Fine. I'll address it. What can we do to stop the incessant infighting between MLs and Ultras?
There is ultimately a middle ground to be found between their positions.
And it is at least in my opinion, it's the positions between both groups that makes the most sense and most closely resemble the intent behind Marx's original aims.
I am a bit of a theorylet so maybe I am missing some crucial ideological perspective that already achieved this, but if not I suppose I am in a sense proposing that stance here.
What do I even mean? Take for example;
Ultras:
>We must abolish the commodity form and money on day 1 of the revolution or you're a state capitalist moderniser falsifier and a betrayer of the revolution
MLs:
>It's fine to have 100 years of market economy, stock exchanges, billionaires etc whilst only making vague promises of transitioning from production for exchange value to production for use value in some distant ever further away future
Ultras:
>You must never ever support national liberation even when the movement is clearly progressive and socialist in character and it's successes will weaken imperialism and capitalism
MLs:
>You must uncritically support almost every single group that opposes the first world and call it AES no matter how anti-communist and nationalistic it is because muh multipolarity
All of the above positions are of course a little exaggerated but typify the types of arguement put forth by both sides.
Instead why can't we use the DIALECTICAL METHOD, end the Marxist infighting, and synthesise a new theory that will allow both sides to work together?
Why not develop a framework where we all agree there will be a steady but brief economic transition period lasting a few years, a decade at most, between production for exchange value Vs use value?
Why not agree to support national liberation struggles as originally explained by Engels himself - when they are progressive, socialist, weaken empire and capitalism while also rejecting support for bourgeois, liberal national, reactionary movements?
Is that not clearly what Marx and Engels both recommended, which was later revised one way or another by later thinkers?
Call me a clown but I really think if people stop caring about their attaching their ego to certain brands of ideological thought we could work together and create the ideological and theoretical breeding ground for a third way.
Both of these groups are just unserious larpers who jerk off to relitigating the same debates for a century plus. Neither of them should be considered worthy of the labels they claim. I'm sick of arguing with strawman parodies of other types of communists.
just rangeban MLoids, they are literally pro-capitalism
>>2659118>There is ultimately a middle ground to be found between their positions.thats not how critique or even reality works lol
>>2659127I'm not going to relitigate every debate had on the internet between both groups in recent times in excruciating detail, the OP post was long enough.
I'm sure both groups will attest to the fact that their ideological rivals make those very arguments in similar enough terms, just as much as they claim the - admittedly exaggerated - representation of their position they cling to so fiercely is a "strawman", in order to protect themselves from contemplating any form of synthesis towards a united Marxism.
>>2659118>>We must abolish the commodity form and money on day 1 of the revolution or you're a state capitalist moderniser falsifier and a betrayer of the revolution this is an anarchist position not leftcom
>>It's fine to have 100 years of market economy, stock exchanges, billionaires etc whilst only making vague promises of transitioning from production for exchange value to production for use value in some distant ever further away future MLs dont say this
>>You must uncritically support almost every single group that opposes the first world and call it AES no matter how anti-communist and nationalistic it is because muh multipolarityMLs dont say this either
>>Why not develop a framework where we all agree there will be a steady but brief economic transition period lasting a few years, a decade at most, between production for exchange value Vs use value? The length of the period of development depends on the level of development before the revolution, the size of the population, international relations etc that is on the material conditions not on a subjective choice of what would be nice
read chapter 5 of state and revolution its all about this
>Instead why can't we use the DIALECTICAL METHODpicking a halfway point between something correct and something incorrect is not dialectics.
material conditions, material conditions, material conditions, material conditions,
>Why not agree to support national liberation struggles as originally explained by Engels himself - when they are progressive, socialist, weaken empire and capitalism while also rejecting support for bourgeois, liberal national, reactionary movements? reasonable people already do this(critically) and only present uncritically in the face of pro-imperialist shills. ruthless criticism is for behind closed doors in a party meeting among like-minded comrades and public messaging should be decided by democratic centralism and all disciplined comrades adhere to it never exposing flaws of international movements and give free ammo to the forces of reaction
>What can we do to stop the incessant infighting between MLs and Ultras?
Cut Ultraoids CIA funding.
