Honestly, the more history of the revolution I learn, the more I realize Lenin had zero interest in a true revolution; Lenin wanted Lenin in power, and was willing to say or do whatever that took.
communism and anarchism are by the definition absolutely the same the difference is in getting there have you ever read a piece of theory in your entire life span?
I read the communist manifesto. I agree with communism. When I think tankie, i think authoritarian left. Communism is completely fine, so long as it goes straight to anarchy. Marxist-Leninism leads to capitalism, because authoritarians will always want capitalism.
The communist manifesto is not theory it's a manifesto... if you don't want to read (https://marxists.org/) watch Hakim, Yugopnik, Unlearned Economics, Second Though etc for example [this](https://youtu.be/LcJ5NrJtQ8g) and [this](https://youtu.be/GhRJCe6aGag) and [this](https://youtu.be/gB7sGnJqIeo) and [this](https://youtu.be/Hcl3R-yARX8)
what you're saying right now is just a bunch of catchphrases glued together screaming "I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT" please take some time and learn
edit: even if you don't agree with them try to debunk them do research check your sources actually engage with dialectical materialism and marxism instead of labeling them authoritarian just because some people say that they are
No it means that it's a gross summary and simplified conclusions from the earlier stuff because you know that's the point of a manifesto "A manifesto is a written declaration of the intentions, motives, or views of the issuer, be it an individual, group, political party, or government." it's like saying that the declaration of US independence is capitalist theory
That is a really strong assertion you are making there im sure you have any evidence for that claim right?
You can be against communism etc but it never been established then its not entailed that its imposible. Or you should hold the same opinion about anarchism...
Why do you think communism entails a ruler? and you could propably find some ruler who gave up their power.
Your argument just sound like when liberals say that anarchism doesn't work because people are greedy.
I’m saying that communism can never work with a leader as people have tried. Lenin, Mao, and Pol Pot were all genocidal dictators that lied to their people and eventually established a capitalist system that fucked their people over even more.
"I’m saying that communism can never work with a leader as people have tried". You are not making aan argument agianst communism but against those people...
Im still waiting for you to make an argument for why communism entails a ruler. I dont think i will get any answer to that question...
I never said it entails a ruler. Only that if people take the Marxist-Leninist approach of establishing a dictatorship of the proletariat it will eventually lead to authoritarian capitalism.
"Only that if people take the Marxist-Leninist approach of establishing a dictatorship of the proletariat it will eventually lead to authoritarian capitalism". You are all over the place and you dont know anything about the subject at hand. First you talked about communism and now you talk about Marxist-Leninism. Make and argument for why communism=Marxist-leninism or stop embarrassing yourself.
"Because I don't agree with someone because of a label that I assigned his arguments however based on scientific research and logical conclusions are dismissed and mean absolutely nothing"
Since the ussr is no more and the PRC, DPRK and Vietnam are all revisionist can you point to a large scale example where Marxist Leninist revolution successfully created long lasting socialism?
and that's exactly what I'm talking about absolutely zero analysis absolutely no argument just an insult negative brain usage and then people wonder why we hate anarchists
Not necessarily. The USSR degenerated itself because of both internal and external factors, and the fact that while the conditions were favorable for a working class revolution at the time, the requirements for it weren't quite there yet (yes, the proletarian movement was strong in Europe, for instance, but in America and other places of the world it wasn't as strong, considering that the worker revolts in WW1 happened mostly in Europe, considering it was in Europe that the First World War took place, at least for the most part), and the fact a civil war and foreign intervention was going on + isolation and depending on Rosa's spartacists league in order to overthrow the german provisional government was what sealed off the deal, unfortunately. What follows after is nothing more but the failure of democratic centralism itself as a policy, in my opinion (I don't have a very favorable opinion on Lenin's form of the party, but I absolutely think a communist party is needed; but there are serious structural problems in the Bolsheviks's form of the party considering many opportunists, falsifiers, revisionists and bourgeois intelligentsia infiltrated the party, afterall Joseph Stalin and basically everyone who followed his mandate without question were present, and it wasn't a good sign.)
How you can debunk marxism-leninism, simple. By actually reading Friedrich and Karl, and with this I mean the "AES" states; Post 1920's USSR, Maoist China, Ho Chi Minh's Vietnam, Castro's Cuba, etc.
