On 2013-10-06, at 1:57 PM, Carrol Cox wrote:
> Marv g: [clip] The best defence of public spending, of course, is to expose
> the sham accounting which purports to show the state will run out of money
> to fund social programs, and to point to truly wasteful spending on the
> corporations and the military. But the governing parties in the US and
> Europe are all Austerians to greater or lesser degree, and, except perhaps
> in Greece, there are, alas, no parties of the left anywhere near to
> displacing them.
>
> ------------
>
> And there never will be such a party in the foreseeable future. That is the
> reason it is so crucial for (actual) leftists to break the hold of the DP
> over "leftists" [sic] in the U.S. There is no hope, period, for anything, as
> long as that grip continues.
I'm afraid that even if the very, very small number of those you identify as (actual) leftists were to succeed in breaking the hold of the DP on the very small number of those you identify as (phony) leftists, it would barely register with the trade unionists, national minorities, and allied single issue movement activists who presently support the party. You acknowledge as much when you say there will never be a party to the left of the Democrats in the foreseeable future.
That is probable, but not certain. As Wojtek writes, and as I've written on previous occasions, the collapse of the Soviet Union and swift transformation of China in our lifetime demonstrates how abrupt and unexpected historic change can be. We're not oracles who can divine the future and it is best to eschew sweeping predictions, a habit which has historically had deleterious effects on the far left's credibility .
You're also too certain, IMO, of what a mass radicalization would look like. It could originate and primarily express itself through a party like the DP which commands the allegiance of the workers (as a prelude to a split from it), or it could primarily express itself by bypassing the established party. That is also part of the historical record.
You're equally too certain of the need to urgently organize individuals today on the assumption they will form the nucleus of a mass anticapitalist party tomorrow. We used to pretentiously call this "the molecular accumulation of cadre", but the human molecules used to fall away faster than we could accumulate them. Some veteran activists will indeed have important lessons to pass on and could play leading roles, but they would be dwarfed by a new crop of leaders from both inside and outside of the DP who would rediscover in both theory and practice the strategies and tactics which prior generations employed. I wouldn't want to dissuade you from organizing in your community since you derive personal satisfaction from it. My quarrel with you is about the greatly exaggerated political significance you attach to your activity, and your insistent berating of those, both active and inactive, who don't share your perspective.
Finally, as in the past, failure or success will ultimately depend on whether capitalism has exhausted its historical capacity to reform itself and provide tolerable living standards for the masses.
Set against these considerations, you can see why I find it hard to treat seriously your claim that the "crucial" factor is whether today's "(actual) leftists break the hold of the DP over 'leftists' [sic] in the U.S."
If it were only so simple.