/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Does anyone listen to Mike Duncan's revolutions podcast? His series on the Russian revolution is so fucking tight. Great marxist analysis too

All theoretical anti-treatlerites are practicing treatlerites.

>>2527560
Practice what you preach

>>2527560
Speaking of the religoid thing, you guys really sound like the "read ze bible" folks. You say it like we're talking about an indisputable proven science like thermodynamics or electromagnetism when to any rational person your "theory" is anything but.

It also doesn't help that the people who always spout the meme phrase never actually did any reading. They call you a revisionist, then when you show them Marx says the opposite of them, they call you a dogmatist. Lol.

>>2527560
Lenin wrote these things in exile. They worked outside of the country, and struck only when the state was weak enough (way beyond what it currently is), and they had thoroughly developed enough networks and infrastructure,

>>2527565
Link the free, moron

>>2527565
apparently he started it again and wrote about a fictional martian revolution or something

>>2527573
not if you're rood

>>2527364
Lenin would destroy zohran. Lenin exposed imperialist democrats

>>2527565
Also speaking of the religoid thing, always trying to extrapolate some contrived wisdoms from some parables from some far removed time and place from whence you live.

>Ohhh well when the ancient Israelites Bolsheviks were fighting against the phillistines Whites

What does that shit have to do with anything?

>>2527578
Proven by what? Where is your proof?

>>2527578
2, 2 and 4 are all social concepts that don’t reflect reality

>>2527577
lol id listen to it

>>2527578
States using the Leninist vanguardism model only ever achieved state capitalism at best, not socialism.

>>2527570
And you can talk about the ANC, because that was in a first world settler colonial nation, but other new left groups in the core were abject failures and just ended up killing comrades and innocents. Apartheid South Africa isn't quite an analog because the US does not have an apartheid, quite the opposite. Nonetheless, institutional racism is alive and well. Conditions all in all were vastly different, and necessitated extreme action. Right now we have to be tapped into the general vibe and not be too far ahead or we'll come off like unhinged freaks. That doesn't mean capitulate, but talking about this stuff irl in any great detail is not going to go well, people are going to think you are a fed. I'm not saying I don't want things to accelerate mind you, but the masses don't support us yet, and we are marginal. Legal, above-ground organizing should be used to the fullest extent until it is outright criminalized.

If only we can LARP harder as Stalin and Lenin we can surpass both Stalin and Lenin.

>>2527588
better than achieving literally nothing like the west lol

>>2527549
>Periodic reminder that if you're not mixing legal and illegal tactics you're objectively not a Communist
Good point but incomplete. That's a bare minimum. It takes quite a bit more than just that to be a communist. plenty of reactionaries mix legal and illegal tactics, but it doesn't make them communist.

but anyway "legality" is a weird thing to focus on because all political groups, whether they have power or not, mix legal and illegal tactics in their quest to get power, or keep power. just like they mix ideologically pure tactics with ideological questionable tactics, in order to remain unpredictable.

>>2527578
marxism is timeless but I always thought 'leninism' to mean the justification for why Russia jumping past capitalism and straight to the socialism stage, which was correct to do, but doesn't apply to our modern situation

>>2527582
>referencing successful anti-capitalist struggles from the current era of history is the same as referencing iron age mythology
are you sure?

>>2527582
I feel this way sometimes w/r/t to my org. We have motion, but it's mostly with existing communists in our area of operation, and a lot of the shit is just appealing to them.

>>2527598
you sound like you are projecting. that's cool though

>>2527588
>States using the Leninist vanguardism model only ever achieved state capitalism at best, not socialism.

