Tag Archives: marxism

Trying to Dig Deeper, or 21st Century Common Sense, Part 4

Uncategorized, , , ,

“A huge problem, up there at the top of the list, is that the history of efforts over the last many centuries to create truly just and democratic societies, run by organized people, not oligarchs, has at best yielded mixed results since the Russian Revolution of 1917.”

These words were part of the first column of this series of my Future Hope columns, planned to be at least 10 of them. I’m calling this series “21st Century Common Sense.”

So what is my “common sense” about why the world is in the state it’s in?

-One very big reason is the fact that revolutions trying to bring into being much more egalitarian and just societies, societies improving the lives and gaining power over decision-making for working-class and low-income people, took place in countries, Russia and China in particular, which had just a small amount of industry and not much of an urban working class. They were overwhelmingly peasant-based societies. This meant there were limitations, both economically and as far as the experience of organization on the part of regular people, that led to very real distortions and much worse, when it came to how society was reorganized after the overthrow of the ruling powers by revolutionary organizations.

-Another very real reason has been the problem of male dominance, leadership of organizations avowedly about positive social change to benefit working-class people dominated by backwards and oppressive cultural practices where men are assumed to be the “natural” leaders.

Because of the impact, staying power and growth of the late 1960’s women’s movement growing, in large part, out of the civil rights movement of the 50s and 60s, there has been not just a growth in various sectors of US society in the percentage of women in leadership but also a growth in an understanding of more and more men that this is good and right.

-Another reason is a similar process when it comes to the issue of racism. The victories of the civil rights/Black Freedom movement back then had lasting impacts in so many ways. Not only did it change racist US laws in 1964, 1965 and beyond, it undoubtedly inspired many other movements—Indigenous, Mexicans/Chicanos, Puerto Ricans, other Latinos/as/e, Asian Americans, lgbtq+ people, progressive trade unionism, immigrant rights, disability rights, student rights, family farmers, environmental and climate protection, for peace with justice, liberation theology and more.

At first, the proliferation of these movements led to overall movement difficulties. Which issue–class, race, gender or something else–was the most important, or the most strategic when it came to changing human society? There was competition over material resources to support all the different organizations which grew out of this new political milieu, a continuing issue.

Over time, over the past decades, I see positive changes as far as these and other challenges. There is, overall, a definite understanding on the part of many millions of us, the many millions of activists and organizers who are at work in our own particular vineyards, whether it be by geography, by issue, by specific tactics, or something else—there is an understanding that we absolutely must and are finding ways to join our struggles, all of which ultimately have a common enemy: the billionaire/multi-multi-millionaire class which literally dominates not just US society but much of the world.

But these difficulties in uniting aren’t the only reasons why the Trumpfascists are now in the positions of power they are.

US society is in need of a lot of change, but it is a fact that, so far, those in positions of governmental power, whether it be in the White House, in Congress, in state legislatures or in cities/towns/townships/villages, are chosen through a process of elections. This dynamic is deeply rooted among the U.S. American people. Yes, big corporate money has much influence, particularly at higher levels, and yes, there are various ways the US electoral system can become much more democratic, like through ranked choice, proportional representation and public financing of elections, but the key point in the context of this column is that social change movements, sooner or later, must contend within the electoral system for power.

Individual progressives and progressive organizations in the past and still today have fallen prey to one of two very real mistakes in working to win the votes of the masses of people who, through their voting, do actually decide who wins. One mistake is for candidates for office to articulate our approach to issues, create a platform, which does not take into account where the people we are trying to influence are as far as their consciousness on issues or in the language they can relate to, and as a result we can come across as too narrow, too dogmatic, not flexible enough, too ultra-left, etc. The other mistake is the opposite: to be TOO flexible, not firm enough on basic principles, too willing to bend too far toward one or another of the corporate class’s positions on issues, understanding that they are not monolithic but in general are primarily looking out for their own power and wealth.

“Purist” politics and “opportunistic” politics: these are two huge mistakes made in the past which have narrowed progressive possibilities for electoral and other victories.

