WI: No "New Left".

The question is simple - what will happen if the radical youth movements remain in the mainstream of the "Old Left"? How will the lack of "new left" influence modern political parties. Under what conditions are possible their absence.
 
Lots more backlash, if you thought the "Hippies are communists trying to destroy America" was bad IRL, imagine if they were more closely associated with the leftists (in America, namely socialist workers and unions) from the previous decades.
 
So, just to make this a little more concrete...

If young people in the 1960s are out protesting the Vietnam War, for example, are they doing so under the auspices of Old Left organizations? And, if so, does this mean that guys like Hoffman, Rubin, and the rest of the yippies are essentially second-tier, organizationally speaking, with union and socialist leaders being the top dogs?

If all that is the case, you're probably seeing far less of an alliance(well, none at all) with the drug culture(no way can unions sell Timothy Leary as an ally to their members). And, while the younger generation would probably still pursue its own style in terms of music, clothing, religion etc, you're not likely gonna see that kinda stuff linked to politics in any major way.

Somewhat contrary to Mass Line, I think if by "the Old Left" we mean people like the mainstream unions and Norman Thomas(who I once saw credited in a World Book article on socialism), the hippies can probably get by unscathed with any association with radical Communism. But if it's groups like the CPUSA, that's gonna be a problem.
 
Imagine blue-collar moms and dads seeing this down at their union local.
Ok - understood irony. But we are talking about the struggle for socialism and the rights of the working class. The desire to create a counterculture enraged conservatives, but the ability to distance young people from reality.
 
Somewhat contrary to Mass Line, I think if by "the Old Left" we mean people like the mainstream unions and Norman Thomas(who I once saw credited in a World Book article on socialism), the hippies can probably get by unscathed with any association with radical Communism. But if it's groups like the CPUSA, that's gonna be a problem.
Well ... I had a couple of thoughts on how to raise the image of pro-Soviet Communist parties.
And with drugs we need to understand once and for all - they took too much place in their ideology (as far as possible to talk about ideology in such a specific environment).
 
I don't see how it's possible for the yippies to team up with the unions of the Old Left, unless the latter turned against the Vietnam War early, which might have its own implications.
 
I don't see how it's possible for the yippies to team up with the unions of the Old Left, unless the latter turned against the Vietnam War early, which might have its own implications.
The Maoists and supporters of Moscow were actively on strike
 
Lots more backlash, if you thought the "Hippies are communists trying to destroy America" was bad IRL, imagine if they were more closely associated with the leftists (in America, namely socialist workers and unions) from the previous decades.
Hippies are not capable of destroying America - they are too apolitical, and this movement is all about escapism.
 
Hippies are not capable of destroying America - they are too apolitical, and this movement is all about escapism.

Communists were never capable of taking over America, since they lacked the numbers to be a real force on their own. Didn't stop two Red Scares from happening, the second largely over imaginary communists.
 
Communists were never capable of taking over America, since they lacked the numbers to be a real force on their own. Didn't stop two Red Scares from happening, the second largely over imaginary communists.
So we have two options - either to make the Communists a real force, or to promote the development of non-communist left.
 
Established Old Left parties did try to organize youth in the US in the 1960's. The CPUSA had the DuBois Clubs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W.E.B._Du_Bois_Clubs_of_America (this was not a mere "youth affiliate" the way the Young Communist League had been but a would-be "mass organization" not formally controlled by the Party), while the (Trotskyist) Socialist Workers Party had the Young Socialist Alliance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Socialist_Alliance

Neither was very successful, and the reasons were obvious. The CPUSA had been shattered both by repression and by internal dissension (eventually leading to mass resignations) sparked by the Soviet 20th Party Congress, the Hungarian Revolution, etc. Moreover, its program of the 1960's--to work within the Democratic Party and the AFL-CIO and liberal organizations in general--seemed old-fashioned and unexciting to rebellious young people of that era. As for the Trotskyists, their "incurable sectarianism" and addiction to splits were notorious, and the Stalinist-vs.-Trotskyist debates of the 1930's seemed dated and irrelevant to most students in the 1960's.
 
Last edited:
Established Old Left parties did try to organize youth in the US in the 1960's. The CPUSA had the DuBois Clubs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W.E.B._Du_Bois_Clubs_of_America (this was not a mere "youth affiliate" the way the Young Communist League had been but a would-be "mass organization" not formally controlled by the Party) , the (Trotskyist) Socialist Workers Party had the Young Socialist Alliance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Socialist_Alliance

Neither was very successful, and the reasons were obvious. The CPUSA had been shattered both by repression and by internal dissension (eventually leading to mass resignations) sparked by the Soviet 20th Party Congress, the Hungarian Revolution, etc. Moreover, its program of the 1960's--to work within the Democratic Party and the AFL-CIO and liberal organizations in general--seemed old-fashioned and unexciting to rebellious young people of that era. As for the Trotskyists, their "incurable sectarianism" and addiction to splits were notorious, and the Stalinist-vs.-Trotskyist debates of the 1930's seemed dated and irrelevant to most students in the 1960's.
Damn it.
Is there any chance that the Communist Party of the United States could not slide onto the position of reformism?
PS - Reminder - Exclude the Communist Party of the US from the list of possible ruling parties in the communist United States.
 
Established Old Left parties did try to organize youth in the US in the 1960's. The CPUSA had the DuBois Clubs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W.E.B._Du_Bois_Clubs_of_America (this was not a mere "youth affiliate" the way the Young Communist League had been but a would-be "mass organization" not formally controlled by the Party), while the (Trotskyist) Socialist Workers Party had the Young Socialist Alliance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Socialist_Alliance

Neither was very successful, and the reasons were obvious. The CPUSA had been shattered both by repression and by internal dissension (eventually leading to mass resignations) sparked by the Soviet 20th Party Congress, the Hungarian Revolution, etc. Moreover, its program of the 1960's--to work within the Democratic Party and the AFL-CIO and liberal organizations in general--seemed old-fashioned and unexciting to rebellious young people of that era. As for the Trotskyists, their "incurable sectarianism" and addiction to splits were notorious, and the Stalinist-vs.-Trotskyist debates of the 1930's seemed dated and irrelevant to most students in the 1960's.
I thought, and if in 1948 or 1957 there is a crisis equal to the strength of the Great Depression, then what is the probability of the spread of pacifism and social movements? Until the 60s, pacifism had no influence because the risk of starving to death was much higher. Death in the slaughterhouse seemed to be a relief. And in the 60's? The son wants to play rock instead of studying - well, let him try - after all, it does not depend on it, whether you die in poverty. Daughter wants to go to the commune instead of being profitable to get married. Well, it's still possible to endure, because it does not mean that you will have to give up the idea of worthy old age. Someone smokes a "jamb" - let it, because society has reached what can provide it with a minimum amount of benefits, and the "smoker" will not have to steal to get money for life. The woman gave birth unknown from whom the child - it's okay, because she can make a living for herself, and he, and she does not face death under the fence, but to him - the horror of the "orphanage".
And now imagine the absence of the "golden age" - "I do not have the money to study, and I can not get a demanded high-paying job. I have little money, so I will not spend it on drugs. there is no time for promiscuous sexual intercourse.My wife can not afford a full working shift - someone should keep an eye on the children. " Under such conditions, it is not so scary to die in Vietnam, and the ideas of the "new left" do not receive special distribution. "What Free Love? If the salary is raised, then it will be a holiday!"
 
Last edited:
Top