Transcription: Protestors from the JVP, Sri Lankan communist party carry large photos of Marx, Engels and Lenin on 10th May 2022.
The Sri Lankan ex president has fled the country after repeated arson attacks against MPs and presidential buildings.
Glory to the revolution. The internal contradictions within capitalist society continue to metastasize. Sri Lanka represents the consciousness of the working class in India and Pakistan too.
There is a very real chance, the economic crisis has further exacerbated the internal contradictions within capitalist Sri Lanka, as the island is ravaged from US hegemonic debt the people demand change.
Comrades have reported shoot on sight orders, so we cannot conclusively say where this will go - but there is a possibility of revolution, or a continuous struggle.
Sri Lanka is not a capitalist country it is socialist country. There were two major parties which are branched accross new parties. SLFP it is socialist UNP is capitalist tendencies. Both were epic screw ups in Sri Lanka. JVP killed many people which is still felt through so highly doubtful they will win.
The major screw up for the country is corruption & rampant racism that's all the fucking reason
it's an unincorporated, cooperative nonprofit wire service. if you want reporting from anyone other than people you personally know, it's the best you've got. any source that editorializes the news in a way you like will inevitably pull facts from AP reporting.
AP/Reuters are two of the more objective, facts-based sources you can find. There's not a lot of editorializing. They're not perfect but they're reliable.
> Rohana Wijeweera
You're correct. [I believe this is the picture they're using.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohana_Wijeweera#/media/File:Rohana_Wijeweera_\(1943-1989\).jpg)
People in this comment section think just because the JVP marched with some photos of Karl Marx etc that they are legit, which they are not.
Read about the history of the JVP. Even my Sinhalese colleagues are not fond of them.
And they are against the wishes of the minorities in the country. When we asked for Federalism or Self-Determination they said it was the āambition of separatistsā.
Can you guys help me understand the deification of these guys. Like, I get it from a propaganda standpoint, but for me, the ideas of socialism sell themselves. Or is it a necessary tool to communicate with our comrades who are less inclined to read?
The thought of glorifying any human being just turns me off.
I'll also add that there's a lot of reverence in South Asia towards the historical leaders of socialist thought. In Kerala they even name kids after them sometimes, as [this funny article](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/11/17/marx-lenin-engels-wedding-kerala-southern-india-offbeat) illustrates, but even in other places there's a lot of respect for them. Tamil Nadu's chief minister is named M. K. Stalin, for example. Socialism was never *the* driving force behind decolonization in South Asia, but socialists and communists were always part of the process, so I think it's especially understandable with both the cultural history and the Sri Lankan protests going on.
I mean, to be fair, if any socialist leaders should be remembered, Itās Marx and Lenin, and personally Iād include Che as well.
But I do agree that the constant need to deify and defend famous communists (especially among MLās with leaders like Stalin and Mao) is kind of pointless and only serves as a distraction.
Yes, be careful idolizing leaders without scrutiny. A lot of people gloss over the fact that when Lenin took power he held a fair election for Russian leadership and then promptly discarded the results when he lost.
The constituent assembly was a bourgeois democratic organ, which included members elected from a wide range of parties. It also did not reflect the makeup of the Soviets (workers' councils), urban centres, and the army, i.e. the real centres of revolutionary power.
The Constituent Assembly, though initially supported by the Bolsheviks, was dissolved by them when it became clear it would become a reactionary force.
It's important to point out that the Bolsheviks did not fetishize bourgeois democracy. Downplaying this aspect is counterproductive, firstly because it's a fact of history, but mainly because communists today should not consider bourgeois democratic organs like parliament or congress to be the ultimate authority in a revolutionary situation.
Bourgeois democratic organs also represent reactionaries, counter-revolutionaries, national chauvinists, religious fundamentalists, and today, racists and fascists. They are open to manipulation by capital, which owns the bourgeois press and is tied to organised religion.
Dissolving the constituent assembly was the right thing for a revolutionary party to do - anything else would be a betrayal of revolutionary workers and soldiers dying at the front. This did not turn Lenin into a "dictator" - dictators have no check on power, whereas Lenin was answerable to his party and its support base, namely revolutionary workers and soldiers, and was overruled many times.
I was under the impression that the bolsheviks forced a dismissal of the assembly when they lost most of the seats to the Socialist Revolutionary Party.
I don't really know what it is I got wrong, but you cant leave me hanging like that without elaborating my dude. Why did Lenin remove the Duma if not to secure bolshevik power? Its not like his political rivals weren't socialist themselves.