How can we make progress on these weaknesses? The first step is to identify them as very real problems and to then talk about them, interact about them, to at least minimize these errors happening, moving toward their becoming, over time, mistakes that we have pretty much transcended.

Paulo Freire, in his must-read book, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, has some very relevant input on the “how” question:

“The correct method for a revolutionary leadership to employ in the task of liberation is, therefore, not ‘libertarian propaganda.’ . . The correct method lies in dialogue. The conviction of the oppressed that they must fight for their liberation is not a gift bestowed by the revolutionary leadership, but the result of their own conscientizacao [consciousness raising]. . . Dialogue cannot exist, however, in the absence of a profound love for the world and for people. Love is at the same time the foundation of dialogue and dialogue itself. Because love is an act of courage, not of fear, love is commitment to others. . . In dialogical theory, at no stage can revolutionary action forgo communion with the people, really human, empathetic, loving, communicative and humble, in order to be liberating.”  (1)

Wise words grounded in experience and commitment. Thank you, Paulo Freire.

  •  Paulo Freire, 1970, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, pps. 53-54, 77-78 and 171

  Ted Glick has been a progressive activist and organizer since 1968. He is the author of two books, Burglar for Peace and 21st Century Revolution, published in 2020 and 2021 and both available at https://pmpress.org . More info can be found at https://tedglick.com.

21st Century Common Sense, Part One

Future Hope, , , ,

A quarter of the way through this century, there is no doubt that the USA and the world are in deep trouble. This is true for everyone, even the families of those most responsible for this state of affairs, the “Epstein class” and those supporting them. Given the fact that the burning of fossils fuels and nukes, the continued reliance on destructive war as a way of determining who runs individual countries, and the growing disparity between the billionaire/multi-multi-millionaire (MMM) class and those who must work for a living, often barely making it—these and related injustices are what must be transcended, must be overcome, asap. The future of the world literally depends upon whether we can transcend them over the coming years.

For us in the United States of America, the immediate issue is the Trumpfascist efforts to impose dictatorial rule to the benefit of the billionaire class and those MMM’s hoping to become billionaires. As of the time of this writing a key next step in the resistance to these efforts is the November, 2026 federal elections, which should result in the Democrats, aligned with progressive Independents like Bernie Sanders, winning control of at least the House of Representatives, as things now appear is very likely.

But even if they take the House and Senate, and even if the percentage of House and Senate members who are strong and consistent progressives grows significantly, this alone will not yield the kind of changes the world desperately needs. For one thing, would-be dictator Trump will still be President, able to use his White House power in destructive ways, like unnecessary and brutal wars, rising economic, racial, gender and other inequality and hateful discrimination, and major attacks on wind, solar and electric vehicles.

A huge problem, up there at the top of the list, is that the history of efforts over the last many centuries to create truly just and democratic societies, run by organized people, not oligarchs, has at best yielded mixed results since the Russian Revolution of 1917.

In a book I wrote and self-published in 2021, five years ago, here is what I put forward as the key aspect of a “winning strategy, the one that is the key link to the social transformation process so urgently needed: the building and deepening of a way of working together and developing organizations that is collaborative, respectful, democratic its core and which, as a result, is truly transformative, built to last.” 1) 21st Century Revolution: Through Higher Love, Racial Justice and Democratic Cooperation, p. 22

This has to be our starting point as we try to determine how we change the world. Also necessary is an understanding of the urgency of the climate crisis. More than any other issue, this is one which must always be seen as a top priority. The amount of damage already done and sure to be done in the future, particularly to low-income people, the vast majority of the world’s population, primarily people of color, cannot be underestimated. We are literally running out of time to transition away from fossil fuels and to be about much more community-building and collaborative approaches to solving problems as they escalate as ecosystems, food and water supplies become increasingly less dependable.

Indeed, this existential reality for the entire planet is a reason that change is not just necessary, not just possible, but very much on the agenda of humankind.

