radicality is almost exclusively considered in terms of passive revolution. even socialism is considered largely in terms of being produced from above, as individual non-systemic demands we make of politicians rather than as a new political order which abolishes the distinction
the point of electoralism is to prove it's limits. if you run you use your bullhorn to decry imperialism, capitalism, colonialism. if you win use all your power to gum up the American death machine.
given DSA left doesn't even try to do that we just do nothing so....
The first priority is to build an organization with a proletarian class character that can shake the complacency of the U.S. labor aristocracy and its petty bourgeois allies
criticism is the lifeblood of organisation. unity-criticism-unity. if u are unwilling to publicly criticise mass protests then u are setting yourself up for future preventable mistakes. that is why this discourse is so harmful. ppl instead view criticism as christian sin
f you ever find yourself thinking, "We have to do something," your first step must be to determine what needs to be done and why. Action taken without this clarity is, by definition, misguided.
It's clearer than ever that the Four Opportunists (FRSO, CPUSA, PSL, & DSA) have no strategy for heightening the class struggle, and no interest in forward progress. They're quite content with the current order, and have gone as far as to put their bodies on the line to defend it
I’ll be real, it’s probably more useful to start a reading group that remains committed to anti-revisionism at this point than it is to join any of the major parties
Anyone in the world with the ability to do something has the responsibility to do something, big or small. This is the sort of moment where everyone is on the hook.
I think an important thing about practice is that study itself, if rigorously approached, understood as having class interests, and used in service of the advancement of the oppressed, can itself be a form of practice. A claim otherwise would be to claim that Marx had no practice