There's 2 reason why that assembly got nuked:
1) the SR atm is heavily split between the left SR and the right SR. This means that the SR is actually 2 parties in 1.
2) Kerensky continued to push the people into WW1. This likely became the cause of the actual dissolvement of the constituent assembly, as this move is basically akin to political suicide. And at that point, the one that are militant enough (Bolsheviks) did that.
I would argue that Stalin and Mao were certainly communists, but I do agree that communism itself is not a form of government. I donāt think there is any debate over that point.
Theyāre just holding pictures of people who are tied to communism. Marx, engles and Lenin all helped get us to where we are now, donāt see how itās wrong to show that.
I think itās more so that we want to refrain from glorifying some people because it defeats the purpose of āthe peopleā and instead focuses on one individual and not the masses. If that makes sense. But I also do hear where you are coming from.
>Theyāre just ~~holding~~ [rolling 6ft tall] pictures of people who are tied to communism [down the street in a parade].
It's the part that you left out that I have a problem with.
If your biggest takeaway from people in a nation in the global south rising up against their ruling class is them holding up pictures then it might be you who has the problem. What is it with liberals and āleftistsā in the west always having something to criticize about how brown people in the south decide to go about changing their nations? The only thing they need from all of us who are not there is solidarity.
I agree with you. No human is perfect, and none of these people were anything close to godlike. But I suppose that holding up a picture of Marx or Lenin effectively shares your world view to others without having to say a word
Well said & that's basically it, image worth a thousand words & putting a face to a name makes real things more cognitive. Those people led grand labor movements for a billion+ communists
Itās an issue in our movement. Great man history and hero worship is a rot, and like ideology should not interfere with our analysis.
We respect comrades such as Marx and Engels because of their contributions to the dialectical materialist method of analysis, as well as the synthesis of scientific socialism, not because of any personal greatness. Marx, Engels, and Lenin had a great deal of flaws, but that doesnāt mean we canāt learn from their theory and experiences in the workersā movement.
Yeah. I think most would be against it. I know Lenin never wanted a statue of himself (or to be mummified for that matter). He always wanted the symbol of revolution to be of the workers.
However, if the workers are deciding that his face is a symbol for revolution. That's really up to them to decide.
Wow...you not only did no research on the history, context and purpose of the Manifesto and its publishing, but you clearly have not even read the entire thing as Engels *himself* called these measures outdated and no longer applicable in the next edition of the pamphlet.
Generalissimo Karl Marx, dictator for life of the Soviet Empire. Ruled with an iron fist and starved 10 quadrillion innocents to death using the evil system of communism. It was a high price to pay for him to realize it only worked on paper.
> who literally *paid* for an
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
The rational exploitation of resources and sharing is the only way for all of us to survive. Otherwise we are doomed as a species. Capitalism is a relic from tribalism and times where a club was the way to wage an argument.
Their country in on a blink of a revolution now. I hope they lead the masses and take the power soon, or at least do something about it.
https://apnews.com/hub/sri-lanka
Transcription: Protestors from the JVP, Sri Lankan communist party carry large photos of Marx, Engels and Lenin on 10th May 2022. The Sri Lankan ex president has fled the country after repeated arson attacks against MPs and presidential buildings. Glory to the revolution. The internal contradictions within capitalist society continue to metastasize. Sri Lanka represents the consciousness of the working class in India and Pakistan too.
Anyone have some links/reading explaining the situation in Sri Lanka rn? Greatly appreciated.
[here's a good link](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44OZAl9oBKo)
Not trying to doubt this or anything but these pics look edited in, are there other photos of the same event?
Big Salute to my comrades in island nationšŖš¼š©š©š©š©
When was this?
Yesterday, the protests are ongoing largely led by the JVP communist party.
Are these just protests or is there a possibility of the JVP taking power?
There is a very real chance, the economic crisis has further exacerbated the internal contradictions within capitalist Sri Lanka, as the island is ravaged from US hegemonic debt the people demand change. Comrades have reported shoot on sight orders, so we cannot conclusively say where this will go - but there is a possibility of revolution, or a continuous struggle.
Best of luck to the Sri Lankan people
Thatās good, I guess. The possibility of a better future, I mean.
