What's up with the hate for left communists?

I get that it's an xd funny meem to hate on leftcoms because muh armchairs and all that stuff, but what is the real reason they are so hated? It feels like quite a few of the things they say are quite sensible, for example, the whole meme of them never doing anything comes them rejecting shitty reformism and collarboration with the ruling class.
I'm not even a leftcom tbh

Other urls found in this thread:


Everyone is hated here pretty equally if you haven't noticed. This place is sectarian as fuck.

We like leftcoms when it comes to theory generally, but outside of that realm they can be condescending pricks who never support any attempts at socialist praxis.

Half of it comes from the constant shitting on other left-wing tendencies, the other half comes from, for lack of a better term, propaganda.
And also some legitimate criticisms which makes people a bit antsy.

wtf, I love leftcoms now.

Trade unionism and electoral parties are reformism, there's no way around it.

Leftcoms in general are pretty good contributers as they actually bother to read theory. But they are pretty dogmatic Marxists often. Defending Marxism against tankies with pure polemicism creates a lot of drama.

But they dont bother with any realistic interpretation with actual existing struggles and for all their proclamations of intent to radicall criticise everything they never look at their own favoured methods of organisation.

Basically we need Bookchin reading leftcoms and everything would be fine.


They have about equal amounts of theory as they have praxis. Writing text != producing theory. I can write a long text about structural antisemitism in breakfast cereal mascots from the 80s, but that ain't theory. (Inb4 situationist asks me for that text, breathing heavily with penis in hand.)

Gee, I wonder who could be behind this post.


thanks for the mental image lmao


fuck you i've read him and he's overrated

Communism is inherently anti-woman and LGBT. Stalin/Mao oppressed queer citizens. It has no place in modern leftism.

No "anfem", your b8 will not work today.


it's a lumpen/pol/ poster

I feel like posts under the leftcom flag were a lot better a few months back than they are now, Holla Forums may be using it to false flag or something.

It's mostly that left communists, or ultras rather as they are today, pull no punches whatsoever in disscourse with the left. In fact, they completely embody the perogative of Marxism: ruthless critique against all that exists, and this means first and foremost the left, which much more importantly mustn't fail through naivety, utopianism or reformism.

As Engels said in his 1882 letters to Bebel:

The backlash is not so much a backlash against general left communist ideas (communization, organic centralism, council communism) but actually against this act of ruthless, ambivalent critique.

Perfect example: in 2014 and 2015 a noted communization left communsit wrote a few pieces critiquing the situation in Syria with the Kurds and their supposed revolution (libcom.org/news/kurdistan-gilles-dauvé-17022015). What was the left's reaction to a literal piece of text dropping some inconvenient commentary? To paint Dauvé as a reactionary; a "frustrated old Marxist" or even a Marxist jealous of the supposed successes of the Kurds (gotta kek here, excuse me).

The worst offender here was probably the pop-pomo commentary from Roar: roarmag.org/essays/zapatistas-rojava-anarchist-revolution/.

Petar Stanchev wrote:
colonial mentality
Right, that's us told and we should hang our heads in fucking shame.

But to be honest, it all feels a bit back to the early 80s and the pathetic left attitude towards contemporary events then, this. Back then, "revolutionary" Iranian refugees were convincing the left how it should support the Mujahadin Khalk and the New Left never stopped telling us to back the Sandinistas and the FMLN. Both accused crtitics and every other anarchist and communist they met of siding with colonialism, both were talking bollocks, as is that bellend, Petar Stanchev.

Here're some particularly stupid bits so others don't have to waste their time reading it:
Pop-postmodernism and anti-univeralism (muh specific conditional truth in X geographical location): check.

Such a threat to the status quo that the USAF is fighting alongside them.

Is that the overthrow of Assad's regime that they are basically allied with?

If they had large reserves of petrol they wouldn't need oil refineries. Technically as well as politically ignorant.

What's the classical Western sense of proletariat then? Miners and factory workers? Only idiot savant academics think that's what the proletariat is. More pomo strawmanning.>>1383625

I'm not sure why but I'm also seeing that trend.

