Socialist "confederacy"

[MD575151@xxxxxxx]

Freinds,
     If any of you are sick of hearing complaints regarding the constant
bickering and lack of unity between the socialist and other anti-capitalist
organazations, stop reading this.

     I am basically going to repeat a concept that everyone has heard a
thousand times.  However, despite the repitition of this idea, nothing has
happened.  Therefor, I am justified in stressing, yet again, the need for
organization.
    What is needed to gain support for socialism (or whatever other name it
may go under) is popular support.  The cause can not get popular support
without the masses being informed about the who, what, when, where, and whys
of socialism.
     I know this is adding pressure to a tender subject, but people respect
numbers!  Why do people not support socialism?  They do not take it
seriously.  It's difficult to give support to something when no one else
does.  I was discussing the fact that the Communist Party is a serious and
important party--this was his response:  "Yeah, all three members."  I had to
lagh. I know that the CPUSA is not that small, but it is small none the
less.(no personal attacks intended)
    Individualy all the major parties (SWP, SP, and CP) are small and have
next to no influence in the lives of the common worker, sad but true.
 However, if added up, all of the progressive parties (non capitalist
parties) reach quite high numbers--with high numbers comes social
recognition, with social recognition comes social support.
    What I am hoping is that socialists can agree to unite under a single
term (a very general party of sorts) in order to verify their importance.
 That party should serve as a sort of confederacy, it should have no power to
impose any sort of regulations or qualifacations on what other parties can
and cannot do, it should serve only to unite and form an official bond
between all socialist parties.  It should, however, be strong and formal
enough to qualify as a real party, perhaps more than for namesake but less
than a Union (unless we can find it within ourselves to agree to a Union).
 Something as simple as making sure that two socialist candidates do not run
against eachother for the same office, or distributing a common newsletter
(but at the same time encouraging the publications of individual parties).
     What about the Committees of Correspondance?  Can you imagine the
influence of and public support for the CoC if it's membership were 50,000
instead of 2,000?? (please excuse me if I have the numbers wrong)  I do not
know enough details about CoC to forward that all socialists should join, but
not give up their true, smaller, organizations.  How organized is the CoC?
 What are the qualifications of membership?  Is the CoC a possable solution
to this "size problem"?  Perhaps someone more involved with the CoC would
have something to add.
    I am not trying to sound like a mad patriot, but --Would the American
colonists have succeded in the American "revolution" if there were no
confederacy?--  No.
Sincerely,
         Mike Dean


     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

     ------------------