/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

You can't until conditions reveal themselves

Weather or not they put thought into their fursona.

>>1837410
In practice.

>>1837410
>>in 20th century there was a huge number of "socialist" movements that ended up being anti Soviet and secretly working for capitalists
The first movement that comes to mind is the CPSU post-Stalin

>>1837426
So after it is already too late?

Through plenty of self-criticism.

>>1837410
>How would (You) separate genuine socialists from plants and opportunists?

I can't blame them, you gotta do what you gotta do to make ends meet. They made their choice, no one can force them if they think they are in a sinking ship, or if one boat is better then the other, even if momentarily. The soviets fought those so called "socialists" when they thought necessary, and others the soviets allied "liberals and socialists" in "united fronts", to combat bigger threats.
The soviet union did not shot every single white army officer, and even employed some of them into their military ranks, but they never managed to get in high positions of power at the time. It was a necessity, and sometimes politics makes you have stranger bedfellows.

Also, other point i would like to make, after the russian revolution, the popularity of "communism" in other countries increased substantially, undermine older socialist organizations, making them in direct conflict with other "socialists", like syndicalists, anarchists, social democrats, etc. Communists made actions to subvert those movements, and they also tried to subvert those communists. Divisions between socialists to the control of power is a tale as old as the labor movement was born.
One argument that communists use to despise "anarchists" is the example of what happened in Cuba. Initially, the anarchists joined the M-26 in the fight against the dictator Batista, but after many expulsions of syndicalists from power by orders of Fidel, and the exile of said anarchist, many of them were accused of being "anti-communists", pawns of the CIA to destroy the Cuban revolution.

>While Cubans exiled in the U.S. were trying to raise money to support anarchists imprisoned in Cuba, the MLCE was being denounced by anarchists in the U.S. and other countries as puppets of the CIA, and "mere anti-communists". The anarcho-pacifist periodical Liberation printed pro-Castro articles, leading to a protest at their offices by the MLCE and Libertarian League. But in 1965, the MLCE sent Iglesias to Italy to present the case against Castro to the Federazione Anarchica Italiana (FAIT). The FAIT was convinced, and published condemnations in Italian anarchist periodicals such as Umanità Nova, and collected signatures to the condemnation from the Federación Libertaria Argentina, the Federación Libertaria Mexicana, the Anarchist Federation of London, the Sveriges Arbetares Central-Organisation, the French Anarchist Federation, and the Movimiento Libertario Español.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism_in_Cuba

While it is easy to judge those MFs for not supporting Fidel, or maybe blame Fidel for being a ""tyrant"" for disbanding those organizations, no one could actually blame them for being realist and objective. Politics is a constant fight for power and control, that need to do what they can to survive and gain power. If you "betray the revolution", you might fuck around, but someday you might find out. That is just how the game goes.

Radical transparency by way of 1984-tier panopticon surveillance of bureaucrats so their actions serving the people can be evaluated on a continuous basis. Regardless of the reasons (although they should still be diagnosed) they shouldn't be doing things that aren't in the interests of the workers.

>>1837454
sounds great, but whose doing the monitoring and who is the monitoring made available to? if its a dedicated professional group thats just creating and empowering another bureaucracy, if its viewable by everyone theres some genuine risks of sabotage

>>1837475
Literally the "who watches the watchmen" question.

>>1837476
NTA, but there is a whole school of thought that holds that bureaucracy tends to expand according to a kind of perverse but inescapable inner logic. The argument runs as follows: if you create a bureaucratic structure to deal with some problem, that structure will invariably end up creating other problems that seem as if they, too, can only be solved by bureaucratic means. In universities, this is sometimes informally referred to as the “creating committees to deal with the problem of too many committees” problem.
A slightly different version of the argument—this is really the core of Max Weber’s reflections on the subject—is that a bureaucracy, once created, will immediately move to make itself indispensable to anyone trying to wield power, no matter what they wish to do with it. The chief way to do this is always by attempting to monopolize access to certain key types of information. Weber is worth quoting at length on this subject:

