Which of the following completely fucking dead/fringe/unknown/unpopular/meme tier movements would most deserve a...

Better a deadlock or a massive caving in to proper consensus than endless splintering via democratic processes. It's better to properly maintain a single vision of the communist movement's praxis and execute it unilaterally than maintain the purity of the representative vote, with all negative consequences. That's my take on it, anyways, from reading some of the spammed Bordiga links on here, and it makes good sense to me.

De Leonism seems like a good one to re-open since rebuilding the American left will require rebuilding America's labor movement.

Seems to me like it would just lead to the same problems as Anarchist "consensus decision making" where nothing ever gets done because it's very unlikely to achieve unanimity on every issue.

Communism with a capital C is dead, but anarchism, autonomism and the squatter movement are STRONG here

This.

I think it would differ in that in organic centralism, organization is centered in the party. The consensus decision making of anarchism allows for power to form outside of the anarchist groups, while the party takes upon itself the only form of the communist idea. This means that you can always join the party and enter the discussion, but never hope to create a different party or organization.

Yeah, but anarchism is fucking garbage.

but communist parties split all the fucking time

Council Communism tbh

There's unexplored potential there. Unexplored because leftists of the 20th century were too busy with revolution they forgot the small stuff.

Because they are either Trotskyist (bourgeois parliamentarism, following representative democracy) or follow democratic centralist principles. The idea of organic centralism is just like democratic centralism to be the working of a ruling, seated communist party. And its workings are meant to prevent precisely splitting, opportunism and other hijackings of what should otherwise be a unitary organ pushing for the communist idea.

Not gonna lie, smashies do dumb stuff sometimes. No reason to denounce the whole movement.

Autonomism is an interesting mix of endless debates and massive amounts of often useless praxis. I credit them for integrating Marxist ideas into antiauthoritanism and that they keep anti authoritan leftism very present in the public live through their creation of free spaces that are often the point of introduction for many young people to radical leftism or just spaces for social organising. The german libertarian left is very influenced by autonomism in general.

I dont know how much the post-autonomes are still related to original autonomist thought but they staged some pretty effective campaigns in germany that managed to bring oposing narratives into the public.

I havent read the counterpunch article, its correct though that much of the autonomist left is engaging in silly self reaffirming activism, but also in endless debates of self critique that imo will create something new at some point.

Not an expert in autonomism but living in germany and knowing a few people that are more invested into the far left libertarian scene here.

Yeah, but if it's an "organic centralist state", aka a one-party dictatorship, your splitter party will be about as relevant as the KPD-ML in the DDR.

no you

They're hardly strong. When I think "strong" I think of the Communist Party of Italy or France after WW2, a visible radically left movement with millions of supporters. Not a bunch of kids doing crap and then going back to being SocDems or liberals.

There is a De Leonist party in the USA
>(slp.www.slp.org/index.html)

I used to consider myself one. Tbh I wish syndicalist ideologies were more active today because I really like them.

Come to Amsterdam, I'll show you a few dozen anarchist organizations and squatted buildings.

Show me the millions of people who believe in anarchism as a viable political movement. Unless you have an actual mass following outside some fringe community of radicals, you're not strong.

I am kinda hyped for G20 man.

Show me the millions of people who believe in communism as a viable political movement. Unless you have an actual mass following outside some fringe community of radicals, you're not strong.

Those people do not exist. Communism and anarchism are both incredibly weak, practically non-existent political movements in the present day. This isn't a dick measuring contest within the radical left, just an observation of the sad state of the left in general which absolutely does not deserve the description "strong" at this point in time, regardless of the tendency.

Mutualism and Sorelianism. (Which is not exactly Marxist by the way.)

We need a nationalist worker's movement dedicated to rebuilding the labor movement as well as acknowledge that a market economy, though heavily regulated by worker's syndicates/guilds over the cooperatives and self-employed workers, is necessary.

Nationalism is the future of the labor movement and to deny it is to prevent the working class, especially in America, from achieving their manifest destiny in seizing the means of production.

It's not on the list, but radical republicanism/direct democracy in the vein of Shay's Rebellion or the French Revolution is needed as well. Both the political and economic spheres must be conquered, and militias will be amongst the bedrock of a revolutionary America.

