Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 09:16:53 No. 681459
were the bolsheviks ml?
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 09:17:41 No. 681462
>>681452 >>681452 I'm not ml but obviously the conditions are different in each country also the different parties do collaborate with each other:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Meeting_of_Communist_and_Workers%27_Parties Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 09:36:41 No. 681479
>>681462 >the conditions are different in each country the conditions are different in each region too. does this mean each region should have its own party?
>the different parties do collaborate with each other yes but a lot of these parties aren't actually in power
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 09:38:54 No. 681483
>>681479 >does this mean each region should have its own party? isn't this what a soviet is?
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 09:44:16 No. 681487
>>681483 yes. what I'm getting at here is that some concerns are local and some concerns are global. obviously a central decision body can't decide on literally everything (see Beer). but I would assume, as Leninists, these parties would seek global unity of action, right? yet there is more than one Party. this is a contradiction
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 09:53:12 No. 681492
>>681487 From one perspective I think alot of governments would consider that foreign interference.
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 09:56:39 No. 681494
>>681492 gesturing toward bourgeois nationalism does not answer my question anon
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 10:45:04 No. 681539
>>681452 they're glorified national socdem parties
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 10:46:47 No. 681540
>>681539 also, they were originally founded as part of the Comintern, which was purposely organized on a national basis by the Bolsheviks
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 10:47:45 No. 681541
>>681452 We have 3 different Leninist parties and none gets more than 2% votes. Autistic infighting about small issues is a universal problem in leftism.
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 11:22:16 No. 681561
>>681541 Yah, you haz anti-revisionist hoxhaism or MZT including MLM, then finally Trotskyists.
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 11:23:07 No. 681563
>>681561 Also forgot to mention 'mainstream' MLs that exclude the above
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 11:50:13 No. 681577
>>681452 > feel like this may border on being a retarded question, but why is there more than one ML party? Of the parties that actually have state power. Shouldn't the concept of democratic centralism imply that all these parties (CPC, CPV, PCC, WPK etc) should just be the one Party Because ml parties have a ban on factions which means that any disagreement between groups of members, rather than being discussed and resolved over time, leads to a purge of the opposition.
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 12:13:01 No. 681589
>>681579 >>681577 Also in my opinion, as for the internationale, the ban on factions still fucks it up. The only reason the Comintern worked is because everyone did what the Soviets said and any opposition was purged. Only "works" when you have one incredibly dominant party.
If the MLS drop their autistic van on factions they could merge with each other and also the ones in other countries, while not neccecarily agreeing on every single thing
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 13:52:59 No. 681640
>>681577 so basically national parties amount of factions? except in an even more retarded way, because your faction ends up being tied to a country
>rather than being discussed and resolved over time, leads to a purge of the opposition could something like short terms and sortition resolve this? you can show statistically that this will make the leadership reflect the cadre with high probability
>>681579 saved, but I have a ton of other stuff to read first
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 13:56:12 No. 681643
>>681452 Socioeconomical differences. One CP can synthesize Islam while the other can do the same with Christianity.
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 13:59:37 No. 681649
>>681643 and when it comes to ecclesiastic disagreements?
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 14:47:07 No. 681689
Isn't the entire point of a MLM party that you recruit people who go on to start their own parties, whose members then in turn do the same? Of course there will be several parties.
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 15:06:20 No. 681714
>>681640 >could something like short terms and sortition resolve this? you can show statistically that this will make the leadership reflect the cadre with high probability Sure. Or put in place a representational system of choosing officials (rather than the tiered delegate system which leads to the same issues as the electoral college in the usa, that is, minority opinions get repressed).
I think not banning factions in the first place is a good first step though, people are going to have differing opinions
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 15:39:11 No. 681758
>>681689 are you saying there were more than one Party in Maoist China?
>>681714 >rather than the tiered delegate system which leads to the same issues as the electoral college I've heard this point made before. in many ways it's even worse than the EC, because you have even more tiers
>I think not banning factions in the first place is a good first step though, people are going to have differing opinions this can be argued mathematically. suppose there are n members and m issues over which the membership is split roughly 50/50, with no correlation between issues. if the party is to be purged then its size must shrink to n/2^m. if n=1,000,000 then there must be less than 20 such issues or the size of the party shrinks to a single person
Anonymous 2022-01-08 (Sat) 15:42:55 No. 681762
>>681452 >I feel like this may border on being a retarded question, but why is there more than one ML party? Of the parties that actually have state power. Shouldn't the concept of democratic centralism imply that all these parties (CPC, CPV, PCC, WPK etc) should just be the one Party? The others are all revisionists. Thank god we were born into the right one!
