Good am Dennis. I re-read the messages from yesterday, as is my practice. And I
certainly do owe you an unreserved apology. I had indeed not answered your
specific query. I cannot really explain why, other than I was rushed - but also
an assumption that you had been asking for the programmatic demands. Which I
honestly thought I had addressed. That, in terms of saying that those demands
would bear a connection to who was in the third party and from where might it
spring.
Again an apology is given.
So... You asked this specific question:
" Why would a future third party be any less of "a spoiler" for the chances of
"the lesser evil" corporate/imperialist party then it is today or has been
accused of being in the long history or resistance to "lesser evilism"? Exactly
what makes it permissible in four years - will there be no Trump-type candidacy
("impending fascism") to fear??? The capitalist class can ALWAYS find a
"greater" evil to frighten liberals and their leftist supporters."
An attempt to answer this.
i) First, there are almost always - as far as I can see - in almost any
political life that faces us, 'choices.' The turn of the screw will almost
always make for some slightly differing choices - they are unlikely to be
exactly the same as the last iteration. (But see the qualification below in
(iii) )Although they may well be related.
ii) I believe that within those choices some of them, would most likely have a
slight advantage for the toiling classes. Somewhere Lenin says that even a
slight advantage in reformist paths, is the one that the workers should take. I
have in prior notes stated my belief that organising for revolutionary purposes
is very likely to be easier under Harris than under Trump. That is the
advantage that I see in a Harris government (at the moment) rather than a Trump
government.
iii) If Trump loses, the one head is cut off the hydra, but not the hydra beast
itself with its propensity to grow new heads. From the perspective of those
socialists confronting the beast ("socialism" however defined.. that would be
the matter of exactly what Left entity is confronting the beast. That was my
mistake about your query to me) - there almost always will be a new head to
confront. And moreover it is a hydra that shares a body with both the
Democratic and the Republican parties.
iii) At some stage those two become more like an amoeba. That is they might
fuse. That is when whatever wings of capital there are - are all united that
fascism is the only way they can deal with the workers movement. I do not think
the capitalist class have uniformly decided to do that as of yet. Neither in
the USA, nor in most of Europe. Instead they are trying to re-fashion the
parties to enable even the social-democrats to steal the colothes of the overt
fascists. I tried to outline this process in June 2024 at:
https://mlrg.online/politics/restructuring-the-capitalist-parties-of-the-european-community/
- following the European elections.
iv) I do not see the putative alternative 'third party' as being a substitute
for a Marxist-Leninist party. I would see that alternative third party as being
an appeal to workers who have mentally broken with the Democratic party or the
Republican party - but who do not consider themselves yet as able to adopt
Marxist perspectives. Some of those will likely achieve that perspective and
may gravitate to the other Marxist party. If you like, a sort of half-way
house. Or an inductive current.
What I think you (and it seems Sartesian) are saying is that there is no
mid-way house in terms of a party. It is all or nothing - the revolution now or
not at all. No role for anything other than an 'impulse'. No role for an
'inductive current' from a midway reformist but not rigidified behemoth. I am
not sure if you Dennis have any role for any party - whether you are in fact
an anarchist. As far as I can tell Sartesian is one. However you describe
yourself, I think you seem to imply that it is an all or nothing job.
For you there is no possible inductive current moving the workers leftward from
a third party towards a Marxist party. Yes I think the Democratic party for
decades has not been such an inductive current. Indeed I think Sartesian was
quite right when he pointed to those those trying to use the barnacle encrusted
behemoth of the Democratic party - they were trying to paint over and use that
rigidified system as such an inductive current.
That was what I thought of as my main point in my response to Michael M.
At the moment from what I see very similar issues are arising from the Labour
Party in the UK, and indeed in the French movement.
For now, a somewhat skeletal reply. It may get fleshed out.
Hari
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#33016): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/33016
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/109066560/21656
-=-=-
POSTING RULES & NOTES
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
#4 Do not exceed five posts a day.
-=-=-
Group Owner: marxmail+ow...@groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/13617172/21656/1316126222/xyzzy
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
