Either you ridin’ or we pass you, flyin’ by sayin’ fuck you
To be clear, this was bait for terminally online lemmy libs.
Not Hexbear anarchists, but here we are.
not an anrachist, dipshit, but feel free to make shit up as much as you want
not an anrachist, dipshit, but feel free to make shit up as much as you want.
What’s an anrachist?
i’m tired, i made a typo, big woop dipshit
I, personally, identify as an arachno-communist.
i’m tired, i made a typo, big woop ditship.
What’s a ditship?
it’s another typo, or do you not understand the concept?
That one wasn’t a typo, I thought it was funny.
You have this out of context Joey Steel quote as your bio:
We believe that the Anarchists are real enemies of Marxism. Accordingly, we also hold that a real struggle must be waged against real enemies
I’m pretty sure the liberals aren’t your target. They certainly weren’t Stalin’s, because he was trying to build a movement and knew they were useless.
Don’t try to walk this post back, stick to your guns, you wanted to struggle with the anarchists. Bask in the struggle session.
I like the quote, and don’t really see any real benefit with political unity with anarchists.
The liberals were the target with this post.
You sexually harassing people wasn’t the struggle session I had in mind, but I guess that’s anarchists.
deleted by creator
my take is that foreign policy differences won’t matter until we have built more than 0.00000000001% of communism
and frankly anarchists are way better at local level shit than we are
i say this as an active member of a marxist-leninist party for the last 15 yearsdeleted by creator
having done extensive on the ground work, irl anarchists are nothing like internet anarchists in my experience
the worst you will get as an ML is a snide comment or a weird look, which if that bothers you, you are not suited to organizing
and frankly “supporting” china has no material impact whatsoever, and implies a very “posting is praxis” western marxist worldviewSupporting China in the form of creating anti-cold war coalitions can have a material impact. It can at least delay and disrupt the imperial machine while they figure out how to pass laws so that calling a Congressperson a loser now earns someone prison time, etc.
Also a great way to expose people to the police reaction that will occur when you organize anything in this vein of any importance. Gotta keep innoculating more and more people so that we don’t get easily murdered when cool zones hit.
are you fucking high?
since when has the us imperial war machine gave the tiniest shit about what the people think?
and even if they did, the average american sees everyone outside of america as subhuman and worthy of scorn, you think they would oppose a war?
The imperial war machine is constantly lobbying for its interests and against sentiments that may disrupt its aims. It is virtually always successful on the national stage, but local organizing can and has massively disrupted supply chains and manufacturing centers. This is why a lot of environmentalism actions are now criminal, even treated as terrorism: they did and do actually force a response, and that sucks away resources from the top in a lose-lose material exchange but with the benefit of innoculating the public from the notion that things are going well, that those companies are on their side, etc. It also teaches your org members that there is no bottom to the depravity to which capital will respond to disruption. Gotta plan accordingly to ensure actions have informed consent, of course - and a clear-eyed goal.
Anyways, the war machine lobbies because they do actually perceive a need to “grease the wheels” to get things going. They don’t throw money at think tanks and Senators and PR campaigns for nothing. And that can be undermined with several aforementioned benefits.
And no, I agree, most Americans are confused and easily led into fashy thinking and frothing for genocide. The actions I’m talking about don’t have naive goals like, “we will convince everyone to oppose US imperialism on principle”. Innoculation can be as simple as being tear gas seeping in your window while the cops beat protesters. The liberal inside may not join the protesters (yet), but they do see the lopsided reaction and a few gears start to turn.
These are the kinds of things we use to peel away libs person by person to build power. Especially younger people.
deleted by creator
my point is that it doesn’t matter at all
we are barely past the starting gun of communism
the generations before us (in the west) got complacent and dropped the fucking ball
at this moment, having anarchists as allies can only benefit the working class, they have better support networks, making a real difference to people’s lives on the ground
we can deal with our differences when we aren’t completely outnumbered and outgunned by the overt fascists who are trying to kill us, and the movement dead
and make no mistake, i will probably be in my sixties by the time that fucking happens, and you in your fortiesdeleted by creator
i’m 32 years old and if you’re older than me and hold to this ridiculous fucking idea then you are useless to us
we are running out of fucking time
this isn’t a fucking game, this is people’s fucking lives
Whether they’re all-in on China or think that Xi is the anti-Christ, the end result is exactly the same: absolutely nothing whatsoever. There isn’t a local left, much less a national left; certainly there isn’t anything that anybody could seriously call an international movement. The opinions of random westerners mean absolutely nothing to the CCP. Fixating on what we have zero influence over is wholly unproductive.
