Trying to make changes in the marxist legacy is an uphill battle and the ‘cadre’ is very much like a ‘cult’, and I fear its fans/members have failed to see that the legacy must be upgraded, remorphed, or simply scrapped. It is simply unrealistic to expect the marxism that generated the Second Internationale can simply repeat itself for a second attempt. Every inch of marxist terrain has been subject to critique. It would be much better to simply make marxism a traditional resource and rewrite a current platform from scratch. Marxists just don’t get it: they defend the legacy in the manner of theological apologetics, but are unfamiliar with the critics. And the legacy of Stalinism can’t be set to one side. Marxists in the classic sense won’t get a second chance with the classic marxism/leninism.
For such reasons it is better to start over.
Our manifesto (or manifesto generator) attempts to start from scratch:
the legacy of Marx/Engels is a great history. Stick to that history.
make the 1840’s an historical jumping point, but keep in mind that communism is an idea/movement that predated Marx/Engels. There is no inherent reason to make their work a dogma.
The whole development of theory up to Capital is useful on the sidelines, but too equivocal as theory. Skip it.
Inflicting Capital on every new generation has create a movement of confused idiots.
All that is needed is a form of praxis that is electoral/revolutionary that creates the foundations of communism as a legal constitution, then moves to create an economy from there. We have suggested a hybrid called ‘market neo-communism’.
I have to wonder if marxist groups are really serious about change. You can spin the spiel at great length but never do much. The cadre is either too intimidated, controlled by deadbeats, or subject to covert infiltration. I am often surprised by the hostile cultic stance of marxists. They won’t even discuss the key issues with interested outsiders. It is a closed realm of people who preach to the choir and who are unable to encounter outsiders, even committed outsiders.
Look at the OWS: fresh air jumpstarted a whole new movement. But that movement could have learned something from the marxist legacy. We see the same confusion with the Sanders movement.
It is time to learn the lesson: a new radical activist movement but this time with a rewrite of the revolutionary communist project that can cite marxism in its appendices but create a new set of practical themes from scratch.