Ask Lemmygrad
A place to ask questions of Lemmygrad's best and brightest
Was re-reading this. What stood out was classifying PSL as Trotskyist and revisionist. The PSL statements, program and publications I’ve read have appeared to be quite clear didn’t strike me as revisionist.
Not sure if the USU expands on this and I missed it. Perhaps you have insight or another suggested reading on that?
PSL is a departure of WWP which itself split from a formal Trotskyist sect. They don't drop Trotskyism in essence just that they are more open to advances made by Stalin.
Trotskyist tendencies remain in PSL with a focus on majoritarianism, treating the "industrial proletariat" as the revolutionary vehicle in the Imperialist states, and placing "workers revolution" above national liberation movements.
Reading this now, thank you! So far, very insightful. Anything specific within this you'd like to highlight in relation to my OP?
I think it's best for the whole piece to be taken in to discuss the current party ecosystem within the Anglo settler states, PSL is in the section on revisionist and Trot orgs as it's structure and issues are similar to the CPUSA, USU views FRSO as a potentially better org at least ideologically, even though it is a "pre-party" formation rather than a true party like PSL.
In my opinion, PSL has wealth that allows it to at least right now, to better serve organizers. However, the ideological development of the mass and leadership of the PSL is very lacking (and deeply Americanist), which is a crit you'll see from myself and Chunka Luta Network members a lot (some are in PSL too). PSL has money to do things that FRSO just doesn't right now since it is not a party organization at this time, so actions are coming out of the expenses of individuals. If FRSO's ideological development had the resources of PSL and CPUSA the movement in the Imperial Core would be a lot more interesting.