[Marxism] When Left Parties are Appropriate

dwalters at marxists.org dwalters at marxists.org
Wed Aug 18 20:59:40 MDT 2004

I like Lou's post too, simply because he stating some pretty obvious things 
about the state of the "left".

I've never seen Solidarity particularly successful...it's the only socialist 
group I know of that always appeared to be less than the sum of it's part. That 
it eskewed 'sectarianism' is just plain hog wash...any one who has had to work 
with, or against, Solidarity members in the unions knows this to be true, 
essentially opposing efforts by any group to it's left to gain any sort of 
influence among workers or in supporting union initiatives.

The problem with left regroupment is the rather a-historical concentration 
on "the left" as a serious political term that is easily definable. Working 
class unity, or working class regroupment, based on *what to do in the class 
struggle right NOW* makes a lot more sense...and this is where all the 
regroupment efforts have always broken down, whether it was the still-
born "Socialist Alliance" in the UK or the one down in Oz.

Parties are so important. The only reason anyone mentions the WWP (aside from 
it's supporters) is percisely because it's a party, and as such, it can have 
influence way outside it's actual membership that is massive. Parties 
didn't 'go out' in the 1980s...if you think that Carrol, you were no where to 
be seen at the massive anti-war marches in the 1980s around Central America and 
the first Gulf War...marches that probably would NOT of come off without the 
very small left/socialist cadre groups that had the undestanding that these 
mobilizations took real effort to build.

Perhaps some think the Internet has replaced the need for left parties...I 
think that's only some much wishful thinking.

David Walters

More information about the Marxism mailing list