In this month’s editorial, we will update you on our activities, discussions, and broader developments. The past month has been busy for us as an editorial board. Recent developments have raised key questions about how to advance the project of building a mass communist party and what practical work we should be doing currently to push this forward.
Events
Prometheus held its first in-person event on January 14th, which was a launch of Bruno Leipold’s new book Citizen Marx: Republicanism and the Formation of Karl Marx’s Social and Political Thought. We were delighted to host Bruno Leipold and Barnaby Raine as discussants at the event, which was attended by around 80 people. They discussed the ideas in the book, their relevance to socialists organising today, and more. The audio of their conversation will be released in the coming weeks. We want to thank everyone who helped make our first event a success. Keep an eye out for future events in London.
We also have an upcoming day school: ‘Marxist Unity: building a Mass Communist Party’, which will take place in Manchester on Saturday, 8th February, and will be co-organised with Talking about Socialism (TAS). It will be a mix of debates and workshops on questions of the party, particularly how we get there and the potential challenges involved. The day school aims to continue work in trying to push the political level of discussions (such as the recent London-based ‘Party Time?’ series) that are opening up around the kind of party we need – and to do this in a way that encourages critical and open engagement.
Book your free tickets for our Marxist Unity day school here.
Members of our editorial board were also invited as observers to attend the Marxist Unity Group (MUG) congress on the 17th and 18th of January. There was high-level debate about the orientation of MUG within the DSA and wider US workers’ movement, as well as democratic deliberation on its points of unity, tasks and perspectives, and political education documents. It was inspiring to see so many socialists taking their tasks seriously and working together, and we look forward to the development of MUG in 2025 and beyond.
Articles
Alongside the public launch of Citizen Marx, we were also able to interview Bruno Leipold in a compelling discussion, which we published this month. In the interview, Leipold lays out the influence of republicanism on Marx’s thought and the development of this over time, sketching out central ideas around freedom as non-domination and touching on how we might relate to these today.
We were pleased to republish two pieces from Sylvia Pankhurst, originally published in The Workers’ Dreadnought and transcribed by L Wilkinson. The first of these, The Parties in the Streets, gives an account of street parties organised by mothers in working-class neighbourhoods following the end of World War One – drawing out the political point that organising is something that can and will be practised by everyone. The second, Co-operative Housekeeping, is a two-part fictional narrative of a working-class woman’s daily life following an imagined British revolution – exploring how experiences of cooperative living and working would radically transform our day-to-day lives.
‘What is the Party?’ series
Alongside these articles, we have continued with our ‘What is the Party?’ series, drawing together submissions and exploring the type of party we need and how it might come about. Articles published this month from Why Marx?, Ansell Eade, The Socialist Party of Great Britain (SPGB), and Steve Freeman continue to develop the discussions around the party question, presenting a variety of differing perspectives, particularly in terms of the political basis a party could or should be organised on. Our most recent contribution in this series comes from Counterfire’s Chris Nineham – the recently arrested Stop the War officer and chief steward of the national Palestine march – who argues in his piece, A Party Mood?, that Marxists should capitalise on the growing radicalisation amongst people involved in the ongoing protests and demonstrations. For Nineham, a revolutionary organisation has to “initiate, support and develop actions with other forces to its right” and “argue for the most militant tactics within the movement”. Any new party of the left, Nineham argues, has to be radical but also goes beyond the people who see themselves as revolutionaries in the present and popularise socialist arguments and take advantage of left-wing MPs in parliament while heeding the lessons of Corbynism.
We continue to publish in this series and have further articles in the pipeline for this – including contributions from members of Greens Organise, Anti*Capitalist Resistance and Platypus, among others. If you would like to respond to a piece or write your own contribution, please reach out to us at editors@prometheusjournal.org. Our hope is to bring the series to a natural close in the coming months, so please do indicate sooner rather than later.
A shout-out also goes to the Auxiliary Statements podcast, which covered the first three articles from the series in their most recent episode (episode 126). We very much welcome this developed, critical, and entertaining exploration of the pieces.
Forging Communist Unity talks
There have been recent developments among organisations that are orientated in different ways toward building a mass, democratically organised, multi-tendency communist party – what is often called the “partyist” project.
Late last year, Why Marx? contacted us to propose jointly organising a discussion series with Prometheus on the party question. We welcomed this opportunity to work closer with others and advance partyist arguments among wider layers. Why Marx?/Prometheus drafted a proposal for a discussion/education series and fielded it to CPGB-PCC, TAS, and rs21, organisations we are politically close to or work closely with/are members of.