Maybe in 20 years we’ll have cobbled together a movement that Beijing thinks is even worth offering a nod to, but right now we’re a bit too irrelevant to worry about our place on the global stage.
you know what, fuck it, i’m done being nice to you larpers
GO THE FUCK OUTSIDE AND DO SOMETHING WITH YOUR FUCKING LIFE YOU WORTHLESS FUCKING PRICK
deleted by creator
shut the fuck up larper, you live in a suburb in wisconsin, no one fucking cares
I dunno I think dismissively quoting 19th century political philosophical divisions in response to someone pointing to the importance of real-world on the ground mass organizing is firmly in the realm of idealism.
The science of revolution requires a grounding in the conditions of the working class and an aptitude for organizing a mass base. Many anarchists are far ahead of many Western MLs in this respect, as being a Western ML is unfortunately often treated more like an identity or club rather than an activity or life dedication or science.
Smdh my dick head you’d think with all the fucking books the intellectual Marxists carry around they’d have the muscle to lob a brick once in a while. Put those arms to a better use in the present than jacking each other off about dreams of fighting anarchists in the future.
You’d think MLs would recognize the need to build a mass base but Western self-proclaimed ML parties tend to be like 4 people that alienate everyone around them or are PatSoc adjacent, lol. Not all of them by any means. PSL and some others do a better job, but none are really doing the work of building a mass base. There’s some kind of inescapable drive to do weird out-of-touch shit, lol. They’re all getting dunked on by DSA libs in that arena, lol.
I also have a great time organizing with several (not all, of course) orgs of various anarchist tendencies.
I come here out of love as someone that identifies with the ML tradition and keeps running headfirst into trying to get Western commies to actually organize.
the muscle to lob a brick once in a while.
Propaganda of the deed was disproven by like 1910
Propaganda of the deez?
Also “eww no physical violence is so 1910” ah yeah that explains why the Russians rolled over for Tsar Nicholas for so long
Oh wait no he got owned
Old Nicky got killed by Marxists, so you don’t get to claim that.
All violence isn’t propaganda of the deed - just purposeless, disorganized violence, done for no other purpose than to feel effective and ineffectively influence others to do the same. Anarchist violence, really.
I get it, it feels cute to try and deflect with humor when you’re wrong, but it’s an old joke, and you’re not in Hexbear.
suck your mum larper
DEEZ NUTS LMAO GOTTEM
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
Although “left unity” is pure idealist crap
So’s your mom. There is something intensely funny about people claiming to be MLs following ML teachings calling for ideological purity before an ML state is established. Like read the tenets of your own belief system, read lenin.
read lenin.
“Unity is a great thing and a great slogan. But what the workers’ cause needs is the unity of Marxists, not unity between Marxists, and opponents and distorters of Marxism.”.
Or like, what Lenin did you have in mind
Hey that’s a fun little quote, where did you get that. I wonder what “Distorters of Marxism” he was talking about? Could he be talking about “Liquidators”, i.e. people who wanted to disband the social-democratic party of Russia in favor of joining with legal parties? Nooo, that’d mean you were quoting something dishonestly, and that just couldn’t be.
I’m asking you to read “Left-communism: An infantile disorder”
Which I shall quote now
"All compromise with other parties . . . any policy of manoeuvring and compromise must be emphatically rejected,” the German Lefts write in the Frankfurt pamphlet.
It is surprising that, with such views, these Lefts do not emphatically condemn Bolshevism! After all, the German Lefts cannot but know that the entire history of Bolshevism, both before and after the October Revolution, is full of instances of changes of tack, conciliatory tactics and compromises with other parties, including bourgeois parties!
