Before discovering this community, I was in a different community that proudly calls itself leftist. I posted a documentary; Loyal Citizens of Pyongyang which was very eye-opening for me.
Anyway, posting that started to really upset people, saying that the documentary is PSL propaganda. That PSL is authoritarian, backed by a Chinese Maoist billionaire and that PSL is riddled with sex abuse scandals. That of course PSL would simp for DPRK because it’s authoritarian. I was even called a holocaust denier for defending DPRK.
So is PSL bad? Where can I find better information on this? I’ve already tried looking into PSL and it all seems okay? The sex abuse scandals I am not sure about, is there more information on this? Am I being too critical on this?
We have a page on them here, https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Party_for_Socialism_and_Liberation, might wanna check the sources directly and make your own conclusions
I’d be curious to hear your thoughts on the controversies section of it, as you usually have detailed takes on issues with western parties, from what I’ve seen.
I appreciate the vote of confidence unfortunately I know nothing about PSL and never felt the need to learn more about them so this is as good as it gets lol. One thing I’d look for is if they recognize the US to be a settler-colonial state, I don’t think any of the major parties do. Oh, this comes up sometimes but some will weasel their way out of it implying or outright saying settler-colonialism is a thing of the past and that the US was settler-colonial but isn’t anymore (implying the colonization has succeeded and the settlers have somehow transcended their settler status to become part of the global proletariat). That’s probably the first thing I’d look for in a US org tbh. It’s the old “the imperial hegemon thinks it knows communism better than the people that practice it”, but this isn’t unique to PSL or anything, just what I’d personally look for to determine an org.
This isn’t really a major critique of PSL, but I think it’s interesting that they (the last time I looked) seem to stress the need to honor old treaties with native groups.
It seems to carry an implied sense of continuity with the settler entity that (fraudulently) made those treaties, and a lack of real deference to native groups to really set their own terms for whatever post-colonial state(s) happen.
Not a big deal, broadly, it just feels strange to me.
Fair enough. Thanks regardless. Even that is a helpful reminder to keep an eye out for.
Thank you for the link, it’s helpful. Small question, is the link in the 15th source cited source broken? It keeps refreshing for me.
It’s on the wayback machine and it’s possible they’re having trouble right now. If you stop the page loading (clicking the X button in the URL bar on your browser) it should display the text. Otherwise the medium posts says it was a copy of this google doc: https://web.archive.org/web/20230321124107/https://docs.google.com/document/d/14wF1Ti5GT2w5GZmwqvhvk6uH4zUss_a-B2GZ9NZEx74/edit, that is also archived.
PSL has been great in my experience. They do receive funding from a singaporean billionaire but I genuinely believe he is a class traitor
Speaking of class traitors, would you consider Ren Zhengfei (Huawei CEO) one?
I have not investigated thoroughly so I will only say that the cooperative(?) ownership of Huawei and Zhengfei’s history in the PLA makes it a real possibility.
To add on to this point for clarity: revolutionary efforts have to be bankrolled from somewhere and there’s nothing glamorous or pure about poverty. “Receive funding from” is not always the same as “working for the class interests of.” Class traitors are a thing, as you say, and as far as I know, PSL behaves like an organization in the interests of the working class and the colonized, imperialized, etc. If it were to start acting in openly imperialist ways and funding pointed to a bunch of billionaires and filling its ranks with capitalists, that would be a different story.
One guy isn’t representative of the capitalist/imperialist class as a whole.
Thanks for the clarity, I’ll keep this in mind.
In other words, uzmi pare
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
Neville Roy Singham. He also funds Vijay Prashad’s Tricontinental.
Based, Engels-pilled. If I get stupendously rich, I will do the same.
Side point but I’m like 80% sure PSL has nothing to do with that documentary.
It’s a great documentary tho. Members / adjacent members of PSL have made their own really good short and long-form documentaries too, like gaza fights for freedom, how palestine became colonized, several great ones on venezuela.
You’re likely just encountering the standard “communism and communist parties = bad” in a lot of english-speaking spaces.
PSL has been around a long time and it’d be insulting if anarchist and other ultraleft groups didn’t accuse it of everything under the sun (that they usually accuse each other of also). But because it practices demcent, and isn’t some trotskyite or anarchist sex cult, It’s not been shown that national or even any branch supports abuse.
Honestly, looking into the documentary. I am really having a hard time finding a connection on it with PSL. The only thing I can find is that PSL had a screening for it sometime after 2020~
The most important thing to know about the PSL is that there’s a ton of misinformation and disinformation online from various kinds of sources. Find out for yourself what they believe and how they work by reading their websites and meeting them in real life. You can never trust what you hear online about communists.
