I’m very in favor of being a socialist who is openly and transparently socialist, and I believe that orgs of socialists should be open in advancing that as well. I think that the failure of “estimation” most often occurs when people try and create their own idea of an organization and fit objective conditions into it, which leads to a sectarian, alienated strategy; rather than developing what already exists into informal structures, and then organizing, eventually formalizing, an organization adapted to existing conditions. This latter case, when carried out with strong political praxis, is what I deem most effective, whereas the alienated sectarian strat fails to gain traction. Another downside is that it doesn’t expose the illusions of individualist politics, whereas the second model is fundamentally collective and democratic.

Many orgs go through these same growing pains, one group I am a member has (sort of) a tenuous relationship with our group’s founders. A common obstacle to watch out for is when groups who begin with the “right ideas” try, and fail, to gain traction in a movement, they can overcompensate too much in the other direction, only tailing the masses. Mass organizing strategies are often over compensation in this direction, whereas sectarian tendencies can fluctuate between tailing and alienating strategies. Fortunately, experienced organizers often know how to navigate this terrain. But in many cases I think they don’t have a navigational strategy, and they still make mistakes.

So make sure you speak up and develop your perspective while engaging with objective conditions as near to actual struggle as you can.