> >I'll take your word on this, Lou - and Trotsky himself was no fool, for
> >sure. But what happened? Why did Trotskyist groups - all Marxist groups
> >did, but it seems to be most extreme among Trot formations - show such a
> >prediliction for rigidity, cultishness, and schism? Why have they been
> >reduced to citing formulas and refighting the same ancient battles for the
> >last 30 to 60 years?
>
> >Doug
To which Louis provided a long answer about the history of American
Trotskism in particular.
I already knew some of that history, did not know some of it, and am not
sure I do not dispute some parts of what were related. But, all that
interests me very little anymore. I am more interested in whether people
in the here and now still agree or disagree with the strategy of
political vanguardism. Define political vanguardism however you want,
postulate a perfect practice of your own definition of political
vanguardism, and then tell me if you think that there is any useful role
for this kind of political activism in progressive political activity in
the twenty-first century -- yes, we are getting very close.
> Louis Proyect