>>2659118>what can we do?Voluntarism
>utilitarianism
Ah oh someone haven't read Marx and using liberal buzzwords he critiqued…
Anyway 8 Billion Yen to Israel
>>2659127>parodies of other types of communistsMLs are not communists
Until ultras and their various cults commit mass suicide, we won't see an end to this
Who will purge to other first after the revolution happens
>>2659336Glad Chinese capitalists made bank from the steel used to crush the bones of Palestinian babies
>>2659337It's called economic leverage and undermining domestic manufacturing in Israel and the collective West
I appreciate when dengists are open about their zionism and genocide
<After the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections, the PRC referred to Hamas as the democratically elected representatives of the Palestinian people.[4]: 130 The PRC invited the Hamas Foreign Minister Mahmoud al-Zahar to attend the China-Arab Cooperation Forum in June 2006 ignoring protests by both the United States and Israel but received praise from Mahmoud Abbas.[10] The PRC continued to focus its Palestinian diplomacy with the PLO, however.[4]: 130 Chinese contacts with Hamas decreased following Hamas' defeat of Fatah in the 2007 Battle of Gaza.[4]: 130 As part of its view of maintaining a balanced posture and avoiding alienating Hamas, the PRC's policy is to never label Hamas as a terrorist organization
If your government proscribes Hamas as a terrorist org, you personally are more responsible for the genocide of Palestinians than China is
>>2659368they don't support genocide as much as they turn a blind eye to it. The sad reality is, for a developing country allying with Israel is infinitely useful since the Israelis are selling the high tech given to them by the Americans. What can Palestinians give in return of saving them?
This is why no one, not even Muslim countries or enemies of America, do any actual concrete shit against Israel, unless they are forced to do so (like with Iran). It is cruel but it is how this chud ass world works. Individual self preservation usually triumphs over individual morality 9/10 times
>>2659376> for a developing country allying with Israel is infinitely useful since the Israelis are selling the high tech given to them by the Americans. What can Palestinians give in return of saving them? This tech all has backdoors and killswitches in it which can then be used for spying, leverage, and building dependency. But I think they fully well know this as part of their calculations. It's just getting something from the mafia don and being stabbed in the back later down the line is better than getting nothing and stabbed and beaten by the dons thugs anyway.
>>2659374My country doesn't even recognize Israel, dengtard bitch.
Even an Amerilard in some basement is less responsible for genocide than your zionist shithole
>>2659172But how will I maintain being a neet in my armchair?
>>2659382Then you're in the clear anon, my post was only addressing anons who's countries do proscribe hamas <3
>Even an Amerilard in some basement is less responsible for genocide than your zionist shitholeLmao alright friend, good trolling
>>2659385You think I hold Chinese workers responsible for China's Zionism?
I just want Xi's and the CCP hanged from their balls (if any), preferably by Chinese workers.
>>2659387>You think I hold Chinese workers responsible for China's Zionism?No because China's "Zionism" is marginal or irrelevant at best, unlike the west. So there is little to hold responsibility for
>I just want Xi's and the CCP hanged from their balls (if any), preferably by Chinese workers.And I want my dick and balls in your mom's pussy. But only one of us is gonna get what they want anon, sorry
>>2659390>only one of us is gonna get what they want anonI suppose I can help mitigate the impossibly of the latter that by plapping your mom on your chest after the Chinese revolution, then your tiny dengist clity might get accidentally wet for once in its life from our generous fluids
>>2659400Anon your barely comprehensible response that you typed out with shaking hands and clenched teeth has been a delight to read, no u 2 u 2 <3
>>2659403>been delight I'm sure your dengist clity shivered at the image of your mom being plowed on your chest by me, after Chinese workers overthrow their neoliberal zionist shithole, but this isn't the place to post your kink sry lil guy :/
>>2659156>this is an anarchist position not leftcomSo leftcoms are ok with commodity autism as a necessary stage of development?
>>2659414Hahah no anon I was talking about how all you were able to muster as a retort was a "no u" and I found that very amusing, easy to misunderstand if you're a little slow
>>2659415Nta, but imo the leftcoms here are basically indistinguishable from anarchists, except that they're more annoying and at least anarchists don't pretend to be communists
>>2659428> at least anarchists don't pretend to be communistsThat where youre wrong.
