The left needs a kind of unified reformist/revolutionary unitary perspective in the sense of considering (virtual revolution) the ambiguous terrain of erodiing neoliberalism in the midst of a pandemic in the midst of climate change…
As we used to say as kids playing cowboys/indians or mock battles, ‘We now take prisoners, beg for mercy’…That will have to pass for backslapping reformist ‘Comrades’ as salutation.
Our ‘Red Forty-eight Group’ is a leftist party group abstraction whose fundamental note so to speak reaffirms the revolutionary path but in a new way, and without as such rejecting the reformists. Like him or not Bernstein struck a dialectical chord that was unstoppable and in the end we can affirm revolutionary socialism and do nothing while the reformists busy beaver civil society’s mock socialism…so, can we evolve to socialism? as we said, ‘beg for mercy’. Continue reading “R48G: revolution, reform…?”
R48G: reform or revolution redux… September 6th, 2017 ·
Our seemingly consistent critique of ‘reformist leftism’ is, of course, misleading because we have also made ‘compromise’ a studied angle with our idea of ‘virtual revolution’ which embraces the whole contradiction. That in addition to hybrid of markets and communism. This is not really compromise but quiet desperation. Continue reading “R48G: reform or revolution redux…”
We have been very hard on marxists, but in fact they are the perhaps the only group with the potential to act in the context of revolution: but only if they can critique their formulas, and arrive at a new formulation that could work…
I am often baffled by leftist/marxist strategy:they confess to the complete failure of their own strategy but then turn around and reaffirm the whole set of cliches that have fallen out of date, assuming they ever had a valid moment. Continue reading “working class science fiction of the marxists…//Revolution, Counterrevolution, and Reformism | Socialist Revolution”
The issue of reform versus evolution is often superficial: the onset of revolutions has almost never been planned, and where planned never happened, yet. Reform ends up compromised but moves in the dimension of the possible…
We might hope that in the end the reformist/revolutionary divide will prove illusory as new combinations of effective change emerge. But the dilemma tends to confuse all parties: the critique of reformism is entirely cogent, but the stance toward revolutionary transformation is mostly botched by so-called revolutionaries themselves who seem to expect they can transform society as the ‘good guys’ y given the revolutionary moment. Every example from the past shows failure. That’s depressing, but the reasons are not beyond analysis Continue reading “Reform/revolution and the lack of any serious platform”
The debate here is really over reformism/revolution, but neither side can really turn the tide or offer any real resolution of the dilemma. It has been that way since the nineteenth century and the era of Bernstein.
In the mean time it is useful to both continue the debate and yet for both sides to be mindful they cannot control the future here: two potentials are better than one and generate the needed thought at a time when revolution is seeding itself, next to a reformist trend seeding itself, and a murky future where the prospect of revolutionary is seemingly beyond conceiving. The future has surprised the left before, and the real question is whether either side could manage a socialist revolution if it landed on their head. Like escapees from a chain gang, both sides are ‘interconnected’…
Louis Proyect Shreds Bhaskar Sunkara’s “Manifesto” | Washington Babylon
The dilemma here is false if the real issue with the classic revolutionary wing is that it has no real platform beyond regurgitated marxism and leninism. The revolutionaries are so focused on the great moment of seizing power that they have forgotten to state what kind of society should come next and how it will evade stalinism.
A completely revamped framework and strategy might be far more appropriate at a time of terminal crisis. The revolutionary left is stuck in leninist confusion and can’t rethink its position. The ups and downs of ‘competing’ reformist and revolutionary sectors is illusory. At the very least reformists need the revolutionary idea in order to think holistically about a new kind of society.
The entire planet is at risk and the chances of reformist measures dealing with the issues seems a vanishing percentage, perhaps the same is true of the revolutionary angle. But it is false perhaps to polarize these two extremes: we need a revolutionary reformism and a reformist revolution, next to a project that can move along reformist lines toward a revolutionary transformation. Part of the problem is that the revolutionary brand is stale leninism, feckless marxism, in the context of an undefined platform.
If the revolutionary and reformist wings could reinvent the left in the sense of saying what kind of society they envision, the false dualism might moderate and the public could respond.
Right now, democratic socialism is on the rise in American society. Revolutionary socialists who have kept the torch of socialism burning during the lean years will now have to merge with democratic-socialist demands of the current moment.