The Left Needs to Seize Impeachment From Centrist Elites 

Donald Trump will almost certainly be impeached in the next few months—but not everyone on the left is happy about it. The trigger for the impeachment is Trump’s pressuring of the Ukrainian government to uncover, or possibly fabricate, dirt on former vice president Joe Biden. It’s this origin that gives some on the left pause.

Source: The Left Needs to Seize Impeachment From Centrist Elites | Portside

9/11 and the left’s confusion and silence over the real explanation

During all those years the left has been strangely confused about the real history of 9/11, denouncing critics of the conventional account as conspiracy theorists. One of the mysteries of the whole constellation of false flag operations is how the left got manipulated into silence, making the whole question an orthodoxy…Discussions of 9/11 at Counterpunch are especially suspect given the obsessive censorship of Alexander Cockburn.
We have also pointed to the influence of the strangely suspicious Chomsky with something to do with israel in the background…

Source: 9/11 and the American Orwellian Nightmare –

The Sunset of Neoliberalism 

Cheer up. The Left is winning the battle of ideas. Ideas are the basis for organization, and organization is prior to change. The signs are in the evolution of statements and platforms presented by Democratic presidential candidates. As the economist John Maynard Keynes wrote, eighty and some years ago:Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist. Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, are distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years back.

Source: The Sunset of Neoliberalism | Portside

 Is the left ready for the coming disaster?

The left has failed to either upgrade or extend its classic format and the result is that there are no real groups ready to confront the capitalist train wreck.
There is no breach of solidarity in a critical view of marxism nor in an enjoinder to leave much of its theory behind at this point. The reverse is the case.
We can see that in fact this was always true and an upgrade requires getting a subject as if for the first time.

Source: So, where does marxism go wrong…? – 1848+: The End(s) of History

  Passing of an older left, gestation of the new

Source: [Marxism] Marta Harnecker and the Death of the Latin American Hard Left

The left is in transition and we have tried multiple new versions of such an entity, as the idea of a ‘left’ transposes backward with our cowcatcher meme of the year 1848 and its huge spawn of southpaw outfits: this is a way to look to pre-marxist origins and to be both critical of marxism which took over the field and yet able to abscond with a number of its tenets/insights. We need, even if we adopt a critical marxism to see the logic of revolutionary thinking before the onset of reformist thinking. Managing that dialectic is not so simple but as we have suggested if we actually adopt that dialectic then the revolutionary tends to become dominant theoretically even as the reformist proliferates in practice. The reformist legacy simply presses the reset button on the revolutionary option despite the lack of any realistic such radicalism. And we are talking about that in terms of the US/american capitalist juggernaut, a prospect that sets the Berniacs into motion as reformists in halloween ‘our revolution’ costumes.
We have created a new idea for a neo-communism, with a divorce from the marxist legacy, banished to the footnotes as reserve dna: we must reinvent the whole subject, which requires seeing the close connection of liberalism and communism across the divide of expropriation. This is not a form of compromise but a way to suggest (what was obvious to many in our cowcatcher assembly of primordials) that socialism might be born from a remorphed liberalism that was based on challenges to capitalism but otherwise was a realization of modern freedoms and rights. That sounds a bit obvious but a close look shows this perspective is absent form the leftist successors to bolshevism, that is the whole nearly braindead left.
Let us grant however that the historical exemplars however we judge them confronted the right at full force and we must ask if the same fate awaits the future as we see in the contracting atmosphere of the defense against couterrevolution, viz. the russian Civil War. The left must find a way to success beyond the construction of covert agencies to defend the revolution, etc, ad nauseam…It is obvious one can fail at the moment of that challenge in practice.
It is worth noting that Thomas Munzer at the dawn of the reformation and of modern revolutionary communism proclaims a communist theme far before the rise of modern democracies. And the English Civil is the cowcatcher for all later broils, including our own.
Somewhere there we see the way the Restoration confused the issues of democracy and the later excess reaction to liberalism that hoped in vain for a total reconstruction after smashing the whole social scene, a project that failed.
We have suggested a way to instead remorph liberalism into a (neo-) communism and that the issue is not so much destroying liberalism, and hence its rights and freedoms, as remorphing its core, but in a context of genuine (revolutionary, but still possibly reformist) postcapitalism in the sense of expropriation and the creation, or recreation, of a Commons.