The Left and the Ultra-Left

hi, just for one of your questions, ultraleft is only used as a pejorative by people on the social democratic or Trotskyist left, there is a distinct current of thought which calls itself ultraleft, some writing about it here:
http://libcom.org/library/3-leninism-ultra-left

Yeah as steven says in the english speaking world and europe its generally an insult. Anarchists for example generally don't see themselves as being a part of ''the left'', geerally because a) we beleive in workers self management, and as a result b) we don;t think state owned enterprise has anything to offer.
The term ultra-left is an insult used to charicature anarchism or libertarian marxism as being idealistic or based simply on rigid adherence to a set of principles.

what I meant was, it is not only used as an insult - some people use it as a positive identifier. The ultraleft is an influence on us, as libcom anyway.

To take your questions in reverse order...
papaspace

Why is Left Communism called "Left" Communism at all? Why is it sometimes called Ultra-Leftism? And why is Ultra-Leftism always a pejorative?

Left-communism traces its origins to the left wings of the Communist Parties formed in the first few decades of the the 1900s (Italian, Dutch/German, Britian, Russian) that fought against the degenration of the CPs into Stalinism after the Russian Revolution. The CPs themselves had their origins within the left-wings of the Socialist Parties and formed the Third International after the degeneration of the Second International before and during the First World War. The 'ultra-left' is often negatively associated with those that Lenin characterised as being 'childish', hence the pejorative nature of the term (I think!)

papaspace

Why are Left Communism and Anarchism (perhaps Trotskyism too) considered to be to the left of Leninism (if I am not mistaken, of course)?

The main 'class line' between Trotskyism and the communist left (and some currents within anarchism) was internationalism, the refusal to take sides in the face of imperialist conflicts and defending the need for a revolution to overthrow the whole of capitalism. During the Second World War the bulk of Troskyism (and some currents within anarchism) went over to the capitalist camp by defending, however critically, the Allies and Stalinism against Nazism (anti-fascism). It's in this sense that they became 'leftist', the left of capitalism.

Leninism is part of the left-wing of the political apparatus of capitalism

Has that helped?

:)

B.

Trotskyism is not "to the left of Leninism". Its is a form of Leninism. Its left wing, may be, but WITHIN Leninist limits.

Beltov

During the Second World War the bulk of Troskyism (and some currents within anarchism) went over to the capitalist camp by defending, however critically, the Allies and Stalinism against Nazism (anti-fascism). It's in this sense that they became 'leftist', the left of capitalism.

But what does it mean to "go over" to the "capitalist camp"? I mean, is there really a "capitalist camp" and once you've gone over, can you come back? It just seems a strange way of framing it.

I prefer the definition of 'leftism' which is about the management of struggles, rather than about passing a purity test.

Yes there is a capitalist camp because we are involved in a class war. Surely this must define the contours of the political organisations produced by the different classes?

888: Yes indeed there is a capitalist camp but you can move in and out of it depending on how the ICC's recruiting strategy changes.

If the ICC didn't exist, would there not still be a capitalist political camp and a proletarian political camp?

888

But what does it mean to "go over" to the "capitalist camp"? I mean, is there really a "capitalist camp" and once you've gone over, can you come back? It just seems a strange way of framing it.

Essentially it means abandoning internationalism and falling behind one national bourgeoisie or another, and all that that entails -- defence of state capitalism, participation in elections, etc.

Can you come back? Yes, but generally only on an individual basis. Once a whole organisation has 'gone over' it is highly unlikely that it can return because historically they have been integrated into the state's apparatus as its left-wing (involvement in parliaments, unions) and play an indispensable role for the ruling class (Socialist Parties of the Second International, Communist Parties of the Third International).

This article develops on the what distinguished Trotskyists from revolutionaries:
http://en.internationalism.org/ir/139/trotsykism

papaspace

Why is Left Communism called "Left" Communism at all?

If you really are interested in this, you should read Lenin's "Left-Wing Communism: An Infantile Disorder". (See the Marxists Internet Archive if you don't have access to a hard copy of it.) At that time (1920), the "socialist" (2nd International) and "communist" (3rd International) movements were generally seen as having factions or "wings", including a left, a right, and a center, similarly to the way mainstream bourgeois politics does. The "right" is/was seen as more "conservative" or "reactionary", and more tied to the staus quo, etc. The "left", on the other hand, was/is seen as more "radical" or "extremist", and more strongly opposed to the status quo. It is/was thus often (including by Lenin, in his pamphlet) criticized for being "utopian", "messianic", "apocalyptic", "purist", etc. Lenin, of course, was arguing from the communist "center", and he held that position then due to the international hegemony of the communist movement held by the Bolshevik Party following the Russian revolution.

I have seen SPEW use the term

"Ultra Left"

as an insult to anyone they disagree with but when SPEW do use the term Ultra Left SPEW fail to explain properly their criticism of the so called Ultra left.