Purity Politics is the mentality that so many leftists have where they choose their ideology and refuse to work or organize with anyone outside of that ideology, for example a leftist could go on some liberals podcast and then the leftists that do purity politics will say "hOw dArE yOu gO oN tHiS lIbErAlS pOdCaSt yOu SoCiAl-fAsCiSt!!!" So then less leftists will go on that podcast out of fear that they will be called a class-traitor or whatever, but when all of these divided sects of leftists are isolated in their ivory towers meanwhile a Fascist goes on that liberal podcasts and spreads his world view to so many lumpens and then we go "hOw iS tHe rIgHt sO oRgAnIzEd?!?!?!" We have to drop this mentality of refusing to work with anyone who is a slightly different leftist because this is why we have no motion.
Lenin was the king of purity politics and he won:
>“We are marching in a compact group along a precipitous and difficult path, firmly holding each other by the hand. We are surrounded on all sides by enemies, and we have to advance almost constantly under their fire. We have combined, by a freely adopted decision, for the purpose of fighting the enemy, and not of retreating into the neighbouring marsh, the inhabitants of which, from the very outset, have reproached us with having separated ourselves into an exclusive group and with having chosen the path of struggle instead of the path of conciliation. And now some among us begin to cry out: Let us go into the marsh! And when we begin to shame them, they retort: What backward people you are! Are you not ashamed to deny us the liberty to invite you to take a better road! Oh, yes, gentlemen! You are free not only to invite us, but to go yourselves wherever you will, even into the marsh. In fact, we think that the marsh is your proper place, and we are prepared to render you every assistance to get there. Only let go of our hands, don't clutch at us and don't besmirch the grand word freedom, for we too are "free" to go where we please, free to fight not only against the marsh, but also against those who are turning towards the marsh!”
Lenin was right-wing. He just swapped the ruling class for another
Communists are not part of the left (of capital) and Marx came to prominence by shitting on you so i don't see how that's my problem
>>2684747Hello Mr. Chomsky. Back from Epstein island?
>>2684771>guy on the *left*: class conscious revolutionary ah, so the left is revolutionary, after all
>>2684707Tom why do you repost Hasanabi talking points from his stream on here?
What "leftist" is being called a social fascist for being on a liberal podcast? What are you talking about?
>Fascist rightoids don't care Yeah they don't need to care about consistency or logic or anything but their feelz because they are reactionaries
It's just that Western Liberals are massive snitchy moral faggots who basically view Communism as secular Christianity.
I have friends who are literal fascists, I have friends who are libertarians etc, pretty much everyone I work with is a Neolib, to the average westard leftist, I should disown all these people but I won't because I'm not a moralfag in a religious cult.
Incorrect.
Lenin denounced every tendency of his time, and said doing so was top priority.
Revolution is not a zerg rush where you get into a big ball and run towards the enemy. It's a science, therefore correctness ("purity") is paramount.
And even then he was talking about opportunist marxists, let alone anarkoids, reformist libs and narodniks
>>2684811they're winning though
do you think calling hasan a democrat shill is purity politics?
>>2684842You would love chomsky since he was best friends with a guy who was all of the above and who also was a pedo.
>>2684842I also remember you crying about Venezuela not being real socialism just like your soulmate Chomsky did with his right wing friends
Both you and him are perfect examples of why "purity testing" is necessary
>>2684715Lenin didn't pull punches when criticizing and working against people he disagreed with, but the difference was that he only did this when the disagreements were substantive. Real differences over real issues. He didn't send the Cheka after people because of disagreements about random historical events or niche social issues. People didn't want to establish Soviet power, people who didn't want to end the war, etc. He never arrested anybody because they had different views on the Decemberist revolt or whatever, which is the kind of nonsense you see people on the left eating each other over today.
>>2684992People who supported the Tsar against foreign imperialism
People who supported social democracy
People who supported capitalism but red
People who supported imperialism (capital export)
People who supported adventurism and populism
People who supported small business
People who supported mullahs and clergy
All the tenants of contemporary leftism
>>2685031Leaving aside the fact that "contemporary leftism" is just a loose connection of unorganized people (and thus can't have "tenets"), some of the shit you mentioned is exactly the kind of irrelevant nonsense I'm talking about. For example,
>People who supported mullahs and clergy Unless you actually live in Iran this question is completely irrelevant. Your "support" or "opposition" for the Iranian government adds up to exactly nothing. If you live in a Western country then the only question that matters on Iran is whether you are for or against intervention, and communists should of course be against it. If somebody is willing to actively oppose Western aggression against Iran then I don't much care about their opinion on the Iranian government. This is what I'm talking about, we need to actually be able to distinguish between shit that matters and shit that doesn't.