>>2659426Must've been tough writing this post with one hand
>easy to misunderstand if you're a little slow 🤓 I'll make sure your mom gives you a brother with enough chromosomes to form a retort :>
You're strawmanning ML points in your OP.
The truth is, so-called tankies are actually the closest to communist orthodoxy, a distaste for them on principle or whatever simply shows you don't like really like the idea of fighting for communism - which is fine, communism is kinda dumb anyways and you'll never reap a positive value from any communist struggle in your lifetime.
>>2659435Anon anon anon, more "no u"s aren't gonna make a difference. China will keep being led by Xi and the CPC and I will keep putting my dick and balls in your mom's pussy, as originally stated. Thanks for playing though!
>There is ultimately a middle ground to be found between their positions.
ML is the middle ground, genius. all of the issues you cite are ones that get resolved in historical time, in communism, in the process of wielding and holding on to power. ultras can say the things they do because they have never ever managed to seize power and hold on to it, and they never will, much like anarchists. grabbing power and staying in power is of the utmost importance
>>2659468Are you homosexual out of curiosity?
>>2659472Anon you shouldn't be saying this stuff about your father
>>2659482He specifically wrote a whole pamphlet about how he was not
>>2659482Lenin too was a Dengist with his NEP reforms.
>>2659491the ussr would still be around today if the NEP was as smart and thorough as dengs reforms TBQH
>>2659508Trvke, Kerensky was gonna do this but the adventurist ultra bolsheviks overthrew him and chimped out
>>2659512kerensky was boutta hand over st petersburg to the germans so truly he was the ultimate revolutionary defeatist
>>2659508Completely agree. USSR lacked light consumer industry due to jumping from feudalism to socialism.
>>2659445>Communism will never happen!Reported for posting right-wing propaganda
Leftcoms are no opposed to political parties and strategies, but insist they must be geared towards defense of the new mode of production as opposed to seizure of capitalist political apparatus.
Politics is downstream from economic organization, this is Marxism 101. MLs have it backwards.
>>2659571except ML is not "seizure of capitalist political apparatus" retard, it is its destruction. A ML state is not a "capitalist political apparatus", it is a socialist one
>>2659172As if CPUSA and SWP aren't totally controlled by FBI.
>>2659415>So leftcoms are ok with commodity autism as a necessary stage of development?yeah they just think that the soviets and china were/are developed enough to abolish it already and were choosing not to as some kind of trick to remain bureaucrats over the proles instead out of necessity for survival in the face of imperialist aggression
basically are from advanced countries projecting their own level of development onto others mistaking it for a universal experience. if MY country could press the button tomorrow then YOU must not being doing it for nefarious reasons
>>2659118>MLs: >It's fine to have 100 years of market economy, stock exchanges, billionaires etc whilst only making vague promises of transitioning from production for exchange value to production for use value in some distant ever further away future uh MLs never said that only fucking Dengists
Dengists are retarded because Trump is about to drive Canada and Europe into Chinas arms over this greenland shit in which case China will have the majority of trade on every continent even north america outside the US, and the world still wont be socialist.
>>2659924>Thus, we are now commonly confronted with such contradictory propositions, emanating from the Western left, as: >(1) one nation cannot exploit another; Citation needed
>(2) there is no such thing as monopoly capitalism as the economic basis of imperialism; Citation needed
>(3) imperialist rivalry and exploitation between nations has been displaced by global class struggles within a fully globalized transnational capitalism; Both of those things can be true at the same time
>(4) all great powers today are capitalist nations engaged in interimperialist struggle; This shouldn't be a controversial point, it's literally true, it emerges from the principles of private property and nation-states
>(5) imperialist nations can be judged primarily on a democratic-authoritarian spectrum, so that not all imperialisms are created equal; Source: Bernie Sanders
>(6) imperialism is simply a political policy of aggression of one state against another; Again, what kind of marxist says that
>(7) humanitarian imperialism designed to protect human rights is justified; Source: neoconservatism
>(8) the dominant classes in the Global South are no longer anti-imperialist and are either transnationalist or subimperialist in orientation; Yes, there are no longer any nations which operate outside of the capitalist mode of production. The only places where this is not the case are failed states which are unable to enforce a market.
>(9) the "anti-imperialist left" is "Manichean" in its support of the morally "good" Global South against the morally "bad" Global North;Too broad of a term to make a salient point. Or a sneaky implication that the rest of the "left" does not care about imperialism.
