Stanford Protesters Collaborate with Marxist-Leninist Organization

not my experience. most branches had a connection/organizing relationship to sjp and other Palestinian organizations from well before October of 23. When we mobilized in October in most parts of the country worked in concert with them, with the guidance to take Palestinian organizer's lead. Many, but not all, of the student organizers likely have already been working with psl before the encampments. When the students started to form them, in my experience a lot of student organizers reach out to whoever has worked with them in the past for support. it is a mass movement, but one that psl has been incorporated into, in part because we have had longstanding relationships with Palestinian organizers... psl runs pretty openly these days too, and outside of answer and people's forum, there isn't really much of a proxy or trojan horse situation going on these days in most parts of the country, because the prevailing thought is that the country is more open to socialism than had been historically the case

nobody in the PSL identifies as Marcyite, its not really a thing.

I don't necessarily disagree with you, Marcyite isn't a ruptural tendency in the way that ML or Maoism are. And the people in PSL and even WWP, are basically ML. I did say that the Marcyite trend reinvented ML in my initial post.

But just to say an ideological trend only exists if people identify as such, is idealist. Various forms of revisionism, right or left deviations, or even just banal differences of opinion all exist within ML.

ML isn't a monolith, and we need to be able to trace where these trends within ML as a tendency come from, to hopefully avoid making tactical mistakes.

Dialectically, there are two general kinds of formulations, "Two Into One," which is the standard "Thesis, antithesis, synthesis" model that serves as most people's introduction to the concept.

And "One Into Two", wherein internal contradictions lead to a fracturing. For instance, a singular species which had divergent evolutionary branches. I.e.Humans and other apes sharing a common ancestor.

While these two formations themselves dialectically interact, the one we give primacy in our analysis shapes how we come to view all kinds of things.

Social Democrats like Eduard Bernstein took a "Two into One" approach top class struggle, which led him to erroneously conclude that the interests of the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat could be reconciled through reforms.

Why is this important with the Marcyite tendency? The primary way that the Marcyite tendency arrived at reinventing the wheel of ML is through the theory of "Global Class Struggle" that Sam Marcy, and others in his wing of the SWP arrived at, which I described in my initial comment.

That Global Class Struggle Theory also asserts that, since AES aren't technically socialist, and in a post cold war period, are allying with anti imperialist States, like Iran, they view this formulation of Global Class Struggle as a Two into One formulation, where various anti imperialist States are forming a unified bloc against the west.

In many ways, this is correct, but by viewing this solely as a Two into One formulation, the Marcyite trend sometimes ends up papering over the internal contradictions within this loose bloc. So you get weird offshoots like Caleb Maupin and his ilk trying to claim that Iran is Communist simply because it's anti-imperialist.

Or that achieving Multi-polarity is the same thing as achieving global socialism. Rather than as what it actually is, which is an opening and opportunity for more socialist States (but also other competing projects) to be founded without starting down US hegemony.

This isn't inherent to all people or orgs that come from this Marcyite trend, and plenty of them are very dedicated and principled MLs, but it's worth keeping an eye on, because it does crop up.

So while I brought up the Marcyite trend history as a historical footnote that I happen to find personally interesting, it is genuinely important that we be able to sit down and think through these things fully, rather than just throwing up our hands and papering over the line struggles and trends within our movement, because "well we're all just MLs, so its fine".

FFS why not just be ML and skip the pointless gymnastics?

For all intents and purposes, they basically are MLs, as others responding to my comment have pointed out.

They just ended up reinventing the wheel, through a really weird, round-about way, that I find interesting.