Zizek rejects Castro

Here's what I don't understand about the Left.
You finally have a giant of the 20th century, a figure connected to the Soviet Union, who has finally died, and the reaction from the Left is pure idiocy and pure ideology.

I see tankie scum praising him like Castro was some saint, and blindly defending everything he did. Sure, i'll admit he was better than the fascist dictator before him, but tankies ignore the fact that Cuba still is an impoverished shithole, with failing buildings.
And the only argument I get from the Left defending Castro's legacy is "He didn't sell out to the USA, he stayed ideologically pure".
I guess when North Korea's leader dies, tankies will probably defend him too because he's "anti american/anti imperialist".

To further point out how cancerous tankies are, instead of the rational position of finally cutting off the rotting appendage of the Soviet Union legacy, tankies have double down on autistically defending shitty states, and now they are larping about resurrecting the Soviet Union again.

It seems the Left doesn't want to win, all it can do is cling to the failed Soviet Union, keep clinging to the collapsed 20th century experiment, and refuses to abandon old 19th/20th dogma in favour of becoming a relevant modern force.

It's either ideological purity (tankie scum) or cutting off the rotting corpse that is the Soviet Union and having to completely reinvent the Left.



Other urls found in this thread:




Here we go again with the "muh gorillions" meme

Provide evidence for your hundreds of millions killed, and tell me how capitalism is more efficient and more effective in reducing deaths worldwide.

they already do, there's no arguing with tankies, they have more skull than brains

Are you a butthurt tankie?
My thread isn't about "Capitalism is the superior economic system" you stupid tankie.
My thread is about Zizek's correct point that the Left, if it's to become a relevant political force, must abandon 20th century nostalgia/dogma/ideology.
The Left must either totally reinvent itself to survive in the 21st century, or it will become more obscure.
And judging by your triggered response, you prefer the Left is reduced to making circlejerk threads on image boards or Reddit.

Tankies have no interest in communism succeeding, their ideological purity and blind idiotic defence of the 20th century failures is far more important to them.

That's why the Left needs to purge Idpol and tankies. They are both cancerous to the Left.

No, I'm not a tankie. I completely agree with you and zizek, thought you were a Holla Forums poster because of that Holla Forumsteir image. I think we should mourn the loss of Castro and remember what he gave for us to learn from, and move on and make a new 21st century formula for the transition away from capitalism.

Did anyone defend Kim Jong-Il when he died?


I don't mourn him.
He's dead, Lenin, Stalin, Mao are all dead and should be abandoned.
And Zizek isn't a Holla Forums tier image.
Just a harsh truth that tankies can't handle.

Fuck off.

Tankies did.
They keep defending North Korea, especially maoists like Jason.

Zizek is still right and more relevant that tankies that whine on Reddit and Holla Forums.

Marxism-Leninism, Stalinism and Maoism failed. In other words, communism in these countries was just the newest flavor of the same tyranny and mass death they were already used to.

at least pay attention to what post he was responding to

What does that even mean?

Hi tankie scum.
Love how you ignore Zizek when he points out that you Larping idiots must abandon the 20th century nostalgia/ideology/dogma.
You prefer to remain obscure, impotent and keep having ideological purity fights.
How does it feel that you idiots lost to an orange reality tv show orangutang in terms of political influence?

You're presenting a false dichotomy. We can acknowledge the good things these people accomplished while also recognizing the bad. I think if we're to be an intellectually honest movement we need to embrace the failed attempts of the 20th century as legitimate attempts to build socialism but simultaneously highlight the lessons learned.

It means, communists must abandon larping over Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Trotsky and other 20th century figures, stop obsessing over ideological purity, stop clinging to 20th century dogma/ideology/nostalgia and reinvent the Left so it's relevant in the 21st century and the future?

Also, the Left needs to get over being so afraid of criticizing the 20th century.
Failures should be called for what they are, failures.
It's weird when marxists claim that the Soviet Union wasn't a true communist state, and then they dogmatically defend it against anyone that points out the gulags, Ukrainian famine, purges,etc.

Either you truly have moved past on from the nightmare that was the 20th century, or you will forever live in obscurity, having ideological purity fights with anyone that criticizes Stalin, Lenin, Mao,etc.

The commu-ball is a Holla Forumsteir image with their classical "muh gorrillions" meme. There's a thread right next to this of a Holla Forumsyp posting that exact image. Calling anyone who has a critical point to offer a tankie won't accomplish anything. Literally nobody here was criticizing zizek

You know how people unironically praise the Soviet Union and wish for its return, and or say that Stalin literally did nothing wrong? These people cling to ideas that clearly failed to produce the desired result, offer no ameliorating theory, and dogmatically advance it the one true Marxism.