Wrong, countless of credit unions and coops exist in this very moment

Marxists havent done shit in 25 years, the last M-L regimes ae shitholes

wow so wise

Bakunin and Kropotkin are rolling in their graves. Or they would be, if they could.

Council communism

Erm. . . uh no reason

stop demanding the impossible user, come BUILD the movement you want

please be a falseflag

How was Marx-inspired social democracy different from "other" social democracy? Obviously a knowledge of Marx, but what else?

top kek!

how does it feel to be retarded?

how does it feel to be retarded?

Biggest credit union/mutualist bank of France: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crédit_Mutuel

Top performer on the stock exchanges; great turnovers. Anarky lives!

...

It literally went to shit after the Nazi occupied france

translate.google.com/translate?sl=fr&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cr%C3%A9dit_mutuel&edit-text=&act=url

The State entrusts the National Confederation of Mutual Credit (CNCM), an association of 1901 law founded by Henri Ardant , ex-administrator of the General Society under the Occupation , Christian d'Andlau and Henri de la Chesnais on 29 April 1958 5 , the interests of the management of the mutual funds of Crédit mutuel N 2 .

holy shit that guy's reading comprehension is shit. i suspect it's the same guy who usually uses the annil flag; just as incapable of interpretation and thought.

sad tbh, this is a new low

hiss, petty bourg. you sally the name of anarchism and its struggle against capital.

Eh? You say we should just settle for milquetoast pseudo-capitalism because the Marxist-Leninists failed to abolish it, which I protest, and then you somehow get out of this statement that I believe the Bolsheviks succeeded, which I also protest, to which you say that I can't read. Seems to me like you're just spouting inane nonsense and then getting butthurt.

sad!

i was agreeing for you; pirateflag is an idiot who didn't properly interpret what you said (that the failure of bolshevism is a shit excuse to permanently dwell in ethical capitalism).

low energy.

lacan.com/jambadiou.htm

SEE YOU IN COURT!

Marxist-Denimism.

no matter how many times you get btfo, it will never matter. talking to an autist with no ability to see his wrongs is a waste of time. as others have said, it's great that on top of being a mongoloid, you're also too obsessed with personal credit not to use a flag, meaning ignoring you is very easy.

Its not listed here but I feel like I may be one of the few Blanquists around, I have seen a few others sympathetic to it around here but its a small amount. The last thread we had on it only had 10 replies or so.

What if I'm a non-denimational Marxist? n-no bully

wrong! production for exchange implies private property,as only after the usage of money as a method to exchange a commodity is it that you have the commodity form, only after a legal system has stablish the rules of exchange is that the bourgeois market can exist

thus in this situation what is being exchanged are property rights

one situation where a market can work without property rights, is when you exchange labour, this means that we prouce for use, but we subjectively qualify the quality of the goods you receive back, using both labour and the subjective opinion of the user, since there is no central authority that protects the usage of a single currency, labour and goods cannot be transformed into monetary prices

you can have such system and still have no property rights, as in the case of extreme necessity, the perssn could make use of the good for consumption or the MoP to produce for self consumption or to enter this non-commodified market

the production is not determined by a market that has to follow prices, but that has to follow strict consumer demand

your total inability of imagining alternative uses of a market is stopping you from advancing in the theoretical field, you peabrain

anarchism is nothing, it doesn't exist. it's 'reform or make-believe bullshit', the only anarchists societies that have been tried were warzones where a military junta or militia rule over their subjects with socialist style. Catalonia, Rojava.

Between reform and make-believe, reform isn't so bad.

Denim is the outfit of the working class no exceptions. You can wear capitalist plaid in the Gulag.

Communization seems like a new one. Haven't seen many online sources about it.

If you ever get the chance, go to Bologna. It's just caked in left-wing street art, including more than a few YPG murals. Pretty much every street corner has an Autonomist logo spraypainted on it.

Of course, this is a whole bunch of radical student memelords who haven't really been relevant since the 1970s, but it's interesting to see.

I'd say this, but mostly because I "haven't read Bordiga". Organization requires some additional insight. And it has to be organization, not dis-organization (as is the case with all the other suggested schools of thought). At least Bordiga supports centralization.