Every bureaucracy seeks to increase the superiority of the professionally informed by keeping their knowledge and intentions secret. Bureaucratic administration always tends to be an administration of “secret sessions”: in so far as it can, it hides its knowledge and action from criticism … The concept of the “official secret” is the specific invention of bureaucracy, and nothing is so fanatically defended by the bureaucracy as this attitude, which cannot be substantially justified beyond these specifically qualified areas. In facing a parliament, the bureaucracy, out of a sure power instinct, fights every attempt of the parliament to gain knowledge by means of its own experts or from interest groups … The absolute monarch is powerless opposite the superior knowledge of the bureaucratic expert—in a certain sense more powerless than any other political head. All the scornful decrees of Frederick the Great concerning the “abolition of serfdom” were derailed, as it were, in the course of their realization because the official mechanism simply ignored them as the occasional ideas of a dilettante.
When a constitutional king agrees with a socially important part of the governed, he very frequently exerts a greater influence upon the course of administration than does the “absolute monarch.” The constitutional king can control these experts—better because of what is, at least relatively, the public character of criticism, whereas the absolute monarch is dependent for information solely upon the bureaucracy. The Russian czar of the old regime was seldom able to accomplish permanently anything that displeased his bureaucracy and hurt the power interests of the bureaucrats

as long as capitalism exists, liberal reformists and capitalist shills will continue to appear in leftism. there's no magical solution to get rid of them.

Didn't stalin answer this question 90 years ago? You just kill a bunch of lax party members and they won't even think of turning to capitalism if you keep purging. Purge!!!!

>>1837490
purges are still necessary in any party

I'd gather as much kompromat on them as possible. Then if they if get any funny ideas I just leak their browser history.

>>1837491
all of those are fair except lasalle he deserved the slander and the fact that it aged badly only makes it more funny

>>1837476
im not familiar with that

We just need to make purging a constant non ending thing.
Just look at china as an example

>>1837410
Non-stop classicide.

>>1837491
>file name
> i don't understand this meme or the people represented in it .jpg

in the first panel, a young Engels asks marx to fight in the 1848 German revolution (Engels actually picked up a gun and fought in the streets under August Willich). Marx responds that he is busy writing, which is indeed what Marx said at the time.

In the 2nd panel Marx tells August Willich that he sucks. August Willich challenges Marx to a duel. Marx says no. August Willich says "K gonna go free slaves." In real life August Willich really did challenge Marx to a duel, and Marx turned him down. In Marx's place, another person substituted. Willich shot the young man in the head, but he survived. August Willich then left Germany and moved to the United States, where he fought in the civil war as an old man, on the side of the Union.

In the third panel Marx calls Ferdinand Lassalle a Jewish nigger, which Marx really did in an 1860s letter to Engels, after Lassalle spent a week staying in Marx's house and annoying him.

>>1837585
>>1837541
Didn't stop revisionism right after Stalin death

>>1837585
Based explanation thanks

>>1837677
>Two fucking hour youtube video
ENOUGH WITH THE TALKING HEADS
KILL ALL SOCIAL MEDIA TALKING HEADS
WRITE ESSAYS TO EXPLAIN YOUR POSITION OR FUCKING DIE FOR WASTING EVERYONE'S TIME WITH YOUR RASPY FUCKING VOICE AND TWO HOURS OF UNNECESSARY ADDED IMAGERY OR SHITTY ART.

>>1837715
>Stand for Socialism against Modern Revisionism was published in 1992. It is a major document of the Second Rectification Movement and a counter to all the attacks on the socialist cause churned out by the imperialists and the petty bourgeois anti-communists in the aftermath of the rapid full restoration of capitalism in the revisionist-ruled countries.
It's called an audiobook

>>1837715
Here's a pdf of the book. Read it.
https://foreignlanguages.press/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/S07-Stand-for-Socialism-6th-Printing.pdf