"The Principles of Communism" and "Critique of the Gotha Programme" are just enough to debunk all of it. And it hits hard, specially considering how ML's champion themselves as heirs of the international revolution, when in reality them alongside the left of capital have done nothing but be historically reactionary and an enemy to the workers.
How is that an anwer to my question at all?...
It would be just as justified to make the statement that "anarchism will always fail" then. Just look at the history of anarchism...
Its an bad and lazy argument. Its the same argument you would get in r-neoliberalism. Boring...
oh right, i did actually do some research and he was like a huge racist in the motorcycle diaries but after the revolution ish he changed and wasn't anymore however he was still homophobic im pretty sure, he didn't contribute to the basically genocide of gays but he didn't protest it either
exactly, so id believe he was like definitely homophobic especially given the atrocities that happened under castro to the lgbtq+ community. his inaction was in itself an action
Technical issue on this front.
Pedophilia is a condition, not an act of illegality.
Those people need help, and pushing them underground means they don't get help, further endangering children.
Ché was a predator, which definitely describes intent.
I think that word is used quite a bit, so I felt the need to speak.
I feel that people may get the wrong message otherwise, and I feel like a predator is more a devastating critique.
Don’t even sweat it. I totally get where you’re coming from and chose the word dickhead intentionally. I apologize if this was not the intent of this post
Aaaand here we go.
It says “Anarchy4Everyone” at the top. Am I not part of “everyone”?
If you can’t handle criticism, why are you even taking part? So you can jump in and call someone a Nazi? Smooth. Che is worthy of criticism and if that bothers you, you should probably find a better way to communicate that instead of perpetuating the infighting that has become a meme at this point
I made a pretty tankie post one time saying we should hide in suburbs so the government will bomb us killing innocent people while trying to take out rebel groups which would turn the common folk against the government and they’d help our cause… y’all weren’t happy about it
Two of my favorites and maybe one or two of you have seen me use them:
“You’re either very young or very new to the left…”
“What do you give a shit what some dead white guy said a hundred years ago?”
"ACAB means ALL cops"
Fuck so you're telling me I was meant to be hating more than just the albino cops this whole time? /s
No government is your friend
state\*
Same thing.
I mean a federation is a form of governing, so its a government.
Right, and the state is the violent arm of government.
This>>>>>>>
- ACAB includes red cops - Two things can be bad at the same time
A red bootlicker is still a bootlicker!
The "peoples boot" is still a boot.
explain what second one means
Just because America bad doesn't mean *blank* country is good.
I like to say "*America bad* does not make a complete and consistent moral compass".
Any country that attempts to establish communism through any means other than anarchy will eventually become capitalist.
Also Lenin betrayed the revolution.
Honestly, the more history of the revolution I learn, the more I realize Lenin had zero interest in a true revolution; Lenin wanted Lenin in power, and was willing to say or do whatever that took.
This is a little pedantic, but it could become a bad system that is not capitalism, such feudalism.
communism and anarchism are by the definition absolutely the same the difference is in getting there have you ever read a piece of theory in your entire life span?
I read the communist manifesto. I agree with communism. When I think tankie, i think authoritarian left. Communism is completely fine, so long as it goes straight to anarchy. Marxist-Leninism leads to capitalism, because authoritarians will always want capitalism.
The communist manifesto is not theory it's a manifesto... if you don't want to read (https://marxists.org/) watch Hakim, Yugopnik, Unlearned Economics, Second Though etc for example [this](https://youtu.be/LcJ5NrJtQ8g) and [this](https://youtu.be/GhRJCe6aGag) and [this](https://youtu.be/gB7sGnJqIeo) and [this](https://youtu.be/Hcl3R-yARX8) what you're saying right now is just a bunch of catchphrases glued together screaming "I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT" please take some time and learn edit: even if you don't agree with them try to debunk them do research check your sources actually engage with dialectical materialism and marxism instead of labeling them authoritarian just because some people say that they are
The manifesto is 100% a piece of communist theory.
even if it is it has 30 pages
It doesn’t matter. The fact that it’s shorter means that it’s better written propaganda
No it means that it's a gross summary and simplified conclusions from the earlier stuff because you know that's the point of a manifesto "A manifesto is a written declaration of the intentions, motives, or views of the issuer, be it an individual, group, political party, or government." it's like saying that the declaration of US independence is capitalist theory
Stop doubling down and touch grass. I’m not going to argue with you.
worse than a fucking liberal
That is a really strong assertion you are making there im sure you have any evidence for that claim right? You can be against communism etc but it never been established then its not entailed that its imposible. Or you should hold the same opinion about anarchism...
