So as some of you might know, I’m a member of a marxist party, maybe one of the biggest of Western Europe currently.

The party is not ML. It takes part in electoral politics, though its main focus is building class consciousness at the work places and in the local communities. Getting into parliament is beneficial because 1) money and 2) raising awareness.

The party gets criticized by groups on the margin. They sometimes specifically criticize the MLs in our party for joining, because we are not part of what Lenin described as a Vanguard Party. I guess they are not entirely wrong, I’m not going to call my party ML even though there is (increasing) room for ML sentiment.

My problem is, I don’t really know what to do with these critics. Leaving the current party, with tens of thousands of active members and actual political influence, for a ‘true ML party’ with several dozen people who struggle to organize a book club, does not sound like the way to go. Stop calling myself a ML? That would seem weird as well.

How do you guys look at this?

  • Weyland@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you, for example, were in a vanguard party. Would this party be worth collaborating with or would they obstruct any and all attempts towards socialist takeover?

    Are you happy with the direction taken and achievements the party has made in these last 5 years? Do you think their current plans are realistic, and are you happy with their scope? I think being pragmatic is the best course of action. Organizations that have their act together and have room for more radical ideas are hard to come by.

    Unless you’re willing to build a party from the ground up, build up a organizational framework that is able to fend off modern threats, and spend a decade maturing the organization as well as have the people to follow you along: I wouldn’t bother splintering off.