>
> On Jun 1, 2013, at 3:15 PM, Marv Gandall wrote:
>
>> I've known these vanguard groups from the inside and have read enough material produced by today's ISO to appreciate that, whatever else the organization may be, it is not composed of "psychologically vulnerable and politically naive young idealists" led by armchair elitists who "sedulously indoctrinate them into a stale and anachronistic ideology" (!!!
>> !) which, for the most part, I still share. If that doesn't reek of red-baiting, I don't know what does.
>
> If that says that you share an ideology (for the most part), how would I look it up, say on wiki, or with google search? I guess I mean 'what's it called'?
Marxism, as you know, which is not saying much, since there are so many divergent Marxist schools that the term has lost much of its explanatory power. There is not even agreement as to whether or not it is an "ideology", and generations of politically active Marxists have been bitterly and sometimes violently divided over tactics and strategy. Nevertheless, on the most fundamental level, my understanding of the past and present and my political allegiances fall well within the Marxist tradition as opposed to those commonly associated with anarchism, social democracy, liberalism, and conservatism. Which obviously places me closer to the ISO and others who also identify with the Marxist tradition, including on this list, than to those who sharply criticize the ISO's "stale and anachronistic ideology" without explanation and for whatever reason.