Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Things that all far left groups can agree on?

Because I'm bad, I'm bad - come on
(bad bad - really, really bad)
You know I'm bad, I'm bad - you know it
(bad bad - really, really bad)
You know I'm bad, I'm bad - come on, you know
(bad bad - really, really bad)
And the whole world has to answer right now
Just to tell you once again,
Whos bad . . .
 
No honour is greater than victimhood. The more authentic the better.

Defend welfarism! Defend mediocrity! The dependence and humility of the working class must be advanced at all costs. Smash vanity! Smash daring!
 
Apart from hating other far left groups more than they hate the Tories I can't think of a lot they actually have in common.
 
Four or five easy-to-understand, but far-reaching, policy proposals are all that's needed.
 
Oh well, at least that's one thing they can all agree on.

I guess that's a good thing, then?
 
JHE said:
The comparison is unavoidable whether you or the various sectarians like it or not.
Click to expand...
Well there is an element of truth in it, but it's just as true of all ways of looking at the world, human beings tend to create grand naratives that explain the world as we understand it. Basically, it doesn't really say anything worth saying, other than to identify tendancies within far left politics that exist pretty much everywhere.
 
They all agree that someone should make a long speech, they cant agree on who.
They all agree that they need to sell and read the paper, they cant agree on what paper.
They all agree there has to be demo, they cant agree on who goes at the front.
They all agree the working class needs to be lead, they cant agree on how.
They all agree with Marx and Lenin, they cant agree on what parts they agree with.
They all agree that capitalism is bad, they cant agree on what to do about it.
 
One more push commrades and the working classes will see the error of their ways and follow our vanguard to the glorious sunlit uplands of socialism, or some such guff..
 
In Bloom said:
Well there is an element of truth in it, but it's just as true of all ways of looking at the world, human beings tend to create grand naratives that explain the world as we understand it. Basically, it doesn't really say anything worth saying, other than to identify tendancies within far left politics that exist pretty much everywhere.
Click to expand...

This of course is a standard and completely adequate response whilst the sects have no actual power. Upon the time that power does come their way, any non-correct thought becomes heresy and involves people being sent to camps, it becomes a very different proposition.
 
kyser_soze said:
This of course is a standard and completely adequate response whilst the sects have no actual power. Upon the time that power does come their way, any non-correct thought becomes heresy and involves people being sent to camps, it becomes a very different proposition.
Click to expand...
Fair point, but surely it's more coherent to view that as a new state consolidating its power base by eliminating the opposition, rather than as a religious thing?
 
In Bloom said:
Fair point, but surely it's more coherent to view that as a new state consolidating its power base by eliminating the opposition, rather than as a religious thing?
Click to expand...

Depends on how it's done. If you take Stalin for example, you had the combination of a Cult of Personality and the creation of a civic religion - any criticism become heretical, any crime was a sin. It tapped into the latent power of 'relgious' belief; where communism was supposed to be a society of critical thinkers, it became a society of creed followers.

The central problem is that, as with religious types, many on the left believe, utterly believe, they have found not just 'a' truth, but The Truth. While you can argue that even the simplest tory would claim the same thing, when they came to express their idea as Truth, they would fail, spectacularly. The left, OTOH, have a system of thought and argument that's easily as comprehensive and impervious to criticism as the Jesuits - and impervious in a way that goes beyond anything our hypothetical tory could muster!

When you say 'a new state consolidating power' you're abstracting a human process. A state can consolidate it's power in many ways, but historically, the myth-making power, not to mention the emotional grip, that being able to tap into that bit of the human psyche that demands a grand narrative, that seemingly needs something 'higher' than the individual that isn't material, of 'religion' is the easiest way to go...for a few years anyway. I mean what's easier for a new state to secure itself - a smart, critical population that views government with it's head, or one that unites around cues to emotion and is trained to view government with it's heart?
 
While not in total agremeent with all of these common beliefs....

There is no parliamentary road to socialism, therefore the left does not organise itself as a traditional political party, i.e fighting elections, internal democracy etc.

The historical inevitability of socialist victory makes our victory a matter of certianty. It is not a matter of if we win, but when.

The ends always justify the means.
 
Couldn't they put their differences aside and merge into one group based around the common aims?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

O
A Plea to the Left from an Ordinary Man
14 15 16 17 18
Replies
533
Views
10K
redsquirrel
R
brogdale
The far-right's "Raise the colours" campaign, part 2
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
314
Views
10K
keybored
keybored
story
Is it time for the Left to move fast and break things?
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
151
Views
7K
Peek Freans
Peek Freans
S
How should the non-party political left respond to the rise of the far right?
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
188
Views
8K
smokedout
S
C
Young women more left wing than men
2
Replies
58
Views
2K
hitmouse
hitmouse
Back
Top Bottom