Forwarded from Alan Bradley

[Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>]

I will concede that my use of the term "sectarian" was incorrect.
Therefore, instead of writing:

"In short, it's a sectarian stick to beat the actually existing US left
with."

I should have written:

"In short, it's just a stick to beat the actually existing US left
with."

While skimming through the essays at

http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/mydocs/organization.htm

I noticed the following:

(From http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/mydocs/organization/JohnPercy.htm)

"Of course, what John has not come to grips with is the clash between
these sensible words and the party-building traditions that the DSP
adheres to."

This is the kind of thing that I was getting at in my (rough, prelimary)
response. The claim here, in effect, is that the DSP mechanically
follows the model ("traditions") attributed to the US SWP. It doesn't
look at what other tendencies are doing. It never thinks about what is
possible and what is necessary. It just follows what the US SWP were
doing thirty years ago.

Yeah, well, good-o. If that were true, then the DSP, and any other crowd
with the same approach, would, in fact, be a waste of time.

Fortunately, it isn't.

Alan Bradley


Louis Proyect, Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org


~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.