<Between capitalist and communist society there lies the period of the revolutionary transformation of the one into the other. Corresponding to this is also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat.
Karl Marx, Critique of the Gotha Programme, 1875

<Will it be possible for private property to be abolished at one stroke? No, no more than existing forces of production can at one stroke be multiplied to the extent necessary for the creation of a communal society. In all probability, the proletarian revolution will transform existing society gradually and will be able to abolish private property only when the means of production are available in sufficient quantity.
Friedrich Engels, Principles of Communism, 1847

< The capitalism that we have permitted is essential. If it is ugly and bad, we shall be able to rectify it, because power is in our hands and we have nothing to fear. The controversies over state capitalism that have been raging in our literature up to now could at best be included in textbooks on history. As regards state capitalism, we ought to know what should be the slogan for agitation and propaganda, what must be explained, what we must get everyone to understand practically. And that is that the state capitalism that we have now is not the state capitalism that the Germans wrote about. It is capitalism that we ourselves have permitted. Is that true or not? Everybody knows that it is true!At a congress of Communists we passed a decision that state capitalism would be permitted by the proletarian state, and we are the state. If we did wrong we are to blame and it is no use shifting the blame to somebody else! We must learn, we must see to it that in a proletarian country state capitalism cannot and does not go beyond the framework and conditions delineated for it by the proletariat, beyond conditions that benefit the proletariat.
Lenin, Eleventh Congress Of The R.C.P.(B.), March 1922

Communists after seizing power don't change everything overnight. The whole reason for having a revolution is to then change society in a way that won't get cockblocked by a bourgeois dictatorship. It's not "revolution vs. reform" it's "revolution followed by communist-driven reform" vs. "liberal-driven reform without communist revolution."

>>2527598
you should chill, I am not disagreeing with you but you are just really zealous about it and it's turning me off and I've been a communist my whole life. you sound like you recently converted, which is good

>>2527595
>are you sure?
1917 is closer to 1850 than 2025 not to mention the exponential nature of historical, technological, and all other forms of development. Yeah I'm sure. Not to mention that China and Russia were backwards feudal societies FOR THEIR TIME and that no such revolutions ever succeeded in the developed nations of that time. It's just absurd on so many reasons on the face of it. If 1917 Russia can work in 2025 America, why couldn't it work in 1910s-20s America or any developed country in Europe?

>>2527609
Except they didn't achieve DoTP, just a dictatorship of the bureaucracy, because their proletariat had/have little real power just like under any other capitalist state. Asking a vanguardist state using an authoritarian model to willingly wither itself away is the problem, because why would anyone willingly give up power without a clear incentive?

>>2527461
I wonder what the “mom and pop” landlords would do if they could break up the big corpo landowners

leftism in first world countries failed because their proletariats were bought off with social democracy. therefore leftism can succeed GIVEN that the bourgeoisie refuses to compromise again with social democracy

>>2527620
it was a dotp because the red army was loyal to the party, not the state, just like the PRC today

>>2527620
>bureaucracy
not a class, try again

>>2527623
that just means the party was the state

>>2527622
>leftism in first world countries failed because their proletariats were bought off with social democracy. therefore leftism can succeed GIVEN that the bourgeoisie refuses to compromise again with social democracy
Socialist revolutions have only ever succeeded in failed states(and then they very often don't even succeed in failed states, why aren't the PFLP leading Palestine?) You guys take a fluke of history that has proven to be unrepeatable and less and less likely as a model to follow. That's your problem.

>>2527625
For all intents and purposes the party was the state, but there were still non-party elements of the state that existed and didn't command loyalty from the red army

>>2527588
>muh state capitalism
no, try again

>>2527620
your critique might have an element of truth to it but it ignores the conditions under which the USSR was born, lived, died, and what they were dealing with:

1. they were born in massive poverty from the corpse of a semi-feudal tsarist theocracy

2. they were born into a world war

3. they immediately set to work ending that war on unfavorable terms

4. they were immediately plunged into a civil war

5. this civil war saw them invaded by 14 capitalist countries who sought to kill socialism in the cradle

6. they had to spend the entire interwar period rapidly industrializing

7. they had to deal with a literal attempted genocide against their people commited by the nazis

8. after sacrificing more lives to defeat fascism than any other country they had to reject the marshall plan to retain economic sovereignty and avoid getting economically couped through structural adjustment programs

9. while they tried to heal from WW2 without economic assistance, the USA built up an iron curtain through NATO and then blamed them for said iron curtain.