To carry on a war for the overthrow of the international bourgeoisie, a war which is a hundred times more difficult, protracted and complex than the most stubborn of ordinary wars between states, and to renounce in advance any change of tack, or any utilisation of a conflict of interests (even if temporary) among one’s enemies, or any conciliation or compromise with possible allies (even if they are temporary, unstable, vacillating or conditional allies)—is that not ridiculous in the extreme? Is it not like making a difficult ascent of an unexplored and hitherto inaccessible mountain and refusing in advance ever to move in zigzags, ever to retrace one’s steps, or ever to abandon a course once selected, and to try others? And yet people so immature and inexperienced (if youth were the explanation, it would not be so bad; young people are preordained to talk such nonsense for a certain period) have met with support—whether direct or indirect, open or covert, whole or partial, it does not matter—from some members of the Communist Party of Holland.
After the first socialist revolution of the proletariat, and the overthrow of the bourgeoisie in some country, the proletariat of that country remains for a long time weaker than the bourgeoisie, simply because of the latter’s extensive international links, and also because of the spontaneous and continuous restoration and regeneration of capitalism and the bourgeoisie by the small commodity producers of the country which has overthrown the bourgeoisie. The more powerful enemy can be vanquished only by exerting the utmost effort, and by the most thorough, careful, attentive, skilful and obligatory use of any, even the smallest, rift between the enemies, any conflict of interests among the bourgeoisie of the various countries and among the various groups or types of bourgeoisie within the various countries, and also by taking advantage of any, even the smallest, opportunity of winning a mass ally, even though this ally is temporary, vacillating, unstable, unreliable and conditional. Those who do not understand this reveal a failure to understand even the smallest grain of Marxism, of modern scientific socialism in general. Those who have not proved in practice, over a fairly considerable period of time and in fairly varied political situations, their ability to apply this truth in practice have not yet learned to help the revolutionary class in its struggle to emancipate all toiling humanity from the exploiters. And this applies equally to the period before and after the proletariat has won political power.Just so I understand correctly, Lenin is saying that communist parties need to join together to overthrow capitalism. Is that how you read it?
Can you help me understand why you think that extends to anarchists?
Not only are most anarchists who would even be interested in such an alliance anarcho-communists, i.e. communists, Lenin directly calls for allying with any “mass ally”, even if this ally is “temporary, vacillating, unstable, unreliable and conditional”
And I agree with Lenin.
I don’t understand temporary alliances for specific goals to be the same as “left unity”.
That implies a unity of purpose and goal that doesn’t exist.
I don’t want the future Anarchists want, and they don’t want mine.
ARE YOU CURRENTLY IN A PLACE IN WHICH YOU ARE MORE POWERFUL THAN THE BOURGEOIS INTERESTS? NO? THEN READ LENIN AGAIN YOU MOTHERFUCKER
In case anyone is thinking “Oh surely Lenin wouldn’t include people who weren’t marxists in this” btw
Prior to the downfall of tsarism, the Russian revolutionary Social-Democrats made repeated use of the services of the bourgeois liberals, i.e., they concluded numerous practical compromises with the latter. In 1901–02, even prior to the appearance of Bolshevism, the old editorial board of Iskra (consisting of Plekhanov, Axelrod, Zasulich, Martov, Potresov and myself) concluded (not for long, it is true) a formal political alliance with Struve, the political leader of bourgeois liberalism, while at the same time being able to wage an unremitting and most merciless ideological and political struggle against bourgeois liberalism and against the slightest manifestation of its influence in the working-class movement.
deleted by creator
You let them help you build socialism as long as your goals align? Like what do you want me to say here “Massacre them in the streets right after the revolution”? As long as your goals align you work together, when they don’t you are opposed and act accordingly.
Do you want me to keep reading you Lenin?
deleted by creator
Demanding decorum is actual idealist crap
Lemme just dial up the tone police real quick…wait, they say they can’t respond because somebody slashed their tires.
deleted by creator
I have no idea what you expect me to do with this information.
deleted by creator
ML is pretty important. If you support China because you think they’re great capitalists, then that’s pretty sus. Supporting China while being ML shows that you’re pragmatic and not dogmatic.
Either way, just these three are fairly loose standards already.
Fair enough, the political compass isn’t really real anyway
