Is the Prog Labor Party libertarian. I read it's Wiki and it seems cool. Also a tad arrogant and pretty dumb tactics wise. But it seems to be libertarian.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Labor_Party_(United_States)
Dec 20 2013 05:23
Dec 20 2013 06:08
I had never even heard of the PLP until this thread but I'm really at a loss as to how you got that impression. From a quick glance at their website, included in their listed accomplishments are
Progressive Liberal Party wrote:
Established a Venture Capital Fund with $3 million to assist entrepreneurs.
and
Progressive Liberal Party wrote:
Allocated $25 million at the Bahamas Development Bank to assist entrepreneurs.
Dec 20 2013 10:28
Uhhh, iexist:
Immigration: Fixing a Broken System
- A new Royal Bahamas Defence Force division dedicated solely to protecting our borders against illegal immigrants.
- A substantial increase in air and border patrols. An integrated and coordinated law enforcement policy, with new training programs in best practices and the use of modern technology.
- Tougher penalties for Bahamian employers who hire illegal immigrants.
- A new test for all people applying for permanent residency or citizenship in The Bahamas, to ensure they understand our language, culture, and history.
Also, they're a party, dude, they want state power. What gave you the impression they were libertarian?
Dec 20 2013 12:14
I meant the progressive labor party I messed up with the link.
Dec 20 2013 12:15
It's fixed now.
Dec 20 2013 13:11
Quote:
Is the Prog Labor Party libertarian. I read it's Wiki and it seems cool.
Some general advice, never stop at wikipedia, wiki articles about small parties and groups are usually written by their supporters or in rare cases there enemies, they shouldn't be taken at face value.
I actually have heard of the PLP, one of the few regular posters on Unionbook is a PLP member. From his comments he they aren't at all Libertarian, they seem to be the standard "Resist, fill out a membership application" typical vanguard group.
Reading there website confirms this impression http://www.plp.org/key-documents/
Quote:
Under the banners of its revolutionary communist party, the working class must arm itself and fight to win power. After the Party has led to the seizure of power, the working class must remain armed. To win and hold power, the working class must develop its own Red Army.
Quote:
The Party is organized on the basis of democratic centralism. The Party is divided into cells, or clubs, which meet regularly to evaluate members' work and to make suggestions about how to improve it, and to evaluate the Party's positions and make suggestions for change. These suggestions are taken by the club leader to section meetings (made up of the club leaders and other leading comrades in an area, and by section leaders to the Central Committee. Based on the collective experience of the Party, the leadership decides on new positions (a new line) which all Party members are then bound to put into practice.
The rest of its stuff is in the same tone, "We are the true anti-revisionist party in America" "We will bring Marxist-Leninist to the working masses". They seem like just another tiny vanguard trying to push out all the other contenders.
Dec 20 2013 13:33
Those Marxist-Leninist orgs are like an additional tax expense.
"Pay your dues, or else Uncle Lenin will be knocking on your door."
Dec 20 2013 13:40
I'd been very into them before when I thought they were decent and actually had a little bit of correspondence with them. The impression I ended up getting was that they were standard democratic centralist types, as Reddebrek pointed out. I had asked them a question regarding how the PLP handles internal democracy and class-struggle organizations that didn't agree with the PLP line. This was the answer I received:
Progressive Labor Party wrote:
As for your question, pro-working class voices will be heard but when a decision is made all members would have to carry that our that decision so we can have a practical scientific analysis of the situation. If people aren't in the party then their would have to be sharp struggle/discussion around the issue and again once a decision is made it must be carried out.
They did have some interesting observations regarding theories of super-exploitation and inter-imperialist conflict, but these were neither original nor particularly smart (actually, it was kinda blinkered). Basically, they are a less interesting Kasama Project. I find it kind of amusing, actually, that Maoism ever took off among lefty types in a country that has never had a peasant class.
Dec 20 2013 14:31
Given that quote above, just out of curiosity, do you have to carry out their edicts to the letter and without question, typos and all?
Party member #1: It says we have to puge the traitors.
Party member #2: What's a puge?
Party member #1: Shhh! Do you want them to give you a puging as well!
