i hope it's ok to start a thread on what is pretty much just my musings. and no i am not well read or a militant, so forgive me for any lack of clarity or mistakes :-)
so i have mentioned claude lefort before on forums, to the effect that he is still kinda so close to being a communist, that he can be considered almost a crypto marxist.
what i find divergent in his thinking, is that he places such emphasis on the idea of democracy, before that or the working class.
but i see / recall, some "communists": scraping round trying to justify some kind of working class populism (to what possibe ends?). this is not the case with lefort, i think by definition!
but likewise, i would be left to draw from more disparate sources than the working class movement. not class collaboration, it seems that his idea of what democracy amounts to surely preclude that by nature. but, i guess, past bourgeois movements. this, actually, sits well with me, though. not picking them over us at any point in history, but recognizing when, in the past, they have been progressive. sometimes i wonder if a fair amount of my confusion has stemmed from not being able to state that past e.g. reforms were good, without that is working for them. i am left wondering if they were won by a class for itself, that is the working class in opposition to the bourgeois, but what was? i agree [i assume that this is the prime example], the russian revolution actually. but what parts of that instance of the class for itself, were not democratic? is it essential to repeat the ideology of the past, in order to try to right its mistakes?
hesitantly, i want to conclude [and i hope someone here knows what i am talking about, or at least can follow what i'm saying - if not delete this!] that lefort is a very paranoid man - suspicious of both the totalitarian left and right. this appeals to me! at the cost, it seems, of being able to have historical agency. but surely that itself, would be for me, only an illusion. but i don't understand how, if i have no control oevr the future, there can be any individual wth agency. for any entity to have that agency, in the place of individfuals, there would have to be ether a mass movement for a certain kind of democracy, if that is there is no socialist one. the rub is that i don't believe the crisis will go away [not absolutely certain], i didn't like the state of capitalism before the crisis, but equally, i see no good evidence of anything i can do about it. better to try to live on according to democractic, or socialist ones principles? because, outside principle, i see nothing :-) !