most working class people cannot read well, let alone theory, have no material time to read, or if, they do, they don’t have the mental energy or continuity to get to the end of it, grapple alone on how to turn that into action and find a path for themselves. It’s very individualistic, good for the privileged who organize out of aspiration rather than out of necessity. Any serious org, to the people coming to offer help, should answer: “this is John, he will teach you how to do X and Y, and why this is important. Get to work”. Anything else is designed for an intellectual, individualistic minority that never gets shit done.
You need both theory and practice together. Practice sharpens theory, theory guides practice. You don’t have to be a grandmaster Marxist-Leninist with decades of theory under your belt to do good work. A large part of organizing involves training and educating comrades, for example, you even hint at it. Many orgs require a protracted training period before even being a full member, such as PSL or FRSO.
What’s classist would be shutting out the working class from theory, keeping it purely for the vanguard. Many existing communist orgs have run into this problem, and resolved it in various ways. Theory is for the working class, not for a privledged few, so the good vanguards have managed to make theory approachable and digestible.
I’d say it’s definitely a “normal” thing to do. A lot of people don’t understand the importance of organizing until they’ve read a bit of theory, and saying they were wrong to do so, or framing them as privledged, isn’t the right path. There are two “wrong” camps, those who only read theory, and those who only do practice, though the practice camp is less incorrect. The correct group is the group that tries to balance both.
“I want to help”
“Read several books first”.
Are you aware of how disgusting and classist it sounds?
how is reading a book classist for you? you can read. (and its free). the introductory stuff is mostly easy to read too.
you can join a leftist org directly and they will teach you if you prefer it that way. that’s probably how most people start.
most working class people cannot read well, let alone theory, have no material time to read, or if, they do, they don’t have the mental energy or continuity to get to the end of it, grapple alone on how to turn that into action and find a path for themselves. It’s very individualistic, good for the privileged who organize out of aspiration rather than out of necessity. Any serious org, to the people coming to offer help, should answer: “this is John, he will teach you how to do X and Y, and why this is important. Get to work”. Anything else is designed for an intellectual, individualistic minority that never gets shit done.
You need both theory and practice together. Practice sharpens theory, theory guides practice. You don’t have to be a grandmaster Marxist-Leninist with decades of theory under your belt to do good work. A large part of organizing involves training and educating comrades, for example, you even hint at it. Many orgs require a protracted training period before even being a full member, such as PSL or FRSO.
What’s classist would be shutting out the working class from theory, keeping it purely for the vanguard. Many existing communist orgs have run into this problem, and resolved it in various ways. Theory is for the working class, not for a privledged few, so the good vanguards have managed to make theory approachable and digestible.
No problem with that. My problem is with people who expect to start from theory as if that it’s a relatable and normal thing to do.
I’d say it’s definitely a “normal” thing to do. A lot of people don’t understand the importance of organizing until they’ve read a bit of theory, and saying they were wrong to do so, or framing them as privledged, isn’t the right path. There are two “wrong” camps, those who only read theory, and those who only do practice, though the practice camp is less incorrect. The correct group is the group that tries to balance both.