As stated by the late Father Paul Mayer, “What history is calling for is nothing less than the creation of a new human being. We must literally reinvent ourselves through the alchemy of the Spirit”—or however one describes that unseen, powerful force in the universe which, down through history, has inspired people to do things which seem impossible—“or perish. We are being divinely summoned to climb another rung on the evolutionary ladder, to another level of human consciousness.” (2)  Paul Mayer, “Wrestling with Angels”, back cover

To be frank, it is not enough to be against Donald Trump and MAGA, or against the control of both major parties in the USA, the Democrats and the Republicans, or even to be committed to hard work for the next eight and a half months here in the USA to defeat the billionaire-supporting, fascist President Donald Trump. Our problems are too deep to accept this essential next step as the ultimate goal. Short-term, essential goal yes, but looking at things historically, it can only be the first major step in a fundamental, revolutionary process that over time not just saves the planet and its people but, at long last, matches our desires as a species with the way that we organize ourselves, economically, politically, culturally and socially.

  Ted Glick has been a progressive activist and organizer since 1968. He is the author of two books, Burglar for Peace and 21st Century Revolution, published in 2020 and 2021 and both available at https://pmpress.org . More info can be found at https://tedglick.com.

To Each According to Their Need

Future Hope, , , ,

“To whatever extent we reach our potential in this world, my grandmother would be furious if I didn’t say that it was due to a combination of our individual talents and the societal conditions – the real existing material conditions, as a good Marxist might say – that have shaped our lives. But while she would probably not admit it, the faith in her eyes – the challenge to imagine with others a better world and actively move with them towards it, to engage in collective struggle to achieve a more humanistic society – that faith will always remain with us.”

–Dorothy Ray Healey remembrance, Jewish Women’s Archive

“Without vision, the people perish.” This famous quote from Proverbs 29:18 in the Old Testament is absolutely on target, based on my experiences over many years. A variation of this quote—if you don’t know where you’re going, any road will get you there—underlines the danger of not having a vision. A road to nowhere is a dangerous road.

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels had a vision, summed up in the phrase, “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need.” Was this an original idea back then, 177 years ago? I don’t think so.

In his younger years Marx was connected to religion; he was baptized as a Lutheran at the age of six. He studied religion, ultimately leading him to develop his well-known critique of it as an “opiate of the people.”

The book of Acts is a religiously-oriented history of the first years and decades of the Christian church after Jesus of Nazareth was killed. In chapters two and four, it is made clear that in these early days of the Christian religion, the concept of “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need” was a central vision.

Here’s how it is described in Acts 2: 44-45: “All who believed were together and had all things in common; they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all as any had need.” And similarly in Acts 4: 32 and 34: “Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. . . There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold.”

I’m pretty sure that Dorothy Healey got this. She was the first socialist I ever heard quote Bible verses as she made her case from the podium speaking to hundreds of mostly young people at a national conference of the now-defunct New American Movement in 1974. I don’t remember exactly what she said, but I remember thinking that I wished I could do that. Why did I feel that way?

One reason is that I had generally positive experiences growing up in the church my parents took me to every Sunday, as well as with others in my extended family, especially my grandparents, who were devout Christians. But it was also because, as I became a peace and justice and impeach Nixon activist in my late teens and early 20’s, and as I was exposed to individuals who looked to Marx and Engels and “scientific socialism” as their “bible,” it seemed to me that one thing both had in common was a vision for a very different kind of society than the one dominating much of the world.

And let’s be real: what both also have in common is the corruption of the original vision of their founders as they grew politically stronger and more institutionalized. That is a reality that can never be forgotten, something those of us today need to study and learn from going forward.  

Healey tried to put the two positive visions together. She believed in Christian/Marxist unity. She may or may not have been an atheist, I don’t know, but her life was grounded in the best of both those worlds.

All of us have a responsibility to “imagine with others a better world and actively move with them towards it, to engage in collective struggle to achieve a more humanistic society” with the long term goal, one many of us will not see, of human societies where the abilities of all are used to meet the economic, social and cultural needs of all. We must hold fast to this vision whatever the odds against us right now.

