Oh sure, I see what you mean. I agree that “defending private property” isn’t exactly a progressive slogan, but it boils down to a difference in strategy maybe? Socialists advocate a radical, revolutionary transformation; progressive libs see the system as sort of neutral and behaving badly, which can be fixed with reforms. So right there at the last second, in theory, the progressive liberals might resist revolutionary change. But in the throes of revolutionary change, All theory goes out and the hard cruel realities set in. We won’t know what its like until we get there. In my mind there wouldn’t really be many progressive liberals left, we would be opposing forces for, and against revolution. Middle strata tend to melt into the whole, or at least seem to, during these times.
I guess so, if there were to be a socialist revolution right now, I’d probably be in support, but it doesn’t mean I’d think it was necessary. I’m a progressive and i don’t necessarily oppose radical overhaul, i just think reform is satisfactory.
I appreciate the engagement! Sorry for any criticisms, I’m just trying to lay out a perspective that is based in Marxism but not like prejudicial against liberals (which Marx and Engels weren’t even if many of their followers are).
Damn… DSA is a big thing. Respect to you for getting your hands dirty with politics. I wish more realised that you don’t win over opponents by trying to be ideologically pure but by trying to accommodate multiple ideologies and finding common ground.
There are Marxist-aligned caucuses in the DSA such as Red Star Caucus. Their overall strategy is to try to win over what is undeniably the biggest non-establishment political party towards Marxism-Leninism, a strategy similar to the Bolsheviks in the Russian Social Democratic Party. While the DSA overall has pretty lacklustre politics, there is a genuine case to be made for Marxists working within it to achieve Leftist aims.
Numerous things, as a “big tent” party there are the big tent issues of a lack of cohesion, discipline, or a general agreement on approach or tactics. It’s also incredibly reformist and not revolutionary, which means it’s a dead end to begin with unless the revolutionary caucuses can change that.
Intellectual differences stand out, and political discourse is just terrible as a rule. Thank you, I appreciate the sentiment as I work very hard to draw these ideas together. I’m just a regular worker, but political marxism provides opportunities for functioning on a very high level intellectually, and collaborate with very smart people, because we are committed to the work of it. That’s all power is really, just peoples labor captured in various forms, and having the ability to use them to achieve our best interests. And the best interest of the working class is solidarity.
And that’s why I try not to be idealist about these differences, its the work that matters most!
Oh sure, I see what you mean. I agree that “defending private property” isn’t exactly a progressive slogan, but it boils down to a difference in strategy maybe? Socialists advocate a radical, revolutionary transformation; progressive libs see the system as sort of neutral and behaving badly, which can be fixed with reforms. So right there at the last second, in theory, the progressive liberals might resist revolutionary change. But in the throes of revolutionary change, All theory goes out and the hard cruel realities set in. We won’t know what its like until we get there. In my mind there wouldn’t really be many progressive liberals left, we would be opposing forces for, and against revolution. Middle strata tend to melt into the whole, or at least seem to, during these times.
I guess so, if there were to be a socialist revolution right now, I’d probably be in support, but it doesn’t mean I’d think it was necessary. I’m a progressive and i don’t necessarily oppose radical overhaul, i just think reform is satisfactory.
I appreciate the engagement! Sorry for any criticisms, I’m just trying to lay out a perspective that is based in Marxism but not like prejudicial against liberals (which Marx and Engels weren’t even if many of their followers are).
Don’t worry about it. You were pretty respectful compared to some others i conversed with
I’m in DSA. As a communist in a group with a lot of social democratic progressives, we have to learn to work together!
Damn… DSA is a big thing. Respect to you for getting your hands dirty with politics. I wish more realised that you don’t win over opponents by trying to be ideologically pure but by trying to accommodate multiple ideologies and finding common ground.
There are Marxist-aligned caucuses in the DSA such as Red Star Caucus. Their overall strategy is to try to win over what is undeniably the biggest non-establishment political party towards Marxism-Leninism, a strategy similar to the Bolsheviks in the Russian Social Democratic Party. While the DSA overall has pretty lacklustre politics, there is a genuine case to be made for Marxists working within it to achieve Leftist aims.
What’s lacklustre about DSA politics?
Numerous things, as a “big tent” party there are the big tent issues of a lack of cohesion, discipline, or a general agreement on approach or tactics. It’s also incredibly reformist and not revolutionary, which means it’s a dead end to begin with unless the revolutionary caucuses can change that.
Intellectual differences stand out, and political discourse is just terrible as a rule. Thank you, I appreciate the sentiment as I work very hard to draw these ideas together. I’m just a regular worker, but political marxism provides opportunities for functioning on a very high level intellectually, and collaborate with very smart people, because we are committed to the work of it. That’s all power is really, just peoples labor captured in various forms, and having the ability to use them to achieve our best interests. And the best interest of the working class is solidarity.
And that’s why I try not to be idealist about these differences, its the work that matters most!