>>2684715So: "I can guarantee you the freedom to choose to go towards the marsh, but I cannot guarantee you the freedom after you choose to go toward the marsh"
>>2684715#1 That is not entirely true because he collaborated with Trotsky who hired tsarist generals during the war but I will admit that other than that he did do purity politics which brings me to
#2
The material conditions in America and most other countries are nothing like the Russian Empire. In America for example there are Treatlerites and stuff and we have elections even if they are rigged.
I love Lenin, he was a great guy but his methods have not worked in the modern day.
>>2684764The brainchair wojak saying left is the left wing of capital IS the party line and therefore class consciousness manifested, he is the ICP, those are his minions outside.
>>2684707>trying to pass off class collaboration as "le leftoid unity"lol langley working overtime. communism isnt an ideology
>>2684715Didn’t Lenin defend both an actual Cheka informant and a guy that bullied a woman to suicide?
>>2684707Marx and Engels cooked your ass centuries ago.
It's always these outside class elements who cry about sectarianism just because their petite-bourgeois bullshit gets laughed at. They make it very clear that these faux socialists should be challenged and expelled, for the preservation of unity of the proletariat.
OP is right, how many Ls do you have to stack up before you realise your strategy is flawed?
>>2685061then your perception of reality is simply distorted
>>2685116>how many Ls do you have to stack up before you realise your strategy is flawed?How many times does Trump have to get re-elected until people apply this to taling democrats and entryism?
>>2685108Except there isn't really much progress made on the "unity of the proletariat" stuff. Socialism today is more like a car spinning its wheels in the mud, you're not talking about an actual material unity of the proletariat around a set of existing demands, but an idealized proletariat that doesn't presently exist.
The phrase “left unity” should be met with an immediate and unappealable four week ban
>>2684715>and he won:His political experiment collapsed.
>>2685130Because of leftist infiltration and revisionism
>>2685133On the part of Mao Zedong
>>2685120>until people apply this to taling democrats and entryism?Where did anybody advocate for either of those things?
>>2685084Dumbest banner yet. Outdated 2013 humor not even cropped properly as you can see in in the bottom.
>>2685121>Except there isn't really much progress made on the "unity of the proletariat" stuff.Hmmm. Perhaps the majority of groups or parties claiming to be Marxist or Communist actually doing everything in their power to sabotage international class unity in favor of vulgar left nationalism and populism for the sake of short term gains in sympathy from liberals might have something to do with this predicament?
>>2685199>Hmmm. Perhaps the majority of groups or parties claiming to be Marxist or Communist actually doing everything in their power to sabotage international class unity in favor of vulgar left nationalism and populism for the sake of short term gains in sympathy from liberals might have something to do with this predicament?I think this is maybe one of the most absurd myths that gets repeated on the left again and again. "Internationalism" has been defined as this abstract, completely unassailable thing. The "internationalism" proposed by online Marxists isn't actually the result of coordinating with other international communist parties but simply aspiring to some individual ideal of what they
think internationalism looks like.
As far as "left nationalism" in western countries at least, I imagine the closest is the ACP, and it's pretty clear their position is a minority opinion within the wider Left as a whole.
It's not that they "failed to be sufficiently internationalist", it's that internationalism has so far failed to prove any superiority to nationalism in the material realm.
>>2685206>The "internationalism" proposed by online Marxists isn't actually the result of coordinating with other international communist partiesInternational coordination among communists is real and it happens outside of party structures because there is no existing so called communist party which really exists as an embodiment of the contemporary movement of proletarians in struggle. Rather class conscious proles worldwide organize outside of and against ossified party structures.
>it's that internationalism has so far failed to prove any superiority to nationalism in the material realm.Bourgeois internationalism is nothing less than essential for the bourgeoisie. Therefore Proletarian Internationalism is nothing less than essential for the proletariat. Nuff' said.
>>2685234Distilled to its essence, this argument is basically you deny that any existing party is representative of the “real” communist movement and that “class conscious proles” (implying that those communists actually part of parties are not class conscious or proletarian) organize against it—but you’re again not referring to real and meaningful material things: you’re alluding to an imaginary, idealized proletariat that’s breaking with the parties of yesteryear when there’s no evidence to support that.
>>2685342No, what I'm saying is the proles who are actually doing the practice of pushing mass movements into a communist direction increasingly reject party structures because those structures are entrenched in opportunism and their organizational dynamics themselves are outdated and insufficient to the tasks at hand. An authentic Communist Party can only arise from the heterogeneous movements in opposition to the social contractions of capital as the most conscious and radical element in those movements which fights for insurrectionary extension and against opportunist, reformist and extinguishing elements.
>>2685234>International coordination among communists is real In your discord server?
>>2684842>I have friends who are literal fascistsInside the Communist Party of China?
>>2685487>In your discord server?Real comrades don't use spyware
Unique IPs: 37