Madashell wrote:
]If individual members or local groups choose not to particpate in something the national organisation is doing, that's down to them, as long as they don't work to undermine the national organisation. I really don't see why this is such a difficult concept to grasp.I understand it. I just don't agree with it.
I am sort of seeing this discussion through the eyes of someone who is involved with a very large expansive union. We are fairly democratic, but occasionally locals end up take positions or engage in actions which are opposed by the national/international organization. I have, at many times, supported these small locals who have taken unpopular stances within their unions. What is your position on this ? Would you support a local group who is engaging in an action which is not supported by the national org. even if that action is justified and is furthering a revolutionary agenda ?
I understand it. I just don't agree with it.
I don't understand the second bit of this sentence. Why is it voluntarism*?
No, I think that the organisation should decide, which members are involved in which activity, in order to best utilise its resources.
I completely disagree with this comment:
Members, in my opinion, should choose as individuals. It should be a decision made by the organisation.
Knightrose has a point with this comment, but the way I look at it that is just something that needs to be considered by the organisation when it makes its decision.
Devrim
*I understand voluntarism to mean believing that communist militants can move the class by their efforts alone.