That PSL is authoritarian
They’re ML.
backed by a Chinese Maoist billionaire
Brian Becker is neither Chinese, Maoist, nor a billionaire.
PSL is riddled with sex abuse scandals
This is endemic to any dem-cent organization in the US. Idk how bad it has been at PSL but its not like a sex cult.
The main issue with the PSL is mostly around tactics. They do protests, they do protests well and I haven’t really seen them do much other than protests. They do engage in local political issues but its usually in the form of protests.
The PSL also hasn’t been very adept at appealing to the working class in the US. While they are leagues better than most on foreign policy, their rhetoric on domestic issues is severely lacking. Issues like student loans, housing, or medical expenses are rare in their literature. Without a concrete domestic program the PSL is an organization set to be on the right side of history but incapable of influencing that history.
I just wanted to offer an example of PSL tactics other than protesting: https://youtu.be/7DdPaj_ekrE
Not everyone in the video is a member, but some probably are based on the PSL shirts you’ll see.
edit: protesting, not organizing
Beautiful to see, thanks for highlighting this.
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
That PSL is authoritarian, backed by a Chinese Maoist billionaire
That of course PSL would simp for DPRK because it’s authoritarian.
This part is just the usual reactionary tripe and not be taken seriously. Breaking it down:
- Authoritarian is a meaningless word: every state has a monopoly on violence in order to hold onto its state power (this does not inherently mean it promotes violence or seeks to abuse its citizens). Socialist states exercise power to suppress the capitalist power and transition to socialism and then to communism, and this is backed by a communist vanguard party. Capitalist states exercise power to suppress the working class more generally, but also consciously liberation-centered groups like those calling themselves socialist, communist, etc. (Takeaway: “Whose interests is power deriving from?” is a meaningful question. “Does power use violence to maintain itself?” is not)
- “Chinese Maoist billionaire”: This is like a mad libs of red scare brain worms. The CPC itself, the vanguard party leadership of China, is not Maoist. They may at times refer back to Mao Zedong Thought, which is different from treating Mao’s words as a whole brand of Marxist theory on its own. Though there have been Maoist groups historically, who took Mao’s words more as dogma than “socialism with Chinese characteristics”, they are about as far away from being a billionaire as you can get.
- “PSL would simp for DPRK because it’s authoritarian”: I highly recommend Blowback podcast’s season on Korea. It’s not a pleasant history to learn about, but it may help in knowing more precisely why such a line is nonsense and why you can rebuff these people with confidence. Korea was brutalized first through Japanese occupation/colonialism and then through the US, the second of which continues this day with the occupation of what gets called “South Korea.” Without the DPRK, Korea would probably be a colony of the US and China would probably be in a much weaker position globally. The damage that the US did to Korea, damage to civilians and infrastructure, is horrific. The idea of being called a “holocaust denier” for defending the DPRK is sort of like calling someone a holocaust denier for saying that the holocast was bad. It makes no fucking sense lol. If anyone was abused on a level resembling genocide involving Korea, it was the US doing it to Korea.
that PSL is riddled with sex abuse scandals
Don’t know about reported incidents that have come up. It’s possible they’ve had issues with sex pests, but the important part would be how they’ve handled it. Organizing, especially among people who can be as colonizer-brained as those raised in the US, is going to have problems sometimes. So far, I’ve not heard anything that would suggest PSL is fundamentally a problematic org, but local branches may vary, as can happen with orgs. As far as I can tell, they appear to be one of the most promising ones the US has in the current state of things, which is not a particularly high bar to meet given how mired the US left is in “reform”, but it’s something. It’s also a reason why the imperialists would want to scare people away from getting involved with them.
Hope that helps.
“PSL would simp for DPRK because it’s authoritarian”: I highly recommend Blowback podcast’s season on Korea. It’s not a pleasant history to learn about, but it may help in knowing more precisely why such a line is nonsense and why you can rebuff these people with confidence. Korea was brutalized first through Japanese occupation/colonialism and then through the US, the second of which continues this day with the occupation of what gets called “South Korea.” Without the DPRK, Korea would probably be a colony of the US and China would probably be in a much weaker position globally. The damage that the US did to Korea, damage to civilians and infrastructure, is horrific. The idea of being called a “holocaust denier” for defending the DPRK is sort of like calling someone a holocaust denier for saying that the holocast was bad. It makes no fucking sense lol. If anyone was abused on a level resembling genocide involving Korea, it was the US doing it to Korea.
On the podcast, is it by RedPylon? Blowback: Season 3? I did look more into Korean history after posting the video and yes it’s seriously horrible. I cried reading about what actually happened there.
