/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>2608165
>Can somebody please explain this to me?
no, but good post

t. dangerous moderniser, augmenter, enricher, improver of the invariant dharma of the ICP

>>2608318
I'm glad you provided a picture of yourself to show how badass and correct you are. I wouldn't have known without it.

The Demsocs weren't wrong because they applied critical thought to Marxism, they were wrong because they were wrong. Mao made "revisions" all over the place, and he laid the groudwork for the most successful form of Marxism in existence.

>>2608361
>social democrat was successful at applying social democracy
see >>2608318

Ok name 1 non marxist success the proletariat has won in modernity

>>2608361
Alright we'll adopt the leftcom praxis of calling them deniers, falsifiers and modernizers instead. Happy?

>>2608361
Are you a leftcom who recognises Mao Zedong Thought as Marxist? Am I hallucinating?

>>2608743
Didn't read the post he's replying to award

>>2608771
I respect the contributions of Mao and friends greatly, mostly because they actually exist. China serves as a fantastic example of socialism as an economic system actually working. With that said, I'm generally opposed to centralized political power, and China is very much a nation that is very much centralized.

This opposition is driven partially by ideology, in the sense that I would personally prefer to live under a form of socialism that uses direct democracy and a people's militia comprised of ordinary citizens to minimize if not outright eliminate the governing "class" as a distinct group.

But it is also, and at this point actually moreso, driven by historical evidence. The death of the Soviet Union was pretty much entirely the result of centralized politics. The fact that a small handful of assholes were able to torpedo a successful nation more-or-less overnight tells you everything you need to know about the failings of centralization.

>me me me me
>I I I I I
>me me me me
no one cares, loser, get meaningfully organized

>>2608165
because people don't want scientific analysis of real-world material conditions, they want religious dogma. religion isn't dead, it's just transformed into pseudo-politics and fandom.

people are ultimately little monkeys chasing social status. "i know more marx than you" is an optimal strategy to seeking social status while playing the communist game, even if it's useless for building communism. "i have a novel analysis" should put you further ahead, but it's easily undermined by accusing you of revisionism, etc. since it's easier to memorize or google marx quotes to support your argument than it is to conduct real analysis, most of the players of the game are encouraged to keep it as a game of orthodoxy rather than orthopraxy.

this is, incidentally, also why nearly all non-governing communist parties are completely and utterly worthless LARPs.

>>2608165
>as if there's a set of ideas that must be absolutely accepted if one is to be a proper communist
yeah sure that can happen but most of the time its not an appeal to authority but just shorthand for "this makes sense, and also marx said it, so you should consider it seriously". people tend not to effort post when the inquirer is just nitpicking and trying to debunk so if you want the details you have to put in the effort yourself or at least ask nicely instead of being hostile