Ted Glick has been a progressive activist and organizer since 1968. He is the author of the recently published books, Burglar for Peace and 21st Century Revolution, both available at https://pmpress.org . More info can be found at https://tedglick.com.

Progressive Comradeship During the Trump Times

Future Hope, , , ,

I’ve noticed over the last couple of years younger progressive/revolutionary organizers using the word, “comrade,” to refer to other organizers. Is this a good idea?

During the days of McCarthyism in the 1950’s, and probably before then, self-righteous conservatives used this word as a smear against people on the political Left. “Comrade” was a word used before and after the Russian Revolution in 1917 by members of the Bolshevik Party which led that revolution and dominated the USSR government for decades afterwards. I suspect, without knowing for sure, that members of the Communist Party in the USA from the 1920’s on, at least until McCarthyite repression in the 50’s, used that term also, given the CPUSA’s very close connection to the Soviet CP during that time.

George Orwell’s “Animal Farm,” published in 1945, had a lot to do with the comrade word becoming much more widely discredited. Animal Farm is the story of a revolution gone bad, corruption of once-revolutionary and brave leadership upon gaining power, and even as those bad things happen and demoralization sets in among many of the animals, use of the word comrade is continued by those in power.

As a young person growing up in the 1950’s and 60’s, I absorbed much of the dominant conservative ideology of those days and as a result never used, and still don’t use, the comrade word in any way. To me, it has been seen as a problematic word.

But there are other-than-leftist groups in the USA that use the word. Doing some google searching I learned that it is in use in both the US military and among veterans groups, which is surprising. Why would that be the case?

In a Random House dictionary published in 1966, they give three definitions for the word: “1) a person who shares closely in one’s activities, occupation, interests, etc: intimate companion, associate, or friend. 2) a fellow member of a fraternal group, political party, etc. 3) a member of the Communist Party or someone with strongly leftist views.”

I think it’s telling that the US military and veterans groups apparently use the word. Clearly, their doing so would fall under definitions 1 and 2, not 3. There is something about the word, something about the idea of comradeship, that connects people who are working “closely” together in a shared task, shared “interests.”

Many of us today, literally millions, are standing up and taking action against the Trumpfascists. 5 million or more took part in 2,200 local actions in all 50 states on June 14, No Kings! Day. Probably millions are going to take part in local “Good Trouble Lives On” actions on July 17, the 5th anniversary of the death of longtime freedom fighter John Lewis; there are already over 1,000 planned. And I feel a sense of comradeship, progressive comradeship, with this so-very-important mass political force, this popular resistance movement.

“Progressive comradeship:” that’s a phrase I’m comfortable with. It fits with definitions 1 and 2 above. It clarifies that this movement is broadly-based, representing tens of millions of people, going from “strong leftists,” including communists, on one pole to decent, concerned people on the other who believe in “one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”

During Hakeem Jeffries’ record-breaking, 8 hour and 44 minutes, impressive speech right before the Big Ugly Bill was narrowly passed in the House of Representatives on July 3rd, he quoted more than once a passage from the Bible that clearly resonated with the many Democratic Congresspeople sitting, and sometimes standing in loud applause, behind him. That passage? Matthew 25: 35-40. It’s one that should undergird all that we do as we keep building and strengthening the Resistance.

“For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me. Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry and gave you food, or thirsty and gave you something to drink? And when was it that we saw you a stranger and welcomed you, or naked and gave you clothing? And when was it that we saw you sick or in prison and visited you?’ And the king will answer them, ‘Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me.”

We must do all we can as long as we are alive to try to bring into existence a world motivated by these words in Matthew. It’s a certainty that the warped and twisted, pro-oligarch, obscene policies of the current federal government, combined with the day-to-day organizing of the millions of us, is going to lead to many more millions joining with us in this profoundly important task history has placed before us.

Our mass democracy movement is now and must continue to be characterized by progressive comradeship in the way we interact and a deep, abiding love for others and the natural world. Nothing can defeat that kind of movement, nothing. We really can change the world.