They also justified the sanctions and military actions on DPRK because the country stole a movie director from Japan? That they also killed Kim Jong-nam in Malasya back in 2017. What is the reality of that? I can’t find anything on this other than wikipedia links that they had posted on this. And after realizing just how much propaganda western media has, I am quite disillusioned on where to learn more. (I am so glad I found this place, seriously.)
On the podcast, is it by RedPylon? Blowback: Season 3? I did look more into Korean history after posting the video and yes it’s seriously horrible. I cried reading about what actually happened there.
I just checked and yeah, that should be the one I was thinking of. And yeah, it is a hard thing to learn about. 🫂 It’s one of those things where, like… I don’t know, it’s hard to find the right words for it. Like it’s important to learn about so we know better what’s going on in the world and how things got to the point that they are, so we can contend with how it is now. But that doesn’t make it hurt any less on its own. The world still needs liberation.
They also justified the sanctions and military actions on DPRK because the country stole a movie director from Japan? That they also killed Kim Jong-nam in Malasya back in 2017. What is the reality of that? I can’t find anything on this other than wikipedia links that they had posted on this. And after realizing just how much propaganda western media has, I am quite disillusioned on where to learn more. (I am so glad I found this place, seriously.)
I’m not informed on this specific incident myself, but hopefully someone else will know something and chime in. I just know the west has made up some really absurd claims about the DPRK over the years. Like saying they’re killing somebody for listening to kpop or stuff like that.
I think they are mostly good and do good work, somw of the criticisms you mention just sounds like sectarian insults from people of other leftist tendencies
From their literature list; it’s all books on Anarchism. Does that explain it?
Yes, but anarchism is also right-wing, so it has no meat. The actual left wing criticism ought to be historical, based in the evolution of these groups from stuff like the Worker’s World Party.
If you have researched and found nothing to back up any negative claims, there is a better than even chance it’s probably bot bullshit. Any organization even vaguely rubbing elbows with socialism, will come under attack. The Epstein Class goes after the DSA for being leftist and portray AOC as the next Lenin. I’m an SEP person myself and they come under the negative attacks.
If you have researched and found nothing to back up any negative claims, there is a better than even chance it’s probably bot bullshit.
I agree. The reason why I still feel the need to ask this is because I don’t know if I researched enough. I am extremely new to all of this, to ML-theory, to materialism.
I’m confident the the people deriding you are:
-50% bots
-25% class enemies acting in bad faith
-24% people who have gotten duped by the above
-1% Ted Danson
The people who were deriding me called the commenters in the documentary “russian bots” because they used the word “westoid”.
the authoritarian stuff is meaningless, and the DPRK documentary you watched is great and totally worth sharing. the issues i’ve heard about as it relates to PSL is about an ossified leadership and leadership structure. this is i think a large part of the reason why there have been so many sex abuse scandals: sex pests get into the org, commit sexual assault, and then are not removed but protected by various levels of leadership. this obviously implies some deep theoretical problems as well, which all current western ML orgs have anyhow.
i found this link that compiled every major criticism or complaint about PSL. i haven’t looked through them all (there are a lot), but those that i looked at (i mostly focused on the sexual assault coverup allegations) looked legitimate. there’s also some nonlegitimate critiques in there from what i recall, so take everything with a grain of salt. but, it does seem like western ML groups have an issue with not only patriarchal tendencies but underlying marxist patriarchal theory.
Thanks for the link. The two from that list that ring a bell is “PSL is a high-control group with an ineffective strategy” and “Ruthless Criticism, But Keep It to Yourself: Concealment and Corruption in PSL Philadelphia”. I think those are the two that were said about PSL in the forum I was in.
Fwiw those have been basically the two biggest criticisms for the last like 5 years. I haven’t heard anything pop up after that.
Authoritarian for who? Authoritarian for bourgeoisie, libs, imperialists…
I unfortunately don’t know much about the PSL, but I am curious about the documentary if you’re willing to share
Thanks comrade!
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
Making a separate comment to add more onto the initial post:
I’m not American and before my posting of the documentary, I had no idea what PSL was. I was not even aware of Marxist-Leninism. I wanted to ask because the ‘Chinese Maoist Billionaire’ and ‘sex abuse scandals’ was used to discredit the documentary. That because PSL made it—the documentary itself was invalid. That it was just propaganda.
This in addition to justifying the sanctions and attacks on DPRK made me also question their condemnation of PSL.
That because PSL made it—the documentary itself was invalid. That it was just propaganda.
Forgive me if I sound like a teacher seizing on everything to make another point lol, but this strikes me as worth addressing as well.