Anonymous 2022-01-09 (Sun) 19:28:29 No. 683718
>>681452 Mexico's communist party was split by a dude, who eventually got funded by the Greek KKE. There is a cult of personality and single leadership under Pavel Blanco, who is a sex creep and they purge anyone who speaks out about his abuse of authority and sexual misconduct. The party has good international relations and publications, so they are the more visible party, and as mention, are funded by the KKE. It was this insane Pavel Blanco who split the party, not anyone else. And the party he split was already a merge of a lot of national parties.
IMO parties should be very local and form solidairty and open communication and coordination with other parties. There's a lot of rot and sludge in parties at the national level that affects local chapters. If your org is doing good shit, but the central committee isn't doing shit, or is outright retarded, then they are actively doing harm. Having national parties means shit slows down too. I think it's best to have congresses and have parties communicate there and agree on things.
Anonymous 2022-01-09 (Sun) 19:58:16 No. 683788
>>683718 so in other words have a single org but push activity to be as local as possible?
Anonymous 2022-01-09 (Sun) 20:20:24 No. 683821
>>683788 Allow splits, but constantly communicate, coordinate, and work together towards common goals. When a portion of the org becomes necrotic, it might be good to escape, at least temporarily. A better solution would be to create better bottom up democratic systems. The ones I've known allow for many vices to form. The national secretaries don't do shit. There is top down commands that are entirely disconnected with the local orgs. No real communication between local organizations. Barely active orgs get an oversized say in decisions. Shit like that.
Sabinyak 2022-01-09 (Sun) 20:49:22 No. 683885
there was a cool wojak meme about MLs fighting over theory and a cool possum screaming
Anonymous 2022-01-09 (Sun) 21:40:10 No. 683964
>>683821 >>683718 This is just a convoluted way to say:
>The upper levels do not have the ability to dictate to the lower levels Which is a good idea. Traditional parties have always had brain rot in the top and rules that enforce top down control. Local chapters and members should be unable to be purged by higher levels, and only be put under pressure in the congress if they act against the interests of the rest.
Anonymous 2022-01-09 (Sun) 22:13:57 No. 684019
>>683964 >The upper levels do not have the ability to dictate to the lower levels this begets anarchy
>only be put under pressure in the congress if they act against the interests of the rest this contradicts the other statement I quoted
these kinds of issues is why I like Beer's way of framing this problem. you want a separation of concerns, and for viability reasons you want keep things as local as possible. the highest levels of organization does not have the bandwidth to deal with every little thing. but you also can't have everyone just doing their own thing with no coordination or ability to sanction local retardedness. that would also threaten viability
some things
do need to be decided centrally, and those who try to defect must be prevented from doing so. one example is dealing with climate change and some area doing petroleum extraction or slash-and-burn agriculture
Anonymous 2022-01-09 (Sun) 22:59:10 No. 684093
>>684019 How would you prevent the party top from just purging people who threaten their power? From purging opposition candidates, etc?
This has happened to my party, so im curious how you prevent this without removing the ability of the top party officials to purge random members.
Anonymous 2022-01-09 (Sun) 23:21:44 No. 684121
>>684093 >How would you prevent the party top from just purging people who threaten their power? From purging opposition candidates, etc? short terms and sortition
>>684100 based and systems-thinking pilled. but I'd avoid the term "state" for things that are not States in the Marxist sense (tool of class power)
also it strikes me that bourgeois states are full of contradictions. in Sweden there is a tension between municipalities, regions and the State
Anonymous 2022-01-09 (Sun) 23:25:04 No. 684126
>>684121 >short terms and sortition Doesnt sortition go against the entire point of a vanguard or quasi vanguard? Eliminating the possibility of getting the better people at the top.
Also that makes people who dedicate their life to politics near impossible. You cant just drop your life, be a professional communist for a year, then expect to pick your life back up again.
There needs to be a solution that allows for both these checks on the top and an actual vanguard.
Anonymous 2022-01-09 (Sun) 23:47:00 No. 684161
>>684126 >Doesnt sortition go against the entire point of a vanguard or quasi vanguard? not if you do sortition among those qualified. for example to be eligible you must demonstrate that you have read the necessary theory and you must have been a member of the party of N number of years
Anonymous 2022-01-09 (Sun) 23:51:22 No. 684170
>>684126 also over time you might be able to flip this around. you do sortition on everyone. those selected will receive the necessary political education, and be paid while they do it. if you don't want to do that then you don't have to - just pick someone else instead. this means going from an opt-in system to an opt-out system over time
Unique IPs: 15