The first organising meeting occurred on 14th December with representatives from all the invited groups present. Discussions were positive. The representatives from TAS and the CPGB-PCC argued from the outset for the process to be organised around the concrete goal of moving towards potential organisational unity between those involved and that this process of potential unity represented a more ambitious prize than a broader public discussion/education series. The representative from the rs21 steering group meanwhile outlined that the situation within their organisation in terms of questions of party and programme is far from settled, meaning they would not be in the position to agree on any merger involvement – frank and useful points were also raised around the emphasis rs21 would put on the recognition of trans oppression within the programme, which they suggested may represent potential points of future difference or red lines.
It was agreed by those present (except rs21 – following the points outlined above) to return to our respective groups with the proposal that the discussion/education series be developed instead into a process looking seriously towards the prospect of potential organisational unity for some or all of the forces involved. TAS subsequently developed a concrete proposal outlining what that process could look like – a focused programme of discussion among agreed parties exploring areas of difference and potential barriers to unity, which could then lay the possible basis for practical steps towards organisational unity.
We met again on 11th January to report back and discuss progressing forward. The CPGB-PCC endorsed the proposal from TAS as a structure for the process. Why Marx? meanwhile outlined that while they were supportive, as a non-membership group of varied trends, there wouldn’t be a straightforward way for them to participate as Why Marx? itself (a number involved are members of the CPGB-PCC and would participate instead on that basis) – they will go ahead then, alongside but separate from this process, with their original idea for an online discussion/education series on the questions of the party beginning on 6th February, and have invited others to be involved and speak (updates here).
The Position of Prometheus
This leaves only the position of Prometheus in this process. At the 11th January meeting, we outlined that to engage in a serious way, we required time to discuss substantially amongst ourselves, which was understood and accommodated by others. Our situation has challenges – as an editorial board we are comprised of individuals in different groups (some in rs21, TAS and a number of us in none), who, as a result, have different political and organisational pressures and questions around involvement which require contending with.
A number are very positive about the prospects for this process – arguing that, although the forces involved are extremely small, this represents something significant in a willingness to engage with the challenges of organisational unity, practising what we preach even on this smaller scale and sending out an important and hopeful message to others in the socialist movement. What may result from this then being greater than the sum of its parts, cohering a partyist core, politically developing and educating through this process, and drawing in wider layers won over by the approach shown in practice.
A number of others have expressed more caution and questions about the process. Raising points around the scope of our vision with the process – that this may end up limited to forces who in some way or other are already involved, or have a history of being involved, closely together in these “partyist” politics. The higher prize being the longer term and necessary efforts to involve more numerically significant forces in this process, and this requires a productive engagement within the existing socialist and worker movements and projects of joint work amongst “partyists”. Points have also been raised around the importance of clarifying and emphasising positions on questions of social oppression through any discussions.
These are all open questions, concerns, and arguments arising from our discussions. We will continue to work on and clarify our perspectives.
There has also been open discussion around questions of what it might look like for Prometheus to be involved given our status as an editorial board – we are not in the same position as a membership organisation; we don’t have a membership to bring over into the process, and we are not mandated by membership discipline in the same way. If say a majority of us decided not to be involved, this would not then preclude a minority going on to be involved, and vice versa.
Through discussion between the different perspectives we initially agreed on the following proposal:
“The Prometheus Editorial Board has agreed to be involved in the discussion process set out by the TAS proposal “Forging Communist Unity”. As our Editorial Board reflects various viewpoints and organisational commitments, we will continue discussing internally and try to reach an agreed position at an appropriate stage before the discussions reach a point of committing the participants to the outcomes of any fused organisation.”
However, following further discussions at our most recent editorial board meeting, it became clear that this position was untenable at present – a number expressed that they would not agree on participation at the level of fusion (given the concerns highlighted above) and that it was wise to be clear on this now rather than later. This takes our full collective participation as Prometheus off the table at present. Those who want to take part in the process will seek to continue to do so as a faction. They will also continue to persuade the rest of the editorial board towards participation, and discussions on that subject remain ongoing. We are still clarifying our individual perspectives regarding the current FCU talks and how any future fusion process will be most beneficial, and we will try to publish our discussions in due course.
In any case, this process and experience will be of significant political importance for us all (in Prometheus and wider partyist layers) – forcing us to clarify and lay out our strategy for advancing this project in the immediate and to contend with questions of what work we believe can take this forward in practice. We look forward to the discussions.
Looking forward
These wider discussions emerging across the movement around the type of party we need, and these more specific questions around advancing the mass communist party project will be strengthened through engagement not just amongst “partyist” forces but across the left. If you have any thoughts on these debates or wish to reflect more broadly on the current organising situation for the British left, please consider writing to us.
Finally, we invite you to join our project as a supporter by contributing a small amount each month on Patreon here.
