That’s why even if I have my own personal views, I identify primarily as an anti-sectarian Leftist. Whether Marxism, Anarchism, or some other flavor of Leftism begins to truly lead the movement, it will be more important to push the movement forward than to spend effort on infighting.
Only a mass worker movement can get any real change.
I can get behind that. I’m not nearly as left as a lot of folks on this platform but in the US we’re so far to the right that at this point we should all just be pulling left. We can duke it out once we move the Overton Window a bit.
I would even argue that open discussion of ideas is fantastic and shouldn’t be discouraged, but that this shouldn’t stand in the way of praxis and collective action.
If Marxist groups are leading the charge and Anarchists spend more time disagreeing with Marxist principles than actually moving forward, or vice-versa, then those people are no better than Counter-Revolutionaries.
Again, if the Revolution doesn’t exactly take on the character I want it to, I am still supporting it far more than criticizing it, because movement to the Left is the primary necessity.
I try to be. I have more sympathy towards some -isms than others, but seek an alliance among all with the same trajectory. Strawmanning and bashing other leftists accomplishes absolutely nothing.
Winning an internet argument may seems small, but it’s a brick in the foundation of the next revolution (not to say it’s an excuse to masturbate before the mirror).
I’m with you on that. I hold a strong belief in anarchism or\and mutualism, but if TEH LIBS are those who are helping political prisoners or minorities at the moment, I’d help them to do so. Since my state is happy to torture activists and is soon to ban satanism as extremism with a 10+ year sentences, it seems chameleoning is the only way to keep acting and causing a little, but difference.
Yep. I personally lean more Marxist, I think a worker-state is a more effective means of protecting the revolution, but if my Anarchist comrades make a real breakthrough and pose serious potential to topple Capitalism and establish Anarchism, you bet your ass I am going to side with the Anarchists and not waste anyone’s time fighting against that.
It advocates working within existing mass organizations, such as trade unions, in order to transform them into vehicles for a social revolution.
How narrow or broad should we go? They come from a different side, but being flexible and ‘work within what works’ is a pretty close thing. It’s telling ‘anarchism’ is unusually ommited from the name.
The platformist organization itself has a high degree of theoretical unity. The platform was invented because the Ukrainian anarchists were so disparate and constantly bickering about theory that they couldn’t form a consistent strategy.
Dual organizationism and social insertion are not necessarily platformist. They precede it by many decades.
Anarchism is omitted from the name because it is implied. There are no non-anarchist platformists.
That’s why even if I have my own personal views, I identify primarily as an anti-sectarian Leftist. Whether Marxism, Anarchism, or some other flavor of Leftism begins to truly lead the movement, it will be more important to push the movement forward than to spend effort on infighting.
Only a mass worker movement can get any real change.
I can get behind that. I’m not nearly as left as a lot of folks on this platform but in the US we’re so far to the right that at this point we should all just be pulling left. We can duke it out once we move the Overton Window a bit.
I would even argue that open discussion of ideas is fantastic and shouldn’t be discouraged, but that this shouldn’t stand in the way of praxis and collective action.
If Marxist groups are leading the charge and Anarchists spend more time disagreeing with Marxist principles than actually moving forward, or vice-versa, then those people are no better than Counter-Revolutionaries.
Again, if the Revolution doesn’t exactly take on the character I want it to, I am still supporting it far more than criticizing it, because movement to the Left is the primary necessity.
Of all -isms that’s probably Platformism. Whatever helps reach the goal. I find that pragmatic and rational.
I try to be. I have more sympathy towards some -isms than others, but seek an alliance among all with the same trajectory. Strawmanning and bashing other leftists accomplishes absolutely nothing.
Winning an internet argument may seems small, but it’s a brick in the foundation of the next revolution (not to say it’s an excuse to masturbate before the mirror).
I’m with you on that. I hold a strong belief in anarchism or\and mutualism, but if TEH LIBS are those who are helping political prisoners or minorities at the moment, I’d help them to do so. Since my state is happy to torture activists and is soon to ban satanism as extremism with a 10+ year sentences, it seems chameleoning is the only way to keep acting and causing a little, but difference.
Yep. I personally lean more Marxist, I think a worker-state is a more effective means of protecting the revolution, but if my Anarchist comrades make a real breakthrough and pose serious potential to topple Capitalism and establish Anarchism, you bet your ass I am going to side with the Anarchists and not waste anyone’s time fighting against that.
That is very distinctly not Platformism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platformism
How narrow or broad should we go? They come from a different side, but being flexible and ‘work within what works’ is a pretty close thing. It’s telling ‘anarchism’ is unusually ommited from the name.
The platformist organization itself has a high degree of theoretical unity. The platform was invented because the Ukrainian anarchists were so disparate and constantly bickering about theory that they couldn’t form a consistent strategy.
Dual organizationism and social insertion are not necessarily platformist. They precede it by many decades.
Anarchism is omitted from the name because it is implied. There are no non-anarchist platformists.