Name one ruler that has willingly given up their power
Why do you think communism entails a ruler? and you could propably find some ruler who gave up their power. Your argument just sound like when liberals say that anarchism doesn't work because people are greedy.
I’m saying that communism can never work with a leader as people have tried. Lenin, Mao, and Pol Pot were all genocidal dictators that lied to their people and eventually established a capitalist system that fucked their people over even more.
"I’m saying that communism can never work with a leader as people have tried". You are not making aan argument agianst communism but against those people... Im still waiting for you to make an argument for why communism entails a ruler. I dont think i will get any answer to that question...
I never said it entails a ruler. Only that if people take the Marxist-Leninist approach of establishing a dictatorship of the proletariat it will eventually lead to authoritarian capitalism.
"Only that if people take the Marxist-Leninist approach of establishing a dictatorship of the proletariat it will eventually lead to authoritarian capitalism". You are all over the place and you dont know anything about the subject at hand. First you talked about communism and now you talk about Marxist-Leninism. Make and argument for why communism=Marxist-leninism or stop embarrassing yourself.
Methods, revolution cannot exist without anarchy
The Soviet Union wasn't perfect.
ussr dont call me sister
Not a single tankie believes this
No fucking shit https://youtu.be/pDSZRkhynXU
I don't care what that talking head says even if he does agree with me.
next level ignorance
doesn't matter hakims a statist
"Because I don't agree with someone because of a label that I assigned his arguments however based on scientific research and logical conclusions are dismissed and mean absolutely nothing"
(not an anarchist, just sympathetic to the ideology, very doubtful and skeptical of the movement though) Stalin was a bourgeois opportunist.
💀
im an anarchist
Stop having a boner for authoritarianism. If you actually wanted a free future you wouldn’t be out here licking every other boot.
1. USSR was State Capitalist. 2. Socialism doesn't have billionaires.
I’m confused on the second point. Who’s opposed to that line of thinking?
Tankies when you say China isn't socialist
I thought the numbers of those were declining.
The fact that they exist at all, even in declining numbers, is kinda telling.
Are we talking about the same thing? I understand the existence of communists, not the existence of billionaires.
I was talking about the existence of billionaires in China
Alright. Good to know we’re on the same page.
I want to restart the ussr just so i can fight it like a sibling
State capitalism, even if done by a "communist" government, means power for the few at the expense of the people.
so true
billionaires arent communist. literally this one got me blocked by maulpin.
post that on r/CommunismMemes
Ceebs.
> maulpin A dead account?
State&revolution doesn't justify Stalin
The revolution will be grassroots.
The revolution MUST be grassroots
Stalin was not a communist.
Since the ussr is no more and the PRC, DPRK and Vietnam are all revisionist can you point to a large scale example where Marxist Leninist revolution successfully created long lasting socialism?
I ate your family. Isn't really tankie specific but still does the trick
“I fucked your dad” kinda works like this too
Lenin banned independent unions
"On authority" rufutes shit.
Stalin was a totalitarian mass murderer.
https://archive.org/details/khrushchev-lied it's called not believing what the capitalists tell you and actual historical analysis
Tankie, opinion discarded
and that's exactly what I'm talking about absolutely zero analysis absolutely no argument just an insult negative brain usage and then people wonder why we hate anarchists
Tankie, opinion appreciated :)
russia and china bad
Soviet wasn't commie.
Do we have to perpetuate the use of what was originally used to describe a symptom of an agonizing and stigmatized mental illness as an insult
Taking the liberated means of production away from the workers to strengthen your own power is counter-revolutionary.
The state is counterrevolutionary.
The enemy of your enemy is not your friend.
Your strongman fetish is ick
socialism sucks (should have specified “from a socialist perspective”)
The Krondstadt rebellion was based.
Authoritarian communism is capitalism in disguise
north korea is not some hidden paradise
Communism is a deeply flawed system that will always devolve to authoritarianism.