Dec 20 2013 15:03
Kasamas pretty cool:
http://kasamaproject.org/threads/entry/nothing-revolutionary-is-alien-to-us
Dec 20 2013 17:12
iexist, what could possibly give you the impression that the politics of any of these Maoist groups are at all similar to those of anarchists? I don't see what's cool about Kasama's cheerleading of murderous Maoist gangsters in Nepal--a "a coherent and determined revolutionary force, charting a new course in the face of betrayal and encirclement from powerful states hostile toward their movement" according to them.
I really think you should take a more critical view of these various groups instead of praising any small organization that pays some vague lip service to "revolution!" and "socialism!" (not that either Kasama or the PLP much hide their favorable attitude toward Stalinism i.e. a form of state capitalism).
Dec 20 2013 18:40
PLP was the first US party coming out of the first wave in the "anti-revisionist" trend.
This trend, and PLP, was to give rise to the pro-Maoist "new communist movement" in the US.
Here's a 1977 piece by two NCM activists: http://www.marxists.org/history/erol/1960-1970/5retreats/index.htm
Knock yourself out with the ML family tree: http://www.marxists.org/history/erol/ncm-1a/chart.pdf
Dec 20 2013 18:48
syndicalist wrote:
PLP was the first US party coming out of the first wave in the "anti-revisionist" trend.
This trend, and PLP, was to give rise to the pro-Maoist "new communist movement" in the US.Here's a 1977 piece by two NCM activists: http://www.marxists.org/history/erol/1960-1970/5retreats/index.htm
Knock yourself out with the ML family tree: http://www.marxists.org/history/erol/ncm-1a/chart.pdf
The chapter on "The Retreat from Marxist-Leninism" is the best example of a surrealist joke I've ever read. I just, I can't even.
Dec 20 2013 18:58
WordShaker wrote:
syndicalist wrote:
PLP was the first US party coming out of the first wave in the "anti-revisionist" trend.
This trend, and PLP, was to give rise to the pro-Maoist "new communist movement" in the US.Here's a 1977 piece by two NCM activists: http://www.marxists.org/history/erol/1960-1970/5retreats/index.htm
Knock yourself out with the ML family tree: http://www.marxists.org/history/erol/ncm-1a/chart.pdf
The chapter on "The Retreat from Marxist-Leninism" is the best example of a surrealist joke I've ever read. I just, I can't even.
Ah, come on, gotta love this"
The evolution of PLP from a Marxist-Leninist Party into an anarchist party is the history of struggle between two lines within the Party – a Marxist-Leninist working class line vs. the petty-bourgeois anarchist line. With each defeat of the Marxist-Leninist opposition a concurrent process occurred in the leadership, a process of corruption of the leadership, convinced of their own infallibility, in short a process of bourgeoisification.
Dec 20 2013 22:22
Tyrion wrote:
iexist, what could possibly give you the impression that the politics of any of these Maoist groups are at all similar to those of anarchists? I don't see what's cool about Kasama's cheerleading of murderous Maoist gangsters in Nepal--a "a coherent and determined revolutionary force, charting a new course in the face of betrayal and encirclement from powerful states hostile toward their movement" according to them.I really think you should take a more critical view of these various groups instead of praising any small organization that pays some vague lip service to "revolution!" and "socialism!" (not that either Kasama or the PLP much hide their favorable attitude toward Stalinism i.e. a form of state capitalism).
Not everything on libcom is agreed with by the group. It's the SAMs with kasama it's a project of reevaluation based on the idea that Leninists are have been doing the same thing for 80 years but failed. Kasama would allow trots, anarchos and Maoists to join. One of its LEADERS is a ex Trot whose only read combat liberalism.
Dec 21 2013 00:01
Regardless of how Kasama may conceive of itself or who it may allow to join, don't you see how its very supportive attitude toward capitalist gangsters (namely Maoists) is irreconcilably in conflict with anarchism and communism more broadly?
Dec 21 2013 00:54
That's one guys opinion not a kasama position.