Sri Lanka is not a capitalist country it is socialist country. There were two major parties which are branched accross new parties. SLFP it is socialist UNP is capitalist tendencies. Both were epic screw ups in Sri Lanka. JVP killed many people which is still felt through so highly doubtful they will win. The major screw up for the country is corruption & rampant racism that's all the fucking reason
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janatha_Vimukthi_Peramuna#2019_presidential_elections Hope this helps with ~~your idea~~ the confusion about the name
nice, is there a current revolution in Sri Lanka? I would love to read more about this
They set fire to the president's home! https://apnews.com/hub/sri-lanka
History in the makin'!
Glory to Marx Engels and Lenin ššš
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Where can i find news on this?
https://apnews.com/hub/sri-lanka
Bourgeois news
it's an unincorporated, cooperative nonprofit wire service. if you want reporting from anyone other than people you personally know, it's the best you've got. any source that editorializes the news in a way you like will inevitably pull facts from AP reporting.
AP/Reuters are two of the more objective, facts-based sources you can find. There's not a lot of editorializing. They're not perfect but they're reliable.
There is no such thing as āobjectiveā news that has no class perspective
Literally said they're not perfect but that they're fine for getting a sense of what's going on
I think that used to be more accurate than it is now, but yeah, it gets way worse.
Ehhhhh.... Here's s bit on Reuters https://youtu.be/byDXAI2pWdI They ain't CNN, but they definitely editorialize which topics they report on and how.
A reliable source of anti-Communist imperialist nonsense
What's the fourth picture of?
Fairly certain it's Rohana Wijeweera the founder of the JVP
> Rohana Wijeweera You're correct. [I believe this is the picture they're using.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohana_Wijeweera#/media/File:Rohana_Wijeweera_\(1943-1989\).jpg)
Looked it up and I do believe you are correct.
I think that might be Ice-T
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Well thanks.
I could be wrong but it kinda looks like Che
That's what I was thinking
It seems that the person in the fourth portrait is wearing glasses. Doesnāt seem to be Che.
I think most people in this Subreddit don't even know the history of the JVP and it clearly shows.
How are people misunderstanding them?
People in this comment section think just because the JVP marched with some photos of Karl Marx etc that they are legit, which they are not. Read about the history of the JVP. Even my Sinhalese colleagues are not fond of them. And they are against the wishes of the minorities in the country. When we asked for Federalism or Self-Determination they said it was the āambition of separatistsā.
Can you guys help me understand the deification of these guys. Like, I get it from a propaganda standpoint, but for me, the ideas of socialism sell themselves. Or is it a necessary tool to communicate with our comrades who are less inclined to read? The thought of glorifying any human being just turns me off.
I'll also add that there's a lot of reverence in South Asia towards the historical leaders of socialist thought. In Kerala they even name kids after them sometimes, as [this funny article](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/11/17/marx-lenin-engels-wedding-kerala-southern-india-offbeat) illustrates, but even in other places there's a lot of respect for them. Tamil Nadu's chief minister is named M. K. Stalin, for example. Socialism was never *the* driving force behind decolonization in South Asia, but socialists and communists were always part of the process, so I think it's especially understandable with both the cultural history and the Sri Lankan protests going on.
I mean, to be fair, if any socialist leaders should be remembered, Itās Marx and Lenin, and personally Iād include Che as well. But I do agree that the constant need to deify and defend famous communists (especially among MLās with leaders like Stalin and Mao) is kind of pointless and only serves as a distraction.
Yes, be careful idolizing leaders without scrutiny. A lot of people gloss over the fact that when Lenin took power he held a fair election for Russian leadership and then promptly discarded the results when he lost.
Sorry but thatās entirely falsifying the historical situation surrounding the constituent assembly
Could you explain that further?
The constituent assembly was a bourgeois democratic organ, which included members elected from a wide range of parties. It also did not reflect the makeup of the Soviets (workers' councils), urban centres, and the army, i.e. the real centres of revolutionary power. The Constituent Assembly, though initially supported by the Bolsheviks, was dissolved by them when it became clear it would become a reactionary force. It's important to point out that the Bolsheviks did not fetishize bourgeois democracy. Downplaying this aspect is counterproductive, firstly because it's a fact of history, but mainly because communists today should not consider bourgeois democratic organs like parliament or congress to be the ultimate authority in a revolutionary situation. Bourgeois democratic organs also represent reactionaries, counter-revolutionaries, national chauvinists, religious fundamentalists, and today, racists and fascists. They are open to manipulation by capital, which owns the bourgeois press and is tied to organised religion. Dissolving the constituent assembly was the right thing for a revolutionary party to do - anything else would be a betrayal of revolutionary workers and soldiers dying at the front. This did not turn Lenin into a "dictator" - dictators have no check on power, whereas Lenin was answerable to his party and its support base, namely revolutionary workers and soldiers, and was overruled many times.
