anarchists have never achieved anything, just communes in bumfuck nowhere
MLs are all chauvinist red fash third worldists
left-coms are armchair shitposters
trotskyists are just wrong
denguists are capitalists
soc dems are pretty much liberals
so what is actually the correct and most accurate form of Marxism? it seems that only MLs achieved to create the USSR that eventually was a world power, but it deteriorated to a corrupt state capitalism
4 posts omitted.>>754820It also produced Adorno. And just because someone has questionable political opinions does not mean their work isnt valuable.
>>754803I havent read Lacan, bu there is a lot more to Freud than Oedipal complex, and didnt Jung mostly ignore its existance as well? Not that I think Jung is a particularly venerable figure, he is mostly the one responsible for reputation of psychoanalysis as a mysthical woo-woo.
>>754821>Im not even that political, I just unionise and vote like a normieyou already do more than 90% of people here
>>754799>and most accurate form of MarxismThis is only a subsect of communist thought that excludes anarchists and socdems. If we want to purity spiral about "real communism" its anarchism.
perhaps we dont have to do make it last forever and can just aurafarm for a bit
or my current cope, make a new word a new idea that destroys the language of the modern world, something, at leadt at birth, devoid of the modern context, that we can aspire to
>>754856of course this birth of a concept would be just mere formalizations of social relations, and something actually new, actually alien would be well something incomprehensible