Left-Wing Discussion Thread III

[United Muscovite Nations]

Why are we supposed to care about moderates?

Because any political movement which wants to succeed thinks in the long term.

I care about the apolitical (those members of the working class who haven't taken an extreme stance)

Goodbye most of the South. :|

Further, exposing centrists for what they are, those who rationalize and defend fascism every step of way towards their dictatorship,

Taking Trotsky as a historical reference is not a good idea.

That was more Stalin than Trotsky.

[Taihei Tengoku]

It's a radical Abrahamic religion without an Abrahamic god, inspiring holy wars by its adherents

All ideologies have wars fought for them, anon.

Marxism inherits the primacy of prophets and the meme of original sin

[United Muscovite Nations]

All ideologies have wars fought for them, anon.

Marxism inherits the primacy of prophets and the meme of original sin

So does liberalism. Liberalism just happened to win so it looks less extreme, but it's origins were very extreme and violent, as well as exalting of figures (hell, the dome of the US capitol literally has George Washington ascending into Heaven as a god).

[Dagashi Shoujo]

Because any political movement which wants to succeed thinks in the long term.


Goodbye most of the South. :|


Taking Trotsky as a historical reference is not a good idea.

That was more Stalin than Trotsky.

I don't think so. Trotsky authored the book that most leftists go to today for arguments such as that.

[United Muscovite Nations]

That was more Stalin than Trotsky.

I don't think so. Trotsky authored the book that most leftists go to today for arguments such as that.

Stalin accused Social Democrats of being fascists and intentionally sabotaged their parties.

[Dagashi Shoujo]

I don't think so. Trotsky authored the book that most leftists go to today for arguments such as that.

Stalin accused Social Democrats of being fascists and intentionally sabotaged their parties.

I'm aware. But he's not the historical reference most socialists use.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Stalin accused Social Democrats of being fascists and intentionally sabotaged their parties.

I'm aware. But he's not the historical reference most socialists use.

Maybe not specifically, but Stalin's idea of Social Fascism was extremely influential. Plus, Trotsky supported working with Social Democrats.

[Dagashi Shoujo]

I'm aware. But he's not the historical reference most socialists use.

Maybe not specifically, but Stalin's idea of Social Fascism was extremely influential.

Fair point.

Which is ironic when you consider how parallel Fascism and the Soviets were.

[Orostan]

Hello fellow gommunists xxxddd

All ideologies have wars fought for them, anon.

Marxism inherits the primacy of prophets and the meme of original sin

what the fuck

[El Hamidah]

The caricature of Anarchists as people who commit terrorism for the sake of chaos itself is inaccurate. The end goal is communism. Same as Marxists.

Well, in fairness, there has been a debate among Anarchists over that very issue: chaos for its own sake and chaos in pursuit of a larger objective. I realize that the trend is now moving in the second direction.

People believing in chaos for its own sake are just not anarchists. In the sense of the political theory.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Can one not be opposed to Fascist totalitarianism without being a liberal? Now sure, if you oppose Fascist totalitarianism, you'd have something in common with liberalism, but having something in common with liberalism doesn't make one necessarily Capitalist. If one was to say that having anything in common with liberalism meant one could not be Socialist, it would necessarily follow that in order to be Socialist, one must be completely diametrically opposed to liberalism. Which, and I, being a liberal, might be a bit biased saying this but, sounds to me like authoritarianism.

I am not a liberal, but the historical context of American autonomism is not Italian workerism. It is the U.S. New Left. That is not to say that Italian workerism had no influence on American autonomism, but the two are still historically distinct.

u wot m8? I don't understand any of that or what it has to do with my comment.

[Pasong Tirad]

Well, in fairness, there has been a debate among Anarchists over that very issue: chaos for its own sake and chaos in pursuit of a larger objective. I realize that the trend is now moving in the second direction.

People believing in chaos for its own sake are just not anarchists. In the sense of the political theory.

So... The Joker isn't an anarchist?

[Mattopilos II]

Well, in fairness, there has been a debate among Anarchists over that very issue: chaos for its own sake and chaos in pursuit of a larger objective. I realize that the trend is now moving in the second direction.

