Help Shape Red Mole's Future
A Brief Survey for Our Readers
This week's article on the NPA-Révolutionnaires sparked some fascinating discussions—and revealed that our readers have diverse perspectives on how Red Mole should approach these kinds of developments on the international left.
Some of you appreciated the detailed organizational analysis and wanted more coverage of European left dynamics. Others felt we should focus more on drawing strategic lessons rather than reporting internal developments. A few suggested we're too critical of other left organizations, while others argued we need to be even sharper in our analysis of sectarian mistakes.
These varied reactions got us thinking: after three months of publishing, it's time to ask you directly what kind of strategic analysis serves you best.
Why Your Input Matters
Red Mole exists to make revolutionary history strategically relevant for today's organizers. But "strategic relevance" can mean different things depending on what challenges you're facing in your own political work.
Are you primarily interested in understanding organizational dynamics to avoid repeating historical mistakes? Do you want real-time intelligence about left political developments across different countries? Are you looking for Fourth International perspectives specifically, or broader left strategic analysis?
The data tells us that articles on contemporary organizational crises consistently perform best—like our coverage of the SWP's implosion, the AWL-Mandel open letter, and Socialist Resistance's evolution into Anti-Capitalist Resistance and Ecosocialist.scot. But we want to understand why these resonate and whether they're actually useful for your political practice.
The Survey: Five Minutes That Could Transform Red Mole
We've prepared a brief survey with just five strategic questions about:
Content focus: Which types of analysis are most valuable for your organizing
Geographic scope: How to balance European focus with international coverage
Historical vs. contemporary: The right mix for strategic learning
Critical analysis: Whether our organizational critiques help or hinder left unity
Growth and recommendations: How Red Mole spreads and what makes it valuable
Different Perspectives, Shared Goals
The NPA discussion highlighted something important: our readers span 28 countries (including 18 US states) and bring diverse experiences of left organizing. Some are active in Fourth International sections, others work in broad left parties, many operate in challenging contexts where revolutionary organization remains fragmented.
What unites us is the conviction that learning from organizational successes and failures—both historical and contemporary—can help build more effective movements today. But exactly how to do that strategic analysis is the question.
Your Voice Shapes Our Strategy
Red Mole has always been guided by the principle that revolutionary history must serve contemporary organizing. Your responses will help us refine that mission and ensure we're providing the strategic intelligence you actually need.
Whether you've been with us since the beginning or just discovered Red Mole, whether you're deeply embedded in Fourth International politics or approaching from a different tradition—your perspective matters.
To take the survey: click here.
The survey will remain open for two weeks. We'll publish a follow-up article sharing what we learned and how it will shape Red Mole's editorial direction going forward.
Thank you for being part of this project to build strategic understanding across the international left. Your engagement and feedback—including those diverse reactions to the NPA article—are what make Red Mole a genuine tool for revolutionary organizing rather than just another publication.
In solidarity,
The Red Mole Editorial Team
P.S. - If you haven't yet upgraded to a paid subscription, now would be a perfect time to support this work. Subscriber contributions allow us to dedicate the time needed for the deep strategic analysis that makes Red Mole unique.