>(10) economic imperialism has now been "reversed" with the Global East/South now exploiting the Global West/North;Who says that
>(11) China and the United States head rival imperialist blocs; and Yes. Though I will say that China is obviously much more responsible and doesn't commit nearly as many crimes upon humanity, their participation in imperialism is negligible. Imperialism emerges out of the capitalist mode of production and whether you like it or not China is a capitalist country at the moment.
>12) Lenin was mainly a theorist of interimperialism, not of the imperialism of center and periphery.He has written on both
Is the rest worth reading?
>>2659118>i'm gonna make up two positions and declare myself as the rational middle ground guyyou're just part of the problem, OP
>>2666860*transitional stage
>>2660037wtf… dengists won….
>>2666860Some people talk about socialism to mean the fully realized mode of production, some people use it to mean a description of the ideology of a country that has undergone social revolution and is now, under a dotp, beginning the process of constructing socialism as a fully developed mode of production. Your confusion stems from not understanding this simple difference. Probably cooked your brain on anti-MLism (anticommunism), it's usually incurable sadly
>>2659172Haven't received my USAID bucks in a year.
>>2667423>>2667425>Dialectics isn't a method of inquiry you bumbling moron, it's literally just a method of presentation***Fuck me.
Anyway what pseuds call "dialectical materialism" (not a thing) is, at its most charitable, literally just science. Although in practice it's pretty much treated like a religion or some magic wand to bullshit your way out of actual analysis.
>>2667428It's simple, it's the exact semantic confusion I was already talking about. Lets read about it from the man himself:
<Can the victory of Socialism in one country be regarded as final if this country is encircled by capitalism, and if it is not fully guaranteed against the danger of intervention and restoration?
<Clearly, it cannot, This is the position in regard to the question of the victory of Socialism in one country.
<It follows that this question contains two different problems :
<1. The problem of the internal relations in our country, i.e., the problem of overcoming our own bourgeoisie and building complete Socialism; and
<2. The problem of the external relations of our country, i.e., the problem of completely ensuring our country against the dangers of military intervention and restoration.
<We have already solved the first problem, for our bourgeoisie has already been liquidated and Socialism has already been built in the main. This is what we call the victory of Socialism, or, to be more exact, the victory of Socialist Construction in one country.
<We could say that this victory is final if our country were situated on an island and if it were not surrounded by numerous capitalist countries.
<But as we are not living on an island but "in a system of States," a considerable number of which are hostile to the land of Socialism and create the danger of intervention and restoration, we say openly and honestly that the victory of Socialism in our country is not yet final.
<[]
<The second problem can be solved only by combining the serious efforts of the international proletariat with the still more serious efforts of the whole of our Soviet people.
<The international proletarian ties between the working class of the U.S.S.R. and the working class in bourgeois countries must be increased and strengthened; the political assistance of the working class in the bourgeois countries for the working class of our country must be organized in the event of a military attack on our country; and also every assistance of the working class of our country for the working class in bourgeois countries must be organized; our Red Army, Red Navy, Red Air Fleet, and the Chemical and Air Defence Society must be increased and strengthened to the utmost. >>2667436>we achieved lower stage socialism but still need 10000 years of commodity production to reach communism Okay? Literally unrelated to how Stalin falsified dotp to make it lower stage
>>2667438>Muh semanticsOk don't listen to me then. Keep being confused
Did 'strengthening proletarian ties' include, forcing united fronts on international parties, allying with nazis, allying with western colonialists, abolishing the Comintern to appease said colonialists, establishing a Jewish state in Palestine, etc?
>>2667440>semantics Nice cope pseudo. If only this distinction wasn't the whole reason Marx broke with the left and the Comintern was later established
>>2667443You asked me a question, I answered it, then you just restate the question differently. The only pseud here is you, Marx didn't break with the left over the distinction between socialism as the mop and socialism as the state ideology of a post revolutionary dotp. He broke with various groups for various different reasons, disagreement over utopianism, reformism, idealism, etc. The comintern was established to further the goals of international revolution and again, break from reformists and their ilk. None of that has anything to do with your confusion regarding mop and post rev dotp both being called "socialism"
Unique IPs: 40