Yes, but people only progressed from those naive, liberal tendencies towards revolutionary action because of revolutionaries attacking them not because principled communists were praising the white liberal.
We criticize people, parties and organisations when their stances are wrong. Whatever good they might or might not have done in the past is no grounds for refraining from attack.
If there’s one thing that’s more than abundant in this world, it’s people defending milquetoast, apologetic liberals. We as communists don’t need to beat that drum too, but have to offer a different tune.
Again, I don’t disagree. Criticism is warranted and necessary.
I will still refrain from attacking the movement as a whole, because it has been, unediably, a crucial aspect of the revival of the left in the imperial core among the younger generations. This is precisely why the movement is most viciously attacked by the right, because they are afraid not of some harmless marches, but from the conclusions that the participants will gather. This is why I hope for the organization to flourish, because the conclusions that individuals will come to is always the same: revolution or capitulation. But getting people to this point is hard, especially in this scale, and has not been achieved in any form in the imeprical core in the last 40 or so years.
So I guess to conclude this hottake, I mean to say that Greta, FFF, or whatever similar organization, while most certainly not in any form revolutionary, is nonetheless the ground upon which we can flourish. Or, of anything, have pulled millions of young people to the left while the trend was drastically going in the other direction. All we have to do is drag them a little further, but some work has already been done for us. This is why I wish FFF etc all the best, despite not being aligned anymore in any form.
This is why I hope for the organization to flourish, because the conclusions that individuals will come to is always the same: revolution or capitulation.
Yes and liberals like Thunberg are actively working so people avoid the conclusion is revolution. Those that came to that conclusion did not get there, because principled communists were defending white liberals, but because they offered an alternative and a systemic critique to the shortcomings of liberal climate movements.
Revolutionary organisations can work on the grounds of liberal organising and even with liberal organisations, even on the grand strategic level as in the Russian, Chinese, Cuban and many other revolutions. But they decidedly do not do that by merging with them or refraining from citicizing them when they’re objectively wrong and to be criticized.
Communists don’t need to do the work of the liberals, the liberals are doing that already. The communists need to do the work of the communists, which is attacking liberal ideology relentlessly and structuraly, offering alternatives for the contradictions within liberal ideology. You don’t get someone from FFF to a CP by defending the liberalism within FFF.
I mean to say that Greta, FFF, or whatever similar organization, while most certainly not in any form revolutionary, is nonetheless the ground upon which we can flourish
Yes, but that is only so if we provide and attack them from the left, not if we defend them. If we do so, there’s no meaningful difference between us and them and then ultimately there’s no movement from them to the left.
Yes, but people only progressed from those naive, liberal tendencies towards revolutionary action because of revolutionaries attacking them not because principled communists were praising the white liberal.
We criticize people, parties and organisations when their stances are wrong. Whatever good they might or might not have done in the past is no grounds for refraining from attack.
If there’s one thing that’s more than abundant in this world, it’s people defending milquetoast, apologetic liberals. We as communists don’t need to beat that drum too, but have to offer a different tune.
Again, I don’t disagree. Criticism is warranted and necessary. I will still refrain from attacking the movement as a whole, because it has been, unediably, a crucial aspect of the revival of the left in the imperial core among the younger generations. This is precisely why the movement is most viciously attacked by the right, because they are afraid not of some harmless marches, but from the conclusions that the participants will gather. This is why I hope for the organization to flourish, because the conclusions that individuals will come to is always the same: revolution or capitulation. But getting people to this point is hard, especially in this scale, and has not been achieved in any form in the imeprical core in the last 40 or so years.
So I guess to conclude this hottake, I mean to say that Greta, FFF, or whatever similar organization, while most certainly not in any form revolutionary, is nonetheless the ground upon which we can flourish. Or, of anything, have pulled millions of young people to the left while the trend was drastically going in the other direction. All we have to do is drag them a little further, but some work has already been done for us. This is why I wish FFF etc all the best, despite not being aligned anymore in any form.
Yes and liberals like Thunberg are actively working so people avoid the conclusion is revolution. Those that came to that conclusion did not get there, because principled communists were defending white liberals, but because they offered an alternative and a systemic critique to the shortcomings of liberal climate movements.
Revolutionary organisations can work on the grounds of liberal organising and even with liberal organisations, even on the grand strategic level as in the Russian, Chinese, Cuban and many other revolutions. But they decidedly do not do that by merging with them or refraining from citicizing them when they’re objectively wrong and to be criticized.
Communists don’t need to do the work of the liberals, the liberals are doing that already. The communists need to do the work of the communists, which is attacking liberal ideology relentlessly and structuraly, offering alternatives for the contradictions within liberal ideology. You don’t get someone from FFF to a CP by defending the liberalism within FFF.
Yes, but that is only so if we provide and attack them from the left, not if we defend them. If we do so, there’s no meaningful difference between us and them and then ultimately there’s no movement from them to the left.