contradiction and raise the workers to a higher level.
Lenin quotes Kautsky of all people in What Is To Be Done?:
Of course, socialism, as a doctrine, has its roots in modern economic relationships just as the class struggle of the proletariat has, and, like the latter, emerges from the struggle against the capitalist-created poverty and misery of the masses. But socialism and the class struggle arise side by side and not one out of the other; each arises under different conditions. Modern socialist consciousness can arise only on the basis of profound scientific knowledge.
…
Accordingly, the old Hainfeld programme quite rightly stated that the task of Social-Democracy [read as “communists” in our parlance] is to imbue the proletariat with the consciousness of its position and the consciousness of its task. There would be no need for this if consciousness arose of itself from the class struggle.
I would caution against abandoning reactionary unions just as Lenin urged communists to engage with them just over a century ago. Many have emerging reform movements and we need to be able to provide political leadership to them which necessitates a degree of trust and organization.
I don't want to be dogmatic, but it will be at least a few more years before we can outright abandon these unions and call for an independent alternative. If TDU successfully leads a Teamsters strike this year (which, for the record, I'm not optimistic they will) that will completely uproot the idea of reactionary unions being unfixable. If we continue to see existing unions shoot themselves in the foot though it will probably be their death (at least as a viable place of struggle, if not literally).
this is the correct take. the class struggle within the unions themselves are unclear to most people and while trade union opposition and the formation of class struggle unions are historically avenues of struggle that communists have undertaken. it won't be until class struggle unionism is an emergent and apparent contradiction that "trade unionism" as Lenin put it needs to be addressed
Most definitely there is work that can be done within unions, we should be wherever the class struggle manifests itself. I was more cautioning against the tendency I’ve seen online and irl for some comrades to valorise unionism, thinking that forming a militant minority and attempting a hostile takeover of a union totally in thrall to a bourgeois political party is a worthy project to pour all your energy and resources into.
It’s the same as bourgeois parliament, there’s certain strategic reasons that make it a useful place to do some entryism under certain conditions, but shouldn’t be the be all and end all of our movement.
Lenin also warned against this tendency. He correctly highlighted that while the workers most definitely WILL spontaneously struggle with the bourgeoisie for economic gains, this spontaneity will never magically create hordes of dedicated, ideologically sound Marxists.
Full agreement, I was juxtaposing the two positions of "attempting to build a political movement" with "waiting until the contradictions are heightened enough" to basically point out that "in either instance education will be key" because when we have many leftists not able to correctly identify the fundamentals of Marxism, it will not spell good for a hypothetical political movement nor transforming agitated proles into ideologically sound Marxists.
That being said I would just share this particularly bloomer quote that Mao has in "Where Do Correct Ideas Come From?" that,
In social struggle, the forces representing the advanced class sometimes suffer defeat not because their ideas are incorrect ! but because, in the balance of forces engaged in struggle, they are not as powerful for the time being as the forces of reaction; they are therefore temporarily defeated, but they are bound to triumph sooner or later.
here being that: suppose our ideas for revolution may in fact already be correct. We should not sit on our laurels about it then. We must educate the proletariat on these ideas so that they will be enabled to use this to continue to adapt to a changing situation. Perhaps along the way we find out our ideas need modification and so we make the modification at that time. I don't believe this is in contradiction with Lenin's warning.
We need more education and we need to be more flexible to consider political projects that aren't just unions because we are likely missing something considering that our present failures indicate that our ideas need to be developed further to discover the "right" ones.
If it really just comes down to "waiting until the proletariat come around to socialism more" as it seems like they are doing, then one of the most important roles we can play is in education: education about theory, and education about organizing.
In either case, education is vital. There are plenty of agitprop outlets out there and lots of organizations. Certainly we can have more, and why would I want to limit that anyways, but in my experience the lack of education in the US is massively hindering.
I’d put forward that dedicating only to union organising in the current climate of captured bourgeois unions (often intimately affiliated with whatever centrist political party inhabits a certain country) is even less effective than the economism that Lenin warned against.
Lenin also warned against this tendency. He correctly highlighted that while the workers most definitely WILL spontaneously struggle with the bourgeoisie for economic gains, this spontaneity will never magically create hordes of dedicated, ideologically sound Marxists. It’s our job as more conscious and developed workers to form and build a communist party that can insert itself into that contradiction and raise the workers to a higher level.
Lenin quotes Kautsky of all people in What Is To Be Done?:
…
I would caution against abandoning reactionary unions just as Lenin urged communists to engage with them just over a century ago. Many have emerging reform movements and we need to be able to provide political leadership to them which necessitates a degree of trust and organization.
I don't want to be dogmatic, but it will be at least a few more years before we can outright abandon these unions and call for an independent alternative. If TDU successfully leads a Teamsters strike this year (which, for the record, I'm not optimistic they will) that will completely uproot the idea of reactionary unions being unfixable. If we continue to see existing unions shoot themselves in the foot though it will probably be their death (at least as a viable place of struggle, if not literally).
this is the correct take. the class struggle within the unions themselves are unclear to most people and while trade union opposition and the formation of class struggle unions are historically avenues of struggle that communists have undertaken. it won't be until class struggle unionism is an emergent and apparent contradiction that "trade unionism" as Lenin put it needs to be addressed
Most definitely there is work that can be done within unions, we should be wherever the class struggle manifests itself. I was more cautioning against the tendency I’ve seen online and irl for some comrades to valorise unionism, thinking that forming a militant minority and attempting a hostile takeover of a union totally in thrall to a bourgeois political party is a worthy project to pour all your energy and resources into.
It’s the same as bourgeois parliament, there’s certain strategic reasons that make it a useful place to do some entryism under certain conditions, but shouldn’t be the be all and end all of our movement.
Full agreement, I was juxtaposing the two positions of "attempting to build a political movement" with "waiting until the contradictions are heightened enough" to basically point out that "in either instance education will be key" because when we have many leftists not able to correctly identify the fundamentals of Marxism, it will not spell good for a hypothetical political movement nor transforming agitated proles into ideologically sound Marxists.
That being said I would just share this particularly bloomer quote that Mao has in "Where Do Correct Ideas Come From?" that,
here being that: suppose our ideas for revolution may in fact already be correct. We should not sit on our laurels about it then. We must educate the proletariat on these ideas so that they will be enabled to use this to continue to adapt to a changing situation. Perhaps along the way we find out our ideas need modification and so we make the modification at that time. I don't believe this is in contradiction with Lenin's warning.