A Left project that is in any way serious about upending the status quo would be constantly generating and debating incredibly contentious ideas without hiding behind moral absolutes, emotional fragility and the attribution of malice to the other party. 1/

A left political culture that doesn’t embrace and foster a tendency for contentious debate will simply be incapable for innovating any ideas and practices that are outside the existing ambient consensus. It’s a surrender to the bounds of acceptability defined by the system. 2/

If you want to figure out whether the left political project you’re involved in is up to the task, you need to look no further than how much agreement exists among them. If they’re all nodding their heads to everything you’re in serious trouble. 3/

If disagreement is attributed to moral failure or an attempt to hurt other, you’re in serious trouble. If nobody is questioning the project’s logic, even at times of defeat, and even worse doing spin and saying they’re winning, you’re in serious trouble. 4/

If people aren’t fired up, debating, disagreeing, challenging assumptions, and coming back for more, without vilifying people at a *personal* level, your left can’t be expected to be anything but a social club that provides a reliable means of dissipating radical energy. 5/

The debate about the Harpers letter is nonsense. It’s dogs jockeying for position to get the scraps thrown down to them from Capital. You *should* be worried that the average socialist “discussion” is usually people taking turns to say the same exact thing. /end