An idea has crossed my mind in regards to the separated state of the Red Left (Revolutionary Socialists, Democratic Socialists, Communism and its schools, Revisionists, Anarchists, etc.) all originating from a divergence, not in philosophy or goal, but in methodology and the means to the end. It is sad, to me, to see what could be the largest movement in the world shattered because so many desperately want revolt and so many don’t want to get their hands dirty. Oh, there are peaceful ways to reform and there is the often necesarry move of revolution and there are all the routes in-between, but we seem to look at our would-be Comrades and brothers and sisters with contempt and mistrust at times rather than the camaraderie and zeal and love that we should be looking at one another with.
But this just what prompted me to look into what I have begun to label as ‘Organic Socialism’. Before I reached a name or a definition, I began asking myself exactly how Socialism shattered. I looked back at Tom Paine, perhaps the most influential figure and thinker of Socialism and its creation and ideas. I then looked at Karl Marx, a man who gave a clearer definition to a more specifided Socialism, Communism, ‘government by the community’. It had defined purpose and defined end goals, long-reaching goals that promised Utopia, unlike most Socialism which promised short-term goals and equality through revolutionary means. Then came revisionists of Communism, just as there were of Socialism, who felt there were peaceful means to the end. True, there are always peaceful means to an end, but they are often too far-reaching and even easier to be corrupt or run astray than revolutionary means. Both have methods have managed to sieze power in the world and both have collapsed from corruption, separation, mistrust and propaganda made easier by just such mistrust and terror organised by corrupted regimes. I thought to myself, in an attempt to answer the snarky questions I often hear regarding the historical failures of Socialism that it has always been around so long as there is oppression and inequality, always trying to reach the same goal and always adapting to better achieve those goals or to create a lasting, uncorruptable Socialist government.
Then it hit me: Socialism is an organic, evolving thing. From the Greek invention of Democracy and Republic to Thomas Moore’s theory of Utopia to modern and revolutionary versions of Socialism. From the slave castes of society rising up to the serf rebellions to the revolts of oppressed proles to modern political dissent amongst low-income workers. Socialism is as timeless and adaptive as its eternal enemies of Imperialism and Oppression. It is a body of ideals based around defeating oppression where it lurks and bringing humanity together across the barriers of language and faith and ethnicity and nationality. That much is obvious to all Socialists, revolutionary and revisionist. However, what is not stressed enough is the focus on the End. Most focus on the Means, either appalled at the concept of resorting to violence or too angry to see peaceful negotiation or, and by far the worst, too hung up on labels and names to look past their own ideology. This is where my solution idea, Unified Socialism, comes into play. Organic Socialism is just a name to the definition of its evolutionary nature. Unified Socialism defines my concept of piecing the Left back together again.
The purpose of Unified Socialism is as simple as this: the coming together of all Socialists and all parties to debate and discuss the current issues of their existing societies and to come to resolutions and a proper Means appealing to all parties to reach the End; a balance that is morally ethical in the eyes of the humanist, accomplishing and efficient in the eyes of the strategist, lasting and reliable in the eyes of the skeptic and above all will reach the End Goal shared by all Socialists. Each nation’s Means would obviously be different from another’s due to the varying circumstances, but this must not cause mistrust between future Socialist nations as they develop to their shared End Goal, as each will have its own speed of progress comfortable to its people. The nations of the Earth will unite when their revolutions have been carried out.
Anyway, this is the main concept of Unified Socialism. In the short run, it is just Socialists of every breed coming together and planning their means to reform their society, whether or not revolution can be avoided or democracy salvaged, by what means democracy can be salvaged, and the methods by which the new society will be run (which runs into far more variables than I could list, but which could be sorted out decently enough with enough patience between parties). I have a few suggestions regarding the getting together of parties and the models of new societies. It is better to start with parties closest to each other, getting over their differences, before uniting with other parties; example: the CPUSA (Communist Party of USA) and the RCPUSA (Revolutionary Communist Party of USA). Both are Communist, but of different schools: the CPUSA is a revisionist Leninist-Marxist schooling while the RCPUSA is a revolutionary Maoist schooling. The CPUSA tends to try the democratic route, rolling over for the Democrats in the end. The RCPUSA tries to learn from historical failures in Socialist countries, including Stalin’s USSR and Mao’s later China, while staying true to doctrines. It would be best for these two parties to come together and discuss differences in ideology and merge as a singular Communist Party with a mutually-agreed idea (I would think an attempt at revisionism, but while preparing for revolution). Also, a tip on the post-unification government model: LEARN FROM HISTORICAL FAILURES AND RECOGNISE OUR MISTAKES! Last thing we need is a repeat of the Great Purge.
Finally I ask to you, my readers, if there is anything you wish to add. Ideas? Comments? Alterations? I actually want to critique this concept; I’m trying to make it as waterproof and clear as possible. Also, if you could spread the concept along it would be much appreciated.