[lbo-talk] Tea Party: less than meets the eye

Marv Gandall marvgand at gmail.com
Wed Nov 10 08:11:49 PST 2010


On 2010-11-10, at 10:19 AM, Wojtek S wrote:


> ... It is quite telling that when the
> issue of working class struggle was brought up, the only examples of that
> struggle mentioned were strikes and trade unionism.

…in reply to your assertion that class conflict no longer existed.


> If memory serves, the
> limits of that strategy were already exposed by Lenin over 100 years ago
> ("What is to be done") - so counting on industrial action alone seems like
> moving the clock back to the 19th century.

We weren't discussing the limits of bread-and-butter unionism or revolutionary syndicalism as a strategy for taking power. Lenin well understood - as you seemed to have not and perhaps still don't - that strikes were also expressions of class struggle, but that a disciplined revolutionary party was required outside of the workplace to lead the workers to state power through forms of political class struggle ranging from demonstrations to armed insurrection, its highest form.


> The proposal was dismissed
> by the "professional radical left," which does not surprise me, because
> theirs is a form of religion - if you do not go to heaven my way, you will
> not get there at all - or ours is god-given everyone else's is man made…
> And this is the reality, the objections and delusions of the professional
> American state haters and gutter populists notwithstanding.

You're a clever and well-educated fellow, but you're too easily agitated and the static will cause others to tune you out. It's unnecessary and ineffective.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list