Even if a communist can colloquially describe themselves as being on the left, there’s a distinction between communism and “the left.” This is implied right in the title of Lenin’s Left-Wing Communism: an Infantile Disorder. Whereas the left, a big tent term for a myriad of incompatible ideologies, aims merely to act as an opposition towards the present order for the sake of it, communists have a coherent vision for how to defeat the system: by advancing history’s development to the next stage. The left, because of its lack of commitment to that central Marxist goal, naturally takes on an opportunistic role. Because when you want only to build a movement as an end in itself, rather than use this movement as a means for defeating the system, you become nothing more than an actor who benefits from discontent without helping solve the problems behind that discontent.
so what do u think should happen? would something similar to the way the soviets republics worked not be the best solution, cuz thats what i have seen as the predominant idea from the so called “settler” left and i cant really imagine a better solution if autonomy on a national level is a requirement.
NFAC had some good ideas. Not enough to keep perpetuating post-GM Jay getting locked up, especially not with how they cut out Black folk who only have Black moms; but there were some good ideas regarding ‘armed formations all on the same accord finding a way to either buy land, or take it from the settlers.’
Assuming we pull that off, then we coalition build with the other historically downtrod, as I know that NFAC probs wasn’t planning on that-- the more I look at them in hindsight, the more issues I have; but they at least had a start.