Just the other day there was a leftcom flag trashing Bookchin outright, when the general leftcom consensus is that Bookchin, while definitely worthy of critique, is a tremendous step forward from anarchism and his critique of the left is worthwhile. Just one example of poor or newfag-tier left communist attitudes that do not at all coincide with the left communist tradition.

Of course, Bookchinposting is forced as shit, but that's separate of all things Bookchin himself and his ideas (i.e. libmun, demconf) themselves and their merit.

Why the fuck are they called Leftcoms, anyway? Aren't commies inherently leftist?

I've literally never seen an ultra say something positive about Bookchin. The general consesus is that libertarian municipalism is basically Fourierism or Owenism under a different name.

It's an antiquated term. They were the left-wing of the third internationale. Most prefer to call themselves ultras these days.

Left communism started as a faction of communists in the Russian Comintern after the Russian revolution. These left communists were various tendencies; council communists, Leninists not in agreement with the way things were going with the supposedly Leninist CCCP after Lenin, Marxist syndicalists, anarchists and general anti-Stalinist ("Marxist-Leninist") communists. They called themselves the left of communism in contrast to this constructed view of the "right" of communism being compromisers or opportunists leading the revolution towards a poor new paradigm that was in fact not proper praxis for the communist movement.

Today, there isn't really such a left communism, because there is no right of communism to contrast itself to. Rather, we can speak of an ultra left, which opposes itself to what it deems a generally inept and not self-critical enough left, either too utopian, reformist, or generally too blind to its shortcomings. This ultra left is still principally Marxist, and generally either some form of Leninist, communization theory or council communist (although council communism is entirely dead as it was recognized not to be properly functional on itself; what there is now is a sort of synthesis with council communist ideas and a general neo-Leninism).

It's not that leftcoms are anti-union, we just don't think they're a revolutionary institution. What remains of the Bordigist current in Italy supports union action and helps organize strikes.

What is wrong with Councilism?

For the period it was okay I suppose, but modern ultras have moved passed it

I like leftcoms

And what replaced it?

The fact that so many posters here on Holla Forums are against Bordigist Left-Coms only shows you how this board is full of brainlets.

You're implying leftcoms here actually read theory. I've seen leftcoms that didn't even read Marx judging from what they said.

Recently with Leftcoms I've been getting a similar sort of vibe I did from Trots. "I'd do what Lenin did but better and gooder and everyone would like it" instead of Stalin.

There's a small group of really intelligent LeftComs who attracted a whole bunch of posers following the Reddit exodus. It's also a good shitposting flag for when you want to ridicule other people's activities.

It fails to account for the material conditions we are in now. This is to say that the persisting prevailance of capitalism has birthed in new conditions and problems which immediate decentralized organization simply cannot account for effectively; things so wedded to our human horizon that one either becomes a primitivist and puts their head in the sand or embraces the importance and need of a popular discipline around them coming from a tightly disciplined communistic organ.

Not to scream "no true ultra!!!11" but being a left communist without being a consistent Marxist is literally impossible because that's the basic prerequisite for being a left communist. You can't lifestyle left communism; the whole point is to BTFO utopianism with said consistent Marxism as a left communist.

You can RP being a leftcom just fine, just like people can RP being anything else. It's really just a matter of using the relevant memes without ever reading anything.

Bookchin shilling makes me miss Bordigaposting tbh

I guess you can regurgitate basic Marxist takedowns of utopianism, as is often done here with Marxist theory breaking down why markets are inseparable of the law of value, and in this way be an effective budget ultra, but this only works if the basics are properly and tactically regurgitated (surprisingly this happens a lot, even though it generally does completely destroy marksuccs).

Don't worry fam I am always happy to shill some Bordiga even though I have never read it and I'm actually a filthy narcho should probably get around to reading it though, would give me some epic ammo to BTFO tankies

Didn't Bordiga literally say that we needed to be "the Lenin whom Lenin could not be" or something along those lines?

We're the Zerg, basically.