Why are we set on the impossible? It is possible the idea of revolutionary new communism is unrealistic, abstract, etc…but the current debates over socialism operate at best on a treadmill and have a half-life in their degeneration into social democratic ‘terminal socialist double talk’. It is nothing of the kind. It is the only realistic strategy at this point.
The answer is simple: nothing at present is working or going to work. The OWS, gone. Sanders et al. going, going… And in each case this was predicted at the start by some.
We have a new potential opening: climate chaos added to capitalism chaos is going to do the work of revolution. A neo-communist group needs to be ready at the sidelines the way the bolsheviks were. But a new communism can’t use anything much from the old canon.
It must have a revolutionary project, military, rebellion mode, colonial war mode…
a parallel electoral project
an economic plan, in writing
along with a critique of current economic theory
a democratic project inside a communist project
a possible transitional stage of market communism
a philosophy beyond materialism to be able to communicate with the religious majorities
…that should include a new and more robust humanism/secular definition
…one that can critique and yet can at least communicate with religious legacies
…including xtianity, buddhism, islam… (I think a better ‘humanism’ would be immensely helpful beyond the current Feuerbachian Iron Cagism)
It is sad but the last issue was already in place in the twentieth century, and we lost all of it. Part of the reason is the shoddy character of marxism as a poor foundation…