What's the point of attracting thousands of people if none of them are ready to go beyond casual activism?

What's the point of attracting thousands of people if none of them are ready to go beyond casual activism?
What's the point of attracting thousands of people if no one reads any literature, and resent you asking them to?
What's the point of attracting thousands of people if they will fight among themselves over anything?
What's the point of attracting thousands of people if they will make your turn your movement into a liberal one?

Numbers are overrated. Yes, leftist movements need to be mass movements, but these mass movements need to be built on the right foundations, which is something we currently lack. Instead of pandering to "the people", we should be working on theoretical, ideological, programmatic and cultural cohesiveness, and cultivating the right socialist ethic and discipline. In this period, organization and efficiency should be our goal, and we should leave numbers and mass appeal to the future.

In organizational terms, this means we should be more like the Nation of Islam and less like the Panthers. Recruit on an individual basis, promote based on merit, cultivate the right ethos and sustain a strict hierarchy. Keep ties with the community and engage in labour activism, but mostly so you can afford a caste of people dedicated to the cause through donations and financial support. If we manage to sustain growth, in a few years this caste will be large and experienced enough to make the transition to mass movement a cohesive and efficient one, and if with an organization like that, the tools of communication and public education will be developed in the meantime, which will make it easier for us to spread our message and not collapse into reformism or split into several powerless factions, like previous Socialist organizations.

Is it worthy to reach out to your community?
Is it labour intensive, agrarian, service oriented or in new tech?
What woold your goal be if you got to organize?

Pretty much. Which is why the most successful political movements did or do away with that nonsense (almost) from the beginning.
A lot of people - when organizing - begin wondering about things outreach, etc. But I'd recommend making sure you have charismatic leadership in place. You can have the best theories and organization, but if you're leader/figurehead is a dork you may as well stay home and not bother at all.
Obviously this is more relevant to emerging movements than established ones. Regardless, avoid listening to the "masses", they'll drown each other out anyway. Just make sure they have the opportunity to bicker amongst each other so they can pretend they're being listened to.

Quality people will reveal themselves in due time. And they can be handpicked as successors or equals by those that actually know how to run the organization.

Democracy is always wrong. And when it isn't, it's redundant.

lol it´s true, for fascists the word organization is the same as when liberals name dystopia

Weird how you're advocating for a vanguard but you can't give a single socialist example for us to follow. I suspect you're a reactionary.
Read Marx, read Lenin.

but that isnt very socialist of you, is it? remember lads, no hierarchies or classes allowed, cant be accidentally creating upper and lower classes within your movement lest you be contradicting your little red book.


You are wasting your time trying to recruit unless you're living in the Third World. The proletariat doesn't even exist in western capitalist countries.

Not all of us are anarkiddie ideologues

Please, read the rules of the Communist League, published a year before the Manifesto, and tell me it isn't compatible with what is proposed here.

medium heh.

First of all, if you get the details wrong on praxis, you get the whole thing wrong. And your post is wrong in many nuanced ways according to ML praxis.
Second, what I am pointing out is that the question of the vanguard is most explicitly laid out by Lenin. Therefore, you should be referencing Lenin, not vague and abstract references to NOI.

ML praxis doesn't succeed in most contexts, and never once in my original post I mentioned Lenin. You're just assuming this relates back to Leninist theory because, to you, any socialist organization that is closed is Bolshevik in character, even though that was almost a standard model in several countries in the 19th century. Besides that, you got the Leninist concept of vanguard wrong, read Nimtz.

butthurt anarkiddie or butthurt leftcom?

Face it naziposter, you want a monarchy because you want to fuck a cute princess.

And I don't blame you

stop choking Luxie and take a shower to clean yourself of your sins.

Start attending City Council Meetings.

Shockingly, ML praxis requires certain conditions (revolutionary conditions, the condition of capitalist crisis) to work! Name one other praxis that consistently gets communist revolution given the NEEDED conditions.

The Bolsheviks laid the groundwork for all following revolutions.

Choking luxie is what socdems say when they honk off

Go away Jason

In agree, this is why I just stay home and masturbate in front of my pc
I would be such a bad activist I am forwarding the Revolution by not getting into politics

At least read some theory and get some useful skills.