10. by the time they got a warsaw pact together in 1955 the USA was already doing CIA coups not just against communists and socialists, but even against 3rd world nationalists who just wanted economic sovereignty

11. The USSR spent its remaining history investing way too much of its GDP in self defense due to the cold war and the arms race. they were way behind the USA who had not only a developmental head start, but also fared better in WW1 and WW2

12. the sino soviet split, followed by operation cyclone which baited them into afghanistan, was the death knell for their economic sovereignty.

13. even after the USSR collapsed the USA drove more nails into the coffin by funding yeltsin's presidential campaign, and materially supporting him as he shelled parliament to crush soviet holdouts

so when you look at the entire life of the USSR, it's remarkable that they did as well as they did, and the criticism of them being too bureaucratic and authoritarian rings hollow. All revolutionary governments are obliged upon taking power to defend the power they took from the old regime, and all revolutionary governments upon taking power are attacked from the outside by allies of the old regime. It is only natural that revolutionary governments appear authoritarian and bureaucratic upon taking power. Did not George Washington crush Shay's Rebellion? Did not Robespierre use the committee for public safety to decapitate 10,000? Liberal revolutions themselves were bureaucratic and authoritarian upon seizing power and needed to be to maintain their growth against feudal counter-revolution. The same appears to be the case for socialism in its cradle. Jefferson said the tree of liberty needs to be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants, yet quivered in fear at the Haitians living up to that quote who hung their French slave masters. It would seem we have a double standard that Socialist and anti-imperialist regimes are held to which liberal bourgeois regimes are not held to.

>>2527462
>>2527483
oh i have no idea. i have never watched hasan and am only aware of him bc people post about him here + general seething on the internet about his antizionism. if its a zio smear campaign i dont want to proliferate it i just saw a lot of leftypolers talking about it as if it was established fact and i strongly dislike e-celebs so guess i was biased to believe it.

>>2527632
you quote nothing and treat history as a decontextualized soup of events that support your narrative, but the moment another anon quotes something you screech that it is out of context and refuse to elaborate.

new thread btw >>2527642

>>2527634
>they failed
<no they were set up to fail
ok sounds like agreement

>>2527644
you are oversimplifying not only my post, but the post i am responding to. you just seem like an annoying gremlin.

>>2527640
1. different person
2. quoting some shit without a source is worse than just stating it because a person saying something can be interrogated for what he means but you cannot do that with a quote

>>2527628
why? china's doing it

>>2527650
idk what you guys are talking about but i strongly agree. without more context quotes are like graphs or statistics, theyre very helpful as easy shorthand and references, but also very easy to use to invoke authority and try to intimidate someone out of a discussion. either establish your specific position and that youre looking for particular kinds of evidence, or accept that youre having a discussion based on reasoning without the need for specific sources or evidence. both are perfectly good and helpful ways to talk about things with different uses, but when you try to force the latter into becoming the former only when its convenient its a rhetorical trick whether you mean it that way or not

>>2527452
would had been funny without the KANGZ racial epithet

>>2527553
no, they have lower rates because they're in less developed societies

>>2527598
by your own logic you're wrong, you've only done the "legal" stuff, and you've yet to do the "illegal" stuff, you're a poser who just wants to feel good while you jerk off to the idea of your imagined enemies being killed while doing nothing than imagining yourself as the next lenin, get in line pal, you're nothing special

>>2527634
I’m a USSR defender but they failed, they couldn’t over come U.S. hegemony. You can cry unfair all you want but nobody said the bourgeoisie would play fair. So the only conclusion is that either Marxism-Leninisim is a dead end that can only achieve rapid industrialization and national liberation (Worthwhile goals and extremely impressive results imo) acting as a shortcut for semi-feudal societies to leap frog and create the conditions for a bourgeois class to emerge. Or the U.S just makes communism impossible so only revolution here will achieve communism, and any attempts by the periphery are pointless.

>>2527651
yeah you're right, China's doing it, but its just the nature of the state to never be fully be 100% ideologically captured by a political party at any one time, even a one party state

>>2527624
it was still quite enough a difference to matter though.