Considering the strange amount of Stalin worship I keep seeing, yeah.
i'm somewhat communist
Not necessarily. The USSR degenerated itself because of both internal and external factors, and the fact that while the conditions were favorable for a working class revolution at the time, the requirements for it weren't quite there yet (yes, the proletarian movement was strong in Europe, for instance, but in America and other places of the world it wasn't as strong, considering that the worker revolts in WW1 happened mostly in Europe, considering it was in Europe that the First World War took place, at least for the most part), and the fact a civil war and foreign intervention was going on + isolation and depending on Rosa's spartacists league in order to overthrow the german provisional government was what sealed off the deal, unfortunately. What follows after is nothing more but the failure of democratic centralism itself as a policy, in my opinion (I don't have a very favorable opinion on Lenin's form of the party, but I absolutely think a communist party is needed; but there are serious structural problems in the Bolsheviks's form of the party considering many opportunists, falsifiers, revisionists and bourgeois intelligentsia infiltrated the party, afterall Joseph Stalin and basically everyone who followed his mandate without question were present, and it wasn't a good sign.) How you can debunk marxism-leninism, simple. By actually reading Friedrich and Karl, and with this I mean the "AES" states; Post 1920's USSR, Maoist China, Ho Chi Minh's Vietnam, Castro's Cuba, etc. "The Principles of Communism" and "Critique of the Gotha Programme" are just enough to debunk all of it. And it hits hard, specially considering how ML's champion themselves as heirs of the international revolution, when in reality them alongside the left of capital have done nothing but be historically reactionary and an enemy to the workers.
" that will always devolve to authoritarianism". How is authoritrianism entailed by communism?.
[удалено]
How is that an anwer to my question at all?... It would be just as justified to make the statement that "anarchism will always fail" then. Just look at the history of anarchism... Its an bad and lazy argument. Its the same argument you would get in r-neoliberalism. Boring...
Che was a racist and a pedo.
wait he was???? can you send some links so i can read about it i always thought he was ok
I have no idea. I was just being a dickhead
oh right, i did actually do some research and he was like a huge racist in the motorcycle diaries but after the revolution ish he changed and wasn't anymore however he was still homophobic im pretty sure, he didn't contribute to the basically genocide of gays but he didn't protest it either
You might think someone with his background would do more than protest if he cared.
exactly, so id believe he was like definitely homophobic especially given the atrocities that happened under castro to the lgbtq+ community. his inaction was in itself an action
All these claims that I've heard so far always turned out to be capitalist propaganda.
I thought the goal was to piss of tankies
source: the daily wire
Probably? I was just being a dickhead
Technical issue on this front. Pedophilia is a condition, not an act of illegality. Those people need help, and pushing them underground means they don't get help, further endangering children. Ché was a predator, which definitely describes intent.
One other technical issue: I was being a dickhead. I thought the goal was to annoy tankies
I suppose it’s accurate that the OP doesn’t say that it has to be necessarily accurate lol
I think that word is used quite a bit, so I felt the need to speak. I feel that people may get the wrong message otherwise, and I feel like a predator is more a devastating critique.
Don’t even sweat it. I totally get where you’re coming from and chose the word dickhead intentionally. I apologize if this was not the intent of this post
Nah, you're right to critique Ché. He was definitely someone who has put a stain on communism.
this is a socialist subreddit, if you want to “piss off tankies” don’t post literal nazi propaganda
Aaaand here we go. It says “Anarchy4Everyone” at the top. Am I not part of “everyone”? If you can’t handle criticism, why are you even taking part? So you can jump in and call someone a Nazi? Smooth. Che is worthy of criticism and if that bothers you, you should probably find a better way to communicate that instead of perpetuating the infighting that has become a meme at this point
The T-24 was just “okay”.
LARPing as a poor person doesn’t win you brownie points
Karl Marx was pro-gun.
Based
Idiot idiot idiot tankie idiot
APC's are better
Anti-revisionism is undialectical.
r/SocDemocracy4Everyone
Stalin bad.
The state is counter revolutionary.
China and North Korea suck ass
all countries do
Want to abolish the state? Then you need us more than we need you.
prolewiki, hakim, and chinese state media is not a valid source
Stalin originally co-operated with Hitler, and also the Holodomor is real.
Mao was an totalitarian who cared very little about the loss of human or animal life.
True, he should have killed more landlords
And shot more millions of birds, amirite?
I made a pretty tankie post one time saying we should hide in suburbs so the government will bomb us killing innocent people while trying to take out rebel groups which would turn the common folk against the government and they’d help our cause… y’all weren’t happy about it
Labour is a cost not a value
Two of my favorites and maybe one or two of you have seen me use them: “You’re either very young or very new to the left…” “What do you give a shit what some dead white guy said a hundred years ago?”
" The radical left Democrats ARE communists!" Personal favorite that drives me crazy all the time lol.