/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>2841442
>nobody did this except lenin
serbian social-democrats also voted against war bonds even though (objectively) they would've been justified being their country was target of imperialist aggression (lenin speaks of this)

>>2841442
yes, and also everyone who finds this confusing is reactionary

>>2841442
uyghurs are not allowed on this board, get out

>>2841457
lol

>>2841452
>the practical application of christianity
so instead of believing a carpenter will save me, i become a carpenter and save myself?

>>2841473
>so instead of believing a carpenter will save me, i become a carpenter and save myself?
Yes. And instead of letting the Romans nail you to a cross, you nail yourself to the cross. All four limbs. Start with your feet, then let one hand nail the other hand. Don't ask me how you get the last hand. It's kinda like Baron Munchausen lifting himself out of the swamp.

>>2841442
Kinda. Yeah. Political movements have spent 150 years arguing over the meanings of words like Marxism, socialism, communism, social democracy, and left wing, so if you combine each faction's self-description you end up with apparent contradictions such as Marx criticizing "Marxists," early Marxists calling themselves social democrats, communists splitting from social democrats over World War I, Lenin claiming to preserve Marxism while others said he distorted it, some communists rejecting the left-right spectrum entirely, and most of the world still describing communism as far left, leaving the impression that everyone is using the same vocabulary to talk about completely different things.

>>2841478
Wittgenstein tried to warn us

>>2841460
I look like that and say that, how could you tell?

>>2841442
If you wanted to make this even more confusing, you should have added the part where social democracy was called the "moderate wing of fascism" in the 1920s by the Comintern who were understandably still thinking about the split in the 2nd international, only for Fascism to begin repressing liberals an Social Democrats, which led Stalin to seek out a United Front against Fascism with the liberal bourgeois countries, only for them to repudiate him and sign non aggression pacts with Hitler, which led Stalin to also sign one in 1939 so he could buy time by invading East Poland and move factories east out of the range of the Luftwaffe, but this didn't work because Hitler betrayed the non aggression pact and invaded the USSR anyway, which led Stalin to again seek out an alliance with liberals against fascism despite calling social democrats the moderate wing of fascism. But then after the war was over Communists and liberals became hostile again in the cold war, and after the cold war was over the 1920s comintern line of social democracy being the moderate wing of fascism got resurrected in ML parties.

>>2841489
What normies hear when you explain Communism lore to them:

>>2841442
>marx said "i am not a marxist"
Bonus fun: He said this in response to hardliner Marxists who said reformist struggles were an illusion, a way of diverting the revolutionary demands. Marx called this "revolutionary phrase-mongering." Don't tell the posters on this board, though.

>>2841442
>and communism came from marx
Completely wrong.

>>2841449
>they would've been justified being their country was target of imperialist aggression (lenin speaks of this)
Like Ukraine?

>>2842719
Ukraine is target of Russian nationalist irredentism, not imperialism.

>>2842736
>Ukraine is target of Russian nationalist irredentism, not imperialism.

Incorrect. Ukraine and Russia are ex-soviet nations, both are targets of NATO imperialism, and both have been made to fight each other for the benefit of NATO.

NATO killed ukraine peace deal with Russia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkpKx6oMN0s

Trump exploits Ukraine as a colony
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zxxv2IEfU_c

Zelensky thanks US corporations for buying up Ukraine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYkQO5fOXH8

Ukraine sits on trillions worth of minerals. US politicians want them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XuJLV2kfcc

The war was avoidable, and basically instigated by NATO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LL4eNy4FCs8


2014: Yanukovych in f Ukraine is elected. He needs a foreign loan. He is given two deals: An EU deal that is high interest rate, and a Russian deal that is lower interest, and comes with natural gas. He chooses Russia. The CIA overthrows him in the Euromaidan coup, which sees the ascent of Poroshenko and CIA-trained neo nazis like Azov battalion. This is covered in plenty of documentaries of the time like "Ukraine on Fire" Also The US puppet Poroshenko banned the Ukrainian Communist party and took out IMF loans that the overthrown leader Yanukovych refused to take. The US puppet Zelensky who people voted for because they thought he was an "anti war" candidate turned out to be just like Poroshenko, and banned other Ukrainian left wing parties as well, based on the fake idea that they are "russian backed". I think you don't realize how much the Ukrainian population, especially in the Eastern half of the country, views this war as being caused by its own government, and not by Russia.

>>2842718
Expand on that

>>2842803
Communism as a movement existed before Marx joined.

>>2841442
You are confusing the context of when Marx said he was not a Marxist. He was specifically saying this in response to Guesde and Lafargue among the French socialists regarding fighting for reforms within the bourgeois state.

I will leave a quote that explains the context for you:

<After the programme was agreed, however, a clash arose between Marx and his French supporters arose over the purpose of the minimum section. Whereas Marx saw this as a practical means of agitation around demands that were achievable within the framework of capitalism, Guesde took a very different view: “Discounting the possibility of obtaining these reforms from the bourgeoisie, Guesde regarded them not as a practical programme of struggle, but simply … as bait with which to lure the workers from Radicalism.” The rejection of these reforms would, Guesde believed, “free the proletariat of its last reformist illusions and convince it of the impossibility of avoiding a workers ’89.” [4] Accusing Guesde and Lafargue of “revolutionary phrase-mongering” and of denying the value of reformist struggles, Marx made his famous remark that, if their politics represented Marxism, “ce qu'il y a de certain c'est que moi, je ne suis pas Marxiste” (“what is certain is that I myself am not a Marxist”). [5]

<Karl Marx and Jules Guesde, 1880, The Programme of the Parti Ouvrier

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/05/parti-ouvrier.htm

>>2841442
Nah kid, this is how the lore goes…
picrel
t. oldfag

>>2841442
You gotta understand that “Marxism” isn’t really a single thing, it’s a whole family of ideologies and research methodologies in the humanities and political economy that use Marx’s work as a foundation

>>2843639
no actually it's my interpretation that's correct actually

>>2841442
TL;DR

>19th century
>the left as we know it is first taking shape in response to how much capitalism is fucking with people
>early socialist and anarchist theories arrive
>enter Marx, who is active in the labor rights movement
>marx decides much of The Discourse is vibes bullshit
>decides the left needs a solid theory of how this new system works so it can come up with actual strategy and achievable goals with a view to overcoming it
>uses the most advanced intellectual tools available to him at the time
>that means german philosophy, early French socialist political critique, English post-Adam Smith economics
>uses the tools of the first to analyze, pick apart and reconstruct the other two
>time to collect empirical data and use these tools to dig deep and uncover the basic shit that makes capitalism what it is

>this is what went into writing Das Kapital, which took so fucking long he only lived to publish the first volume (the fact that we was an angry troll in the movement and was dead broke for a good chunk of his life didn’t help)

>the other two exist as manuscript drafts outlining the basic arguments + a bunch of research notes
>nobody can agree on whether certain ideas were actually meant to make it into the second and third books or if they were dead ends that got Frankenstein’d into the final draft by his surviving friends and colleagues
>his unfinished work left behind a lot of loose ends that different people extrapolate shit from
>different branches of the left take up his name in incompatible ways
>everyone keeps arguing over what he really meant until the sun explodes

<you should still read Das Kapital anyway because it’s useful and interesting


Hope this helps