One of the accusations that gets levied at liberation efforts, anti-imperialist efforts, marxist-leninist efforts, and so on, is that they use “propaganda”. The implication here is that propaganda is some kind of uniquely bad thing that the bad people are doing and that the Good and Pure Western Empire does not stoop to the level of propaganda (even though they definitely, explicitly do, example here: https://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/documents-expose-how-hollywood-promotes-war-on-behalf-of-the-pentagon-cia-and-nsa/).
It’s this baseless claim to some kind of “neutrality” and is used to position the empire as somehow “above the fray” and able to make judgments of peoples and countries from on high. Likely going back to colonialism and its positioning of the colonizer as a “civil people” who are above the “savages”. There’s a good piece on colonialism pinned on lemmygrad for discussion right now in fact: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/10964427
The reality is: Everything and everyone has bias. However, this is not the same as saying “everything is relative” (which would be more like solipsism and not a dialectical materialist view). It’s more just a way of pushing back on the idea that anyone/entity can be truly neutral to conflict. That having biases does not uniquely taint you and is an inevitable part of existence.
The important part for communists / marxist-leninists is that information is representative of truths about oppression and is in the interests of the oppressed masses. It is biased toward their interests, but this does not de facto mean it is dishonest. On the flip side, much of capitalist media is biased toward capitalist interests, but is presented dishonestly as if it is in the interests of the masses - otherwise, the working class would be put off by it.
It’s this baseless claim to some kind of “neutrality” and is used to position the empire as somehow “above the fray” and able to make judgments of peoples and countries from on high. Likely going back to colonialism and its positioning of the colonizer as a “civil people” who are above the “savages”. There’s a good piece on colonialism pinned on lemmygrad for discussion right now in fact: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/10964427
Okay so this basically was my experience in that forum. I wasn’t even conscious of the class struggle and was completely unaware of reading theory before my experience with posting the documentary. I didn’t really understand these feelings, this sense of injustice that I was discovering for the first time. I wasn’t even siding with DPRK yet but realized I should at least be critical of the propaganda that western media spews out non-stop at the very least. That’s what I emphasized in my thread but the reaction was overwhelmingly negative. As the thread went on I became flustered with the responses and looked into the things they were saying, not feeling right with the responses. They brought up USAID and that disagreeing with USAID was horrible to do. That “both sides” of imperialism are bad. (Saying that China and DPRK are imperialist). They were justifying US/NATO presence everywhere because while they “oppose imperialism” they somehow justify that it’s better than the “savages” of DPRK becoming imperalist.
I felt that it was basically? Defaulting to the imperial core? Mind you, the entire forum is mostly Americans. I genuinely thought they advocated for justice and rights, they do call themselves very leftist. But when challenging this, they suddenly became extremely pro-imperialism.
I crashed out and felt betrayed. But out of that I found out why I felt this way because it lead me to read on Marxist-Leninism. How? Because I looked up “tankie” and “campism” which is what they called me and that they don’t tolerate Marxist-Leninist posts.
Sorry for the tangent. Haven’t felt a place to vent these thoughts anywhere.
Congrats on finding Marxism-Leninism!
Thank you! I’m still learning and the amount of books, lectures and articles are hard for me to read as I am a slow person but the knowledge is very worth it.
That’s awesome! If you want something to help guide your studies, I made a basic ML reading list that you can check out, see if it helps!
I want to give you the biggest hug ever. You’ve found good people.
Thank you!! I think so too! After having lurked for a bit and seeing how people talk here, it’s very interesting since in other places it ends in a lot of name calling and bans.
No sorry needed, I’m glad you found this place. Dealing with those kind of people is an experience I’m sure most, if not all, here have had at one point or another (and if I’m not mistaken, it was one of the motivations for building this forum in the first place). Some have even described experiences like it in the west with political parties that position themselves as “left” but then have shitty stances on imperialism. It can be very disillusioning.
I haven’t been here since the beginning, but from what I hear, this place has been accused of being repressive in its views or something, when it’s other instances on lemmy that have a tendency to defederate with it. It really is reminiscent of DARVO (deny, attack, reverse victim and offender).
So-called “tankies” are supposedly “authoritarian” but imperialists don’t blink an eye when the empire justifies another aggressive and unprovoked military operation in a country thousands of miles away, when it coups other countries, when it puts sanctions on another country that result in the deaths of its citizens, and so on.
they somehow justify that it’s better than the “savages” of DPRK becoming imperalist.
Yeah, pretty much colonialism in a nutshell. The old “civil and savage” narrative continues to rear its head. That you’ll find this sort of garbage coming from people from the US makes more sense when you consider it in the context of its origins as a settler colony committing genocide and building itself through slavery, and then its subsequent transformation to a global imperial power. And its western europe allies, many of them have their share of brutal parts in colonial history. British empire, French colonialism, Belgian, etc.