Zizek is says that we need to critically examine their failures, devise new theory based on what we find, but ultimately leave the past in the past rather than succumb to nostalgia and stagnate.

As a matter of fact, it is:
You literally claim we should abandon Marxism.

If you insist on "embracing" the failed attempts of the Soviet Union, you ostracize your movement from others, especially if they lived in the Soviet Union and experienced it as hell.
I don't care if Leftypol thinks every person who survived the Soviet Union and hated it is somehow a CIA shill, it's the communist version of Holla Forums thinking that the holocaust is a zionist conspiracy.

Point is, the 20th century was a nightmare and must be disavowed.
Sure, you can point out industrialization and some advance's, but it will fall on deaf ears as the majority of people reject anything positive about the Soviet Union.

For opportunistic political purposes, defending the Soviet Union won't bring more people to your movement.

This. And this is exactly the point zizek makes across multiple lectures. not sure why OP is getting so triggered about leftists choosing to even acknowledge the people that fought for communism in the 20th century.

If you meet the Buddha, kill the Buddha.

Is there a reference to a movie or something?


Mein gott, nobody is claiming we proclaim the Soviet Union as a model for future goals. Literally just saying it's important to remember the writings, ideology and efforts of Lenin&co because they're still relevant. It's important to learn from and build off of their failures. You can't erase history.

But most former Soviet satellites say that their quality of life was better under the USSR.


You are a stupid tankie.
If you don't understand that the 20th century should be abandoned, then you will die shitposting on this image board and Reddit, while the far right gains more power in the coming decades.

Tell me, is Marx some holy prophet who's writings must never be criticized?
That's the attitude that makes the majority of people look at your like your a religious cult that thinks of Marx as God, with Lenin/Stalin as his prophets and the "Historical inevitability of communism" as the Christians version of the Holy Spirit.

Marxism needs to reinvent itself, not refuse to drop outdated language and ideas to maintain ideological purity.

You clearly want fascism in power, as by refusing to abandon the failed 20th century, you prevent the Left from becoming a major political force.

I'm frustrated by such attempts because clinging to such a history makes you repulsive to the masses, it tends to whitewash any horrible actions done on the part of communists, and it can't answer to what should be done today.

There's no plan as to what society should look like after the revolution, just nostalgia and masturbating over "the revolution".
I don't see any marxists addressing that the masses want a first world standard of living with consumerism/internet.
Instead, I see marxists go on about some miserable, shitty communal life that the majority of people don't want to live in.

Then communism will forever be defined by it's past failures, and that's what the majority of people already believe it to be.
You've just killed any chance of communism being relevant again.

For some old people, maybe.
I would like to research such claims.

Please, do critique it.


if you really only see marxists talking about a shitty communal life that doesn't address modern material conditions then you need to get off the internet and get involved with local organizations because that is absolutely not what all marxists claim.


anyone who can't recognize the difference in these two things has poor comprehension skills and wouldn't be receptive to any change in the current system, whether communism or anything else. you've literally just repeated the same few lines 10x in this thread without developing your points any further than zizek does in this one lecture. Have you listened to his other lectures? my god the man is a Hegelian-Marxist who believes in a hybrid of their dialectics, how is that not clinging to the 19th/ and 20th centuries?

prolly cus u need 2 read m0r3


If the best you can argue against your political impotence and the fact you larp and dogmatically cling to failed 20th century projects is "muh gorillians", then communism deserves to keep remaining obscure, impotent with it's followers treating it like a religion instead of an economic system.

Not an answer.

I hate Zizek's ugly face

I'm not wasting my time with larpers and idiots who still cling to blithering on about "solidarity", "community", and still cling to 19th/20th century rhetoric/ideology.

I'd like to see modern communists incorporate individuality into their language, while still being able to differentiate true individual freedom from bourgeoise individualism.
Or, modern marxists can make a case that allows for an alternative society to still have some material comforts, a decent standard of living, that doesn't require mass exploitation.

I guess most marxists prefer clinging to the 20th century, it's more comforting then having to do work.

I don't.
It's bizarre why you are tolerated on an anti-Idpol board, when you are the resident Judith Butler.


Not a question.

where do you associate with modern communists outside of this board? I know many communists who elevate the ideas of human freedom and self-determination above 20th century rhetoric and nostalgia. it seems like you make assumptions about all communists based on the shitposting you read on this board

This. We need to marry socialism with automatization and ecology to make it relevant for the 21st century. Green fully automated socialism when?