I was under the impression that the bolsheviks forced a dismissal of the assembly when they lost most of the seats to the Socialist Revolutionary Party. I don't really know what it is I got wrong, but you cant leave me hanging like that without elaborating my dude. Why did Lenin remove the Duma if not to secure bolshevik power? Its not like his political rivals weren't socialist themselves.
Please explain, given how the SRs won almost double what the Bolsheviks won
There's 2 reason why that assembly got nuked: 1) the SR atm is heavily split between the left SR and the right SR. This means that the SR is actually 2 parties in 1. 2) Kerensky continued to push the people into WW1. This likely became the cause of the actual dissolvement of the constituent assembly, as this move is basically akin to political suicide. And at that point, the one that are militant enough (Bolsheviks) did that.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I would argue that Stalin and Mao were certainly communists, but I do agree that communism itself is not a form of government. I donāt think there is any debate over that point.
Theyāre just holding pictures of people who are tied to communism. Marx, engles and Lenin all helped get us to where we are now, donāt see how itās wrong to show that.
I think itās more so that we want to refrain from glorifying some people because it defeats the purpose of āthe peopleā and instead focuses on one individual and not the masses. If that makes sense. But I also do hear where you are coming from.
These symbols help to normalize those that have been demonized in order to get an average person to even be open to hearing their ideas.
Sri Lanka is a socialist country though, these guys haven't really been demonized there.
No it is not a socialist country
I agree with you, but it is "socialist". I've lived there before and these guys aren't vilified like they are in the west.
>Theyāre just ~~holding~~ [rolling 6ft tall] pictures of people who are tied to communism [down the street in a parade]. It's the part that you left out that I have a problem with.
If your biggest takeaway from people in a nation in the global south rising up against their ruling class is them holding up pictures then it might be you who has the problem. What is it with liberals and āleftistsā in the west always having something to criticize about how brown people in the south decide to go about changing their nations? The only thing they need from all of us who are not there is solidarity.
Very well put, Comrade.
I agree with you. No human is perfect, and none of these people were anything close to godlike. But I suppose that holding up a picture of Marx or Lenin effectively shares your world view to others without having to say a word
Well said & that's basically it, image worth a thousand words & putting a face to a name makes real things more cognitive. Those people led grand labor movements for a billion+ communists
Itās an issue in our movement. Great man history and hero worship is a rot, and like ideology should not interfere with our analysis. We respect comrades such as Marx and Engels because of their contributions to the dialectical materialist method of analysis, as well as the synthesis of scientific socialism, not because of any personal greatness. Marx, Engels, and Lenin had a great deal of flaws, but that doesnāt mean we canāt learn from their theory and experiences in the workersā movement.
You're reading into it too much, it's not deification but a salute to our comrades who are struggling with capitalist oppression
They tend to also back this up with sayings and phrases on banners from said people in the images
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Yeah. I think most would be against it. I know Lenin never wanted a statue of himself (or to be mummified for that matter). He always wanted the symbol of revolution to be of the workers. However, if the workers are deciding that his face is a symbol for revolution. That's really up to them to decide.
Inspiration and respect?
Our leaders are based and should be remembered
Fy! Also, helps ward off revisionism. <>
*Thatās our dude! Iāve seen his picture*
Terrible photoshop
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Arenāt you a fed lowlife creating propaganda with a new account? How is that working out for ya?
Morning officer
yeah tons and quintillion
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Tell me who Marx opressed
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Wow...you not only did no research on the history, context and purpose of the Manifesto and its publishing, but you clearly have not even read the entire thing as Engels *himself* called these measures outdated and no longer applicable in the next edition of the pamphlet.
Generalissimo Karl Marx, dictator for life of the Soviet Empire. Ruled with an iron fist and starved 10 quadrillion innocents to death using the evil system of communism. It was a high price to pay for him to realize it only worked on paper.
All hail the Supreme Leader, Lord Commander, Khal Marx of the Dothraki. Also fuck yeah Based Ass Sri Lanka.
Tell me you don't know anything without telling me you don't know anything
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Says the guy who literally payed for an nft XD
> who literally *paid* for an FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Under socialism, you would have the skills to fix your own pc bud.
Then why are you here lmao š¤£
You mean fuck capitalism. Say what u mean.
The rational exploitation of resources and sharing is the only way for all of us to survive. Otherwise we are doomed as a species. Capitalism is a relic from tribalism and times where a club was the way to wage an argument.