(Saying that China and DPRK are imperialist).
There’s a term you’ll probably come across, if you haven’t already learned about it. Ultra-left, or left-com. Some people who purport to be on the left and even are closer to being marxist-leninist than the colonizer-brained people tend to be, will try to pull this “both sides” thing and say “the US is imperialist but also China is”. So that’s another angle to look out for. China, from all the evidence I’ve seen, does mutually-beneficial deals with other countries, or even gives them loans that are easy to pay back to help them build vital infrastructure, which is markedly different from the imperial practice of predatory loans and purposeful underdevelopment of a country in order to maintain control of it and use it as an outpost for extracting resources. ProleWiki has a good article on that here: https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Imperialism#Chinese_“imperialism”
So-called “tankies” are supposedly “authoritarian” but imperialists don’t blink an eye when the empire justifies another aggressive and unprovoked military operation in a country thousands of miles away, when it coups other countries, when it puts sanctions on another country that result in the deaths of its citizens, and so on.
It was doubly frustrating because one person who took GREAT offense to the video, who also linked to wikipedia articles like the kidnapping of a Japanese director or the Malaysia assassination in 2017. When disputed on this, I was not allowed to talk about it because I was “some white dude in Iceland” and they however, was a child of a refugee from the Vietnam war(southern region I think?) and that there’s generational trauma that somehow gives them higher authority on the opinion of this entire conversation. Who then proceeded to defend imperialism while at the same time saying they have issues with US imperialism. What am I to think about this? It was very confusing. Said person was American too.
I wasn’t sure what to think of it myself, because well. I am not oppressed, I am white and living within the imperial core is a status of privilege no matter how well I am actually doing in life. Still though, that whole interaction still bothers me. Is it wrong?
ProleWiki has a good article on that here: https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Imperialism#Chinese_“imperialism”
I also read https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Essay:State_Capital_vs._Finance_Capital:_Why_China_is_not_--_and_Cannot_Become_--_an_Imperial_Hegemon which I thought was a very good essay.
Oh yeah, that’s a frustrating sort of trap. You’re trying to be conscientious about being a white person talking to someone who is considered non-white and they’re using this against you to push narratives that actually benefit white supremacy. So I think that’s the important thing to look for, is when the implicit narrative they’re pushing is enabling of white supremacy and its racism. vs. when they’re sharing a lived experience that is worth listening to and taking into account.
The common implication here, for example, is that 1) They (sometimes as a person who has never even lived in the region they’re talking about, who is only related to it by ethnicity and distance of being a descendant of someone who has) somehow speak for millions of people who do live there and who grew up there and who still live there. 2) What the people who do live there say is not worth listening to or is tainted when they overall like their government because “they’re brainwashed” (millions of them, apparently). Which is pretty racist.
So it circles back to the superiority thing, but they’re siding with the imperial/colonial view instead of the one that benefits their own people (and to be fair, they may have less connection with their ethnic country of origin than the imperial core country they live in if they grew up in the empire, immersed in its culture).
As for where they get the narratives like “my father/grandfather/etc. was oppressed by the government and fled”, sometimes that goes back to their relative being among the power elite from the previous regime and so they fled for that reason. Like a landlord. It’s not always the case, but when we’re talking about governments led by a communist vanguard party, it is one of the reasons those stories get started. I believe another reason is people buying into fear-mongering of “scary commies” when the change of power happens and fleeing for that reason. War of course can be scary and involve hardship regardless of what side you’re on, and Vietnam was trying to shake off the yoke of colonialism.
So yeah, in short: If they’re pushing views that further white supremacy, them being non-white doesn’t excuse it. And some of the so-called victims of communism are members of the former exploiting class who ran. If you’re ever uncertain about it, please feel free to bring it up more on this forum and ask. None of us is imbued with proper judgment on it with ease and working through stuff together can help.
P.S. I don’t think I’ve actually read that essay myself, but I will give it a read, thanks for mentioning it. Looks like a good addon to the point, to further back it up.
They spend as more time trashing Trotskyism than they do on elections. Not exactly a “big socialist tent” approach to electoral politics or organizing. https://www.kshamasawant.org/why-im-running/ (an actually socialist who has won office and done things before)
Do you consider yourself to be a marxist leninist or something else? I’m actually confused right now as to what position you’re even taking here. Soc dem? Ultra? A mix of the two?
Tend to lean into the SEP transnational methodology; more of a Trotskyist-Maoist mash-up. I find Marxism-Leninism a bit too Eurocentric. It is why the 1924 revolution in China failed and Mao created a different approach than that used by the Bolsheviks. I have concluded that the failure of communism in the US is the abandonment of the rural areas and cities of the Mid-West, that were once socialist hotbeds (ex. Minneapolis), in favor of a coastal urban approach.
