Lenin did nothing wrong

Deng did NOTHING wrong

...

How about 'no'? Anyone who bases their ideology on its proximity to the current year rather then a thoroughly reasoned analysis is a fool. Pancake and Danny Devito may have written their best stuff in the 30s and 40s but I actually respect that Leftcoms commit to it on the merit of its argument rather then it being the new le current year ideology to be thrown out as soon as something else new comes along.

I love how our resident bookchin fags like to post "just sayin'" style comments meant to look like their written by anons uncommitted to the ideology in order to create a consensus in their favor that doesn't exist.

...

Not but its fairly straight forward

Unions have been proven to be shit and we know that party politics isnt as straight forward as envisioned. We had 2 crisises that where heralded as the final capitalist crisis but both time capitalism reemerged. The ecological aspect of capitalism has been underestimated