Ted Glick has been a progressive activist and organizer since 1968. He is the author of the recently published books, Burglar for Peace and 21st Century Revolution, both available at https://pmpress.org . More info can be found at https://tedglick.com.

Revolution?

Future Hope, , , ,

I wonder how many people reading these words know the significance of April 19th to US Americans, and others, to all of us worldwide who value democracy and justice for all.

What is April 19th? It’s the 250th anniversary of the beginnings of the US American Revolution. On that day in 1775, in Concord and Lexington, Massachusetts, farmers and other working people stood their ground against redcoat British troops doing the bidding of King George III. It was the day of “the shot heard round the world” which eventually led to a victory in 1781 over the mighty British Empire after six years of war.

It also led to the expansion of European American settlement across the continent in the decades afterwards, a process which nearly wiped out the Indigenous peoples who have lived here for thousands of years. Estimates are that 90% or more were killed either by disease or violent military action to force the survivors onto reservations so that the Europeans could take the land and the resources underneath it.

Like so much else about this country, this 250th anniversary of the beginnings of what became the United States is a decidedly mixed bag.

On balance, though, I see value to connecting the political uprising against the Trumpfascists with the uprising by revolutionary European Americans 250 years ago. Not by coincidence the success of this revolution was followed by the French Revolution, the Haitian Revolution, the Bolivar-led South American Revolution and eventually, in the USA, the Civil War that led to the end of the legal enslavement of African people. It led to the success of the women’s suffrage movement over 100 years ago, the rise of trade unionism, the Black Freedom movement in the 60’s which forced an end to Jim Crow segregation, the rise of Indigenous resistance and societal leadership, the LGBTQ movement, an environmental protection movement and more.

Trump and his co-conspirators want to take us backwards at least 90 years, to the time before the rise of industrial unionism and the CIO in the 30s and the existence of programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Their agenda is truly and profoundly un-American, and the mushrooming popular resistance movement should begin saying that loudly and clearly. We, our broadly based movement of movements in all its political, racial, gender, age and other diversity, are the “next one up” in the never-ending struggle toward a more just, peaceful and ecologically-connected world.

Revolution or Reform?

As is the case with any authentic mass movement that has a chance of winning, there are differing views on a range of topics, even as we are united on many, many issues and a generally progressive worldview.

One very big one is whether what we are striving for should be viewed as defense of, as well as needed reforms to, the existing institutions of society or whether what we must be about should be viewed as revolutionary in its ambitions.

For myself it’s the latter.

A few days ago longtime progressive author and activist Michael Albert wrote about this issue of “reform or revolution.” He explored what his experiences have taught him about the difference between them. He called for a resistance movement today which had the maturity to appreciate that we need to develop a way of working so that all of us can join together in this existential battle for the future. Here’s how he summed up his main thoughts: “So, a reform and/or revolution bottom line: No to reformism. Yes to sustained reform struggles. No to mindless revolutionary posturing. Yes to wise, visionary long term commitment. As resistance grows and as views proliferate, stay together. We need each other.”

Several years ago I wrote a book with the title, 21st Century Revolution: Through Higher Love, Racial Justice and Democratic Cooperation. In it I laid out what I saw as necessary to bring about the changes needed. As I concluded the book I quoted these words of a longtime friend and fighter for justice, the late Fr. Paul Mayer: “What history is calling for is nothing less than the creation of new human being. We must literally reinvent ourselves through the alchemy of the Spirit or perish. We are being divinely summoned to climb another rung on the evolutionary ladder, to another level of human consciousness.”

In the end, it all comes down to the personal, how each one of us does the best we can, as lovingly as we can, as resolutely as we can, as clearly as we can, day after day, to help create a world for our children and grandchildren and the seven generations coming after us very different than the one we are living through right now. We cannot let them down.

Ted Glick has been a progressive activist and organizer since 1968. He is the author of the recently published books, Burglar for Peace and 21st Century Revolution, both available at https://pmpress.org . More info can be found at https://tedglick.com.