People believing in chaos for its own sake are just not anarchists. In the sense of the political theory.

The linking of chaos to anarchism is true propaganda, honestly. It is basically because those that support the status-quo need to build a boogyman, and therefore claim themselves to be the "order" to the anarchist's "chaos".

[Dagashi Shoujo]

People believing in chaos for its own sake are just not anarchists. In the sense of the political theory.

The linking of chaos to anarchism is true propaganda, honestly. It is basically because those that support the status-quo need to build a boogyman, and therefore claim themselves to be the "order" to the anarchist's "chaos".

Or, bear with me because this is going to sound crazy, maybe the fact you guys chose to put "anarchy" in the name gives people a certain first impression of your ideology?

[Mattopilos II]

The linking of chaos to anarchism is true propaganda, honestly. It is basically because those that support the status-quo need to build a boogyman, and therefore claim themselves to be the "order" to the anarchist's "chaos".

Or, bear with me because this is going to sound crazy, maybe the fact you guys chose to put "anarchy" in the name gives people a certain first impression of your ideology?

Anarchy is not the same as "chaos" or "destruction". That was a conflation made by non-anarchists. Any person who reads an inch further into it sees it refers to:
1. a philosophy, and/or
2. a political stance.

Neither are the same as "chaos" unless one wants to be disingenuous when an anarchist attempts to bring up a point.

[Nature-Spirits]

The linking of chaos to anarchism is true propaganda, honestly. It is basically because those that support the status-quo need to build a boogyman, and therefore claim themselves to be the "order" to the anarchist's "chaos".

Or, bear with me because this is going to sound crazy, maybe the fact you guys chose to put "anarchy" in the name gives people a certain first impression of your ideology?

Anarchists have been using that label since the 19th century. "Anarchism" has referred to the leftist political philosophy for well over a hundred years.

[The Grene Knyght]

Or, bear with me because this is going to sound crazy, maybe the fact you guys chose to put "anarchy" in the name gives people a certain first impression of your ideology?

Anarchists have been using that label since the 19th century. "Anarchism" has referred to the leftist political philosophy for well over a hundred years.

And furthermore, that is definitely noticeable whenever I read older literature; often, when I come across the word Anarchist in fiction, its used in regard to adherents of the political ideology, and no context or disclaimer is needed because the word has only shifted in meaning since then.

[The Multiversal Communist Collective]

>not being a Proletarian Bonapartiste Blanquist

Draper was a third-camp socialist, definitely not a Blanquist.

[The Multiversal Communist Collective]

Tbf Marxism is and has always been a jihad religion. The most successful (in a Darwinian sense) Marxist sects have always been tankie Salafists rather than any sort of "moderate" denomination.

Successful how? The tankies have been relegated to the dustbin of history.

[The Multiversal Communist Collective]

It's a radical Abrahamic religion without an Abrahamic god, inspiring holy wars by its adherents

Just words.

[Taihei Tengoku]

Tbf Marxism is and has always been a jihad religion. The most successful (in a Darwinian sense) Marxist sects have always been tankie Salafists rather than any sort of "moderate" denomination.

Successful how? The tankies have been relegated to the dustbin of history.

How many Luxemburgists are even mentioned in history?

[The Multiversal Communist Collective]

Marxism inherits the primacy of prophets and the meme of original sin

You are writing in circles.

[The Multiversal Communist Collective]

People believing in chaos for its own sake are just not anarchists. In the sense of the political theory.

Marxists, anarchists, Christians, Buddhist, Muslims, Jews, etc., etc. have historically attacked the legitimacy of other Marxists, anarchists, Christians, Buddhist, Muslims, Jews, etc., etc. Yeah. Aside from acknowledging that sectarianism, nothing else can be added.

[Aillyria]

It's a radical Abrahamic religion without an Abrahamic god, inspiring holy wars by its adherents

If you aren't willing to fight a war for your ideas, they either weren't worth the effort, or you weren't committed to them.

[The Multiversal Communist Collective]

How many Luxemburgists are even mentioned in history?

Luxemburgism has never been tried. Obviously, an untested system would not be the focus of much historical analysis.