Dec 21 2013 01:00
iexist wrote:
Tyrion wrote:
iexist, what could possibly give you the impression that the politics of any of these Maoist groups are at all similar to those of anarchists? I don't see what's cool about Kasama's cheerleading of murderous Maoist gangsters in Nepal--a "a coherent and determined revolutionary force, charting a new course in the face of betrayal and encirclement from powerful states hostile toward their movement" according to them.I really think you should take a more critical view of these various groups instead of praising any small organization that pays some vague lip service to "revolution!" and "socialism!" (not that either Kasama or the PLP much hide their favorable attitude toward Stalinism i.e. a form of state capitalism).
Not everything on libcom is agreed with by the group. It's the SAMs with kasama it's a project of reevaluation based on the idea that Leninists are have been doing the same thing for 80 years but failed. Kasama would allow trots, anarchos and Maoists to join. One of its LEADERS is a ex Trot whose only read combat liberalism.
having leaders would kind of indicate that its not libertarian don't you think? and what matters about an organisation is not the politics its members claim to poses but what the organisation does, and what its agreed positions are.
Dec 21 2013 01:17
iexist wrote:
That's one guys opinion not a kasama position.
The Maoist cheerleading is hardly one person's opinion. The entire Revolution in South Asia section (the name of which should make clear their perverse understanding of social revolution and socialism) of the site is filled with it.
Dec 21 2013 01:41
I meant leaders like day chili sauce or Steven are leaders on libcom.
Allot of them are Maoists but they organize in a libertarian manner. One themselves involved in One Struggle South Florida.
Dec 21 2013 03:14
What does that matter that they organize in a "libertarian manner"? Would a fascist group be cool if its meetings were very egalitarian and open to anyone with an interest in joining?
Dec 21 2013 04:11
The Black Panthers, a Young Lords/Patriots, and Rising Up Angry were Maoists. You'd still defend them, I'm taking the same with Kasama. They do worthwhile work, so I'm fine with them.
Dec 21 2013 06:11
You are a confused young man. One Struggle is Maoist and united with Kasama (ideologically if not officially). I have no idea why you think nobody here would dare to criticize the Panthers et al.
Dec 21 2013 09:51
I don't know anything about the Young Lord/Patriots nor Rising Up Angry and very little about the Black Panthers. Please don't be so presumptuous as to what I would have to say about any of those groups, as that statement isn't based on anything I've ever written here. Regardless of whether you view Kasama as doing worthwhile work, the point remains that their politics have little to do with communism, anarchist or otherwise.
Dec 21 2013 10:25
iexist wrote:
I meant leaders like day chili sauce or Steven are leaders on libcom.Allot of them are Maoists but they organize in a libertarian manner. One themselves involved in One Struggle South Florida.
Flattered but still chuckling iexist 
How about Steven, how does it feel to be co-leader of the electronic proletariat?
Dec 21 2013 12:26
Don't underestimate your self Comrade Sauce. I have long thought of you as our illustrious leader. The deal was sealed when you pointed us in the direction of a garlic peeling tip. As for Steven I'm not so sure of his credentials. Let's face it, plebs like me ALWAYS need someone from the ranks of the middle classes to show us what to do, and you sir, fit the bill!
Dec 21 2013 13:48
All hail the central committee of the electronic vanguard party!
Dec 21 2013 14:58
I didn't mean wouldn't criticize I meant that they're a group we'd endorse. Kasama organizes democratically, has freedom of thought, and fights the good fight. That makes them a group I think is anarchistic but not anarchist.
Dec 21 2013 15:05
iexist wrote:
I didn't mean wouldn't criticize I meant that they're a group we'd endorse. Kasama organizes democratically, has freedom of thought, and fights the good fight. That makes them a group I think is anarchistic but not anarchist.
It simply means that they have a democratic internal structure (I've no clue, but take your word).
That doesn't make it anarchistic. Liberals also practice, in large measure, freedom of speech. It doesn't make them anarchistic. Social democratics often times fight the good fight. But that doesn't make them anarchistic.
Respectfully, you can't fling stuff around and think that it is what it isn't.
Dec 21 2013 15:18
looking at http://kasamaproject.org/so-what-is-kasama it says nothing about how they are structured or what forms of organisation they favour, and generally i get the impression that its just a website run by fans of maoism
Can comment on articles and discussions
Are you fucking kidding?!