Pluralism and disagreement are quite simply, irreducible facts of political life. Using Democratic Centralism as an excuse to stifle debate is destructive. Only by engaging in constant, informed, and self-critical discussion does it become possible to build real unity of action.

As more and more people are integrated into the socialist movement and come to recognize the necessity of partisanship and (self-)discipline in the struggle for social transformation, we can no longer afford caricatures of Marxism to pass themselves off as authentic examples.

Liberals misunderstand themselves when they act as if freedoms are based in legal pronouncements and normative practices, when really, freedom of thought and conscience are simply givens in that there is no power which can succeed perfectly at stifling independent thought.

But it is possible to disorient people and interrupt their capacity for thinking, to use fear and coercion to render people passive, timorous, and obedient. Such people are useless to any revolutionary movement worthy of the name, maybe worse than useless.

Why? Because obedient people and sycophants are afraid of the truth, and bend their analyses to arrive at conclusions made in advance. They will not be able to present new information that can provide a basis for reorientation and responding to objective circumstances as needed.

A revolutionary movement requires the best that all involved have to offer, discipline in study and inquiry, discipline in the practice of democracy, and a willingness to place oneself wholly in the service of what is necessary fearlessly and without hesitation.

That’s a discipline that is defined by its ability to resist to authoritarianism and dogma, to rely instead upon trust earned through patient effort, mutual regard, and the kind of strength of character that is needed to recognize mistaken beliefs and course correct.

In short, cultishness is anathema to democratic centralism. It substitutes an irrational belief in the infallibility of leaders, an idealism that assumes some ultimate decisive instance, for the kind of shared commitment acquired that can actually bring about real change.