Leftist orgs seems to be filled with opposite extremes, on one hand we have inactive social clubs that do nothing or are very ineffective, on the other hand we have slaving cults ruled completely by one or a few people and use the guise of communism and liberation to control their members and makes them work for the party or give all their money to party as their life purpose.
Is this good dedication or just exploitation be the leadership?
idk never been in an org
I'm not familiar with this. Any sources?
Does The Bob Avakian Gang (RCP) or various other Microparties like SWP and PSL count as Cult-Like.
t. never been to an RCP meeting
Look at the official pictures of him they put everywhere, where he styles himself like Mao or Kim Jong-il. Look at the publications the RCP formulates, they quote him like you'd quote an evangelist in the bible ("BA 12:21").
The PSL is pretty broad (not surprising considering the Marcyist line) but a lot of their groups are like your average Twitter ☭TANKIE☭, trans and calls you a racist if you criticise China.
Liberal
How about you actually engage instead of calling him names?
Reddit-tier comment
Personality cults around a guy who who has achieved literally nothing and whose party is a laughing stock is bad, yes. At least Mao won a fucking civil war.
t. cult of bob gang
Are you a RCP member? If yes, you should easily be able to debunk those accusations, right?
That's every party in the west.
Tbh I'm in the process of starting my own org and if you are a charismatic individual & are well-versed in theory, it's not hard for people to start idealizing you. And even if you try to contain it, you'll seem like a humble person etc.
i think the principle of a directory is very underrated. rule through councils has worked very well historically (dutch republic comes to mind) but since councils are so successful at suppressing the individual identity that they are marginalized in historical studies or come off as abstract social bodies whose policies are never talked about in action.
also venetian republican model placed a heavy emphasis on councils. as another user mentioned in the robespierre thread (and an opinion i've held for a long time) the french terror was overseen by a COMMITTEE of public safety of which robespierre was just a single member. This principle didn't disappear with his execution either as the Directory that succeeded the CPS governed on the same principle and however much the Directory was derided for corruption and for falling to Napoleon it actually passed a lot of vital reforms. But, again, the Directory is understudied and underrated precisely because it had no charismatic figures (and it ended the radical revolution)
I think you're right but charismatic leaders may be a necessary evil to start a revolutionary process. Such directory/council type of structure may be good to safeguard it from the leader himself.
Bump
leadership is incredibly important. but don't delude yourself into thinking that leaders appear magically. they are the product of their epoch - they are born, trained in and schooled, by the material conditions of their lives.
we must train ourselves and each other to become leaders through education and discipline.
Sig/leftyweeb picks a leader