Then again, I’m not the sharpest tack in the box and will definitely not be part of the vanguard. I read Capital three times and still didn’t “get it” until I listened to the “Reading Capital with Comrades” podcast from PSL’s Liberation School. https://liberationschool.org/reading-capital-with-comrades-podcast/
I think the most important election in the US this year, is Will Lehman’s second try to become president of the UAW; Shawn Fain and Biden used dirty tricks the last election to keep him out of office. A socialist in charge of a major union would be a first step in the right direction. The much touted mid-term elections are a farce and still a choice between the Republican AfD Party and the Democratic Likud Party.
I see, thanks for explaining where you’re coming from.
I find Marxism-Leninism a bit too Eurocentric. It is why the 1924 revolution in China failed and Mao created a different approach than that used by the Bolsheviks. I have concluded that the failure of communism in the US is the abandonment of the rural areas and cities of the Mid-West, that were once socialist hotbeds (ex. Minneapolis), in favor of a coastal urban approach.
Reminds me, this thread has an interesting part related to ML, in the Chinese understanding, through the eyes of a member of the KPRF visiting China: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/10935588
Some excerpts:
While China has adopted the best of the West in its industrial organization, its creative development is imbued with its own cultural traditions. This is the “Sinicization of Marxism,” the meaning of which is so often debated.
Returning to the forum, I’ll say that at first, the terms used by the speakers, like “the sinicization of Marxism” and “the sinicization of socialism,” jarred on the ear. Someone impressed by the scale of change in China might have imagined that Beijing, having sensed its strength, would now sinicize the entire world in the style of Trotskyism. However, this notion is false. Moreover, it contradicts the very essence of the development model China proposes.
“The Sinicization of Marxism for Russia is Leninism. Lenin is one of the most, if not the most, brilliant Marxist and political figure in world history. In its initial stages, the CPC, inspired by the successes and victories of the USSR, copied the Soviet model as much as possible, but quickly realized the futility of this approach. This isn’t because Leninism, the Leninist model of socialism, is flawed. No, it’s simply that Lenin developed them for Russia, for its culture, traditions, including its traditional economic structure. They are undoubtedly optimal and relevant for Russia.”
Therefore, from the vantage point of my experience, I urge you to adhere as closely as possible to the principles developed by Lenin. They are the most optimal for Russia. Therefore, Leninism is the Sinicization of Marxism for Russia.
So I think it is somewhat a matter of the definition one uses. But there appears to be some agreement on the idea of the concepts of marxism-leninism being worth modeling after, with variation based on the characteristics of where one is doing it.
I would also posit that based on what I’ve read on Trotskyism, your position sounds in line with adaptive marxist thinking and like it would be at odds with the kind of conclusion Trotsky came to. As I understand it, he landed on the end of believing the peasantry could not be a reliable ally. But you are emphasizing the importance of “rural areas and cities of the Mid-West”, which I’d think would have some similar characteristics to the peasantry under feudalism insofar as people who own some amount of land that they work and things like that.
I don’t know, I might be overly hasty in the crossover there, but I guess what I’m getting at is your position sounds (to me) more like supportive of the modern Chinese view on marxism than anything else.
Then again, I’m not the sharpest tack in the box and will definitely not be part of the vanguard. I read Capital three times and still didn’t “get it” until I listened to the “Reading Capital with Comrades” podcast from PSL’s Liberation School. https://liberationschool.org/reading-capital-with-comrades-podcast/
Capital is pretty hard to read. Or at least, I find it to be. I’ll have to bookmark that resource, I may get some help out of it myself.
Lev Bronstein is Trotsky’s birthname. I think they’re quite clearly a Trotskyist.
Oh I didn’t realize. Good catch. Yeah, that plus Tardigrade which I just looked up:
Tardigrades live in diverse regions of Earth’s biosphere – mountaintops, the deep sea, tropical rainforests, and the Antarctic. They are among the most resilient animals known, with individual species able to survive severe conditions, such as exposure to extreme temperatures, extreme pressures (both high and low), air deprivation, radiation, dehydration, and starvation – that would quickly kill most other forms of life. Tardigrades have survived exposure to outer space.
So kind of a sideways way of saying “resilient Trotskyist”
Isn’t PSL a trotskyist offshoot itself?
Ish, they’re an offshoot of a Marcy-ite party. I think that’s basically Trotskyism with support for AES? Sort of circling back around to ML.
From a quick search, I’m not finding anything indicating such, but PSL was apparently a split from the Workers World Party in 2004 and the WWP was (in the 50s) a split from the Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party as a result of that party’s opposition to the Soviet Union. So some Trotskyist roots if you go back decades, but, as far as I can tell, roots which were split away from precisely because of those roots being considered Trotskyist in a bad way.
Lots of enthusiasm in this thread, but no mention of what Brian Becker’s actual goal is: voting out the republicans and triggering a widespread elevation of consciousness among the settler population via protesting and posting online. PSL is just one of his ideological Pokemon lol. Is… anyone even aware of what he says on his own show? Go watch his show right now, preferably one with Mike Prysner crying about the poor little veterans having to spill their precious blood in Iraq. It’s fun! Just imagine how ballistic Marx would have gone listening to the radio. Makes me clean and cook like a kind of reverse-tornado.
If it means anything, yes I love that documentary too, everything about it, one of the first things that really transported me into what it would be like to endure a torture center. Something about the depressed lawyer with his crappy paper cup of coffee just pulls me in. I have also made a lot of assumptions about what the PSL is and enthusiastically debunked harebrained MLM/anarchist smears against them.
The issue with why all these orgs have such a tolerance for informant behavior like sexually assaulting people will have to be left for another time, so maybe it is best for me not to even mention it, because it is a topic of the utmost severity and must be approach throroughly and comprehensively.
I’ve listened to the Socialist Program for many years now, and I don’t agree with your approximation of Brian Becker. He makes many good points and I don’t find myself disagreeing with him. I probably listen once a month, so I’m not an expert on his beliefs. I’m also not American.
Of the all the groups in the USA, they seem to be the most well organized and largest compared to FRSO and a better political line than CPUSA/DSA and any other smaller groups. But like I said, this is only what I’ve observed from afar. I know they had some scandals in the past.
This isn’t about discrediting the entirety of the ideology they use for recruitment. Anyone can point out the obvious about how fucked up the USA is and we can nod our heads and tune in for the next episode, nothing happens. It’s primarily about what drives the organization (where their limitations come from) and how they plan to achieve what are ostensibly their goals.
Removed by mod
Ah yes, “the episode” of the show. Well if they say the same thing in every one, it must be a great use of our time. I should not even be responding to personal attacks which treat what I am saying as condemnation of everything either of them have ever said, you’re being completely disingenuous. Whatever you think of veteran activism portraying troops as victims in imperialist wars is none of my business. I’m here to discuss the party form of socialism, not student activist-tier naievete with added bickering. Maybe you ought to consider who started making personal attacks over a Youtube video before deciding who is acting like a “jackass” here, no?
Are you aware the democrats also namedrop sexual assault in their ranks & in the military? Do we take people’s statements of intent at face value or do we examine their actions? How do you think Prysner intends to do something about the US military? This whole project’s claims of usefulness has an expiration date, and with the looks of things in West Asia we may be closing in on it sooner than expected.
Removed by mod
@v_pp
What are you trying to imply here? Are you upset that a PSL affiliated news program is covering news? It’s not like this is the PSL party line.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
No seriously, go watch Brian Becker’s own show and come back and tell me I’m wrong. You are looking at a democrat who barely even hides it.
What I find on him at a glance so far suggests that he’s consistently on the side of anti-imperialist messaging and defense of AES states. What does that have to do with being a democrat?
Edit: Watched an episode of what I can only guess is the show you’re referring to (this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-dtDQ2yrPo&list=PLwZtBKjGSMzU5sfEXGAUcC-ZqOINABYNi) and in one episode, he already mentioned Marxism and socialism explicitly and quoted Engels, so I dunno what you’re on about comparing him to democrats.
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
Because he intends to achieve antiimperialism via electoralism and marches. Picture a guy installing fake airbags in your car and saying he just wanted to make you feel better when it kills a passenger. Do we credit ACP for their inconsistent ideological support of AES countries (depending on how public the group/voice chat is 👀)? They are building influencers and a settler labor movement in the fashion of the CPUSA and DSA. Their existence is dependent on large donors, their fundraising network is synonymous with progressivism (I realize this is a structural claiming requiring extensive citations, I’d like to cover every one but each day a new person like that Abugazelah lady pops up and adds 6 more to the graph).
The USA crushes people who support militancy or build the party form of socialism. The PSL is training influencers that, if you go to your local protest, have built a relationship with the police in order to make things peaceful and orderly. Unless they have radically shifted in the past 2 years since I left the country. Following them online, it seems to be the same.
This is all assuming that you can even join the party. They often tell people to bugger off because they’re full and want to balance their demographics for optics, because again they are not a mass movement. Notice how people here are not saying they are actually in the PSL, only what they have heard about it.
Is this making any sense, or should I save this all for something long-form to avoid agitating and confusing others? I would like to cover the history of the FRSO as well. Avakian is fun too but he’s too blatantly kooky.
Is this making any sense,
Not really to me because 1) it’s a lot of broad claims without receipts and 2) it doesn’t reflect what they appear to be doing in actuality.
It’s one of those weird moments where like, I don’t think anybody here has a super high opinion of them like they are the proven vanguard of the US working class (idk maybe I’ve missed the sentiment if such was expressed), but they are doing something. And you’re arguing like they’re actively harming instead. So it comes out sounding like it’s a debate between whether they are saviors or villains, when it’s surely more complex than that.
Okay, then maybe we can have a separate discussion another time on if we think tricking people into doing fake revolutionary activity is good or bad. I usually post on my phone when I shouldn’t post at all, so I’ll definitely get back to you after sorting out my bookmarks. Thought that someone else might find the experience of listening to Becker and Prysner shoot the shit a bit jarring after interacting with PSL accounts.
My contention is this isn’t the party form, it’s one of many ideological nodes in a wider alternative media and NGO fundraising network that developed out of a preexisting network of money laundering and capture that was exposed during the McCarthy era (I’m not basing this on their opinions and current tactics alone). One that actually crosses over seamlessly into Scott Ritter/ACP territory. Not to mention Margaret Kimberly, RT, and PressTV (personally I do not think that black Americans and foreign state media should spare resources on distractions in a battle for life and death). If I were trying to sort people into good and bad buckets I wouldn’t even notice this stuff.
The prison activism stuff is particularly heartbreaking once you realize how this kind of thing is used to stall people out and ruin their lives, just long enough to avoid prison riots. Have you read Blood In My Eye by George Jackson? https://annas-archive.pk/md5/20f816158d230048174c52c634c6eb2e
(Apologies if this is not the best file on offer from Anna’s, I’m trying to keep better track of it these days but mostly going off files on the ereader and searching.)
Actually I have one more thought about the saviour/villain thing. This is much more serious than that. It’s about distilling what we focus on down to what’s important so we can spend more time with family and friends. Isn’t that important to you? Isn’t the political energy expended on protests valuable and finite? The time spent reading articles by Ryan Grim instead of reading Leila Khaled’s story or finding comrades internationally?
Okay, then maybe we can have a separate discussion another time on if we think tricking people into doing fake revolutionary activity is good or bad.
What? Of course it’s bad, the question is not whether it’s bad, the question is whether that’s what PSL is doing (so far, your only evidence of that I can discern is that they do protests and that you believe they should put their focus on other things). Protest culture has its problems, but you have not demonstrated that PSL is discouraging people from doing more than that and you have not demonstrated that PSL is only doing that.
Thought that someone else might find the experience of listening to Becker and Prysner shoot the shit a bit jarring after interacting with PSL accounts.
Well, I’d have to see the clip because I don’t know what interaction you’re talking about and if you want to talk about limited time, I don’t want to spend my time trying to hunt down exactly what you’re referring to because a single person on the internet says an entire party is misleading people. I already went and watched an episode of a show with Brian Becker, in which nothing particular seemed off about him. Other than maybe that he’s not exactly Lenin, but my expectations for the US left are pretty low.
I have read Blood In My Eye, though it was a while back. I don’t remember it well enough to guess at what connection you’re making between it and protest culture.
The continued comparisons to ACP seems rather disingenuous to me. The reasons why the ACP is a problem has come up many times here in detail, the most basic of which is that they’re patsoc. I have not seen evidence that PSL shares that tendency, or other corralling or wrecking tendencies that you’d expect to see from a party that is there to divert revolutionary energy, and given the willingness on this forum to call out issues with western parties and investigate what is going wrong with them, I would expect to have seen such by now.
I usually post on my phone when I shouldn’t post at all, so I’ll definitely get back to you after sorting out my bookmarks.
I would rather you do it as its own sourced thread if you’re going to do it at all, so it’s more visible and people can work through the claims collectively.
That’s fine. I would hope people are more alarmed by veteran activism at this point, but let’s come back to it later. I have someone else going full Youtube comments on me and accusing me of supporting rape. Just thought that the thread could use a bit more than a dozen people saying the organization is secretly awesome and has transformative potential not already demonstrated.
Folks who have been part of the same imperialist forces that dropped Rainbow Pesticides all over SEA & forbid troops from referring to Vietnamese people as human beings don’t benefit from being told that they are special sparkling stars. Their place in a working class movement needs to be strictly clarified.
I need to emphasize if the PSL changes its form of organizing that it will lose a large part of its fundraising network and collaborations. Internally, maintaining these ties is justified as “coalition building” when it is in fact limiting tailism. (You can be a tailist strategically and run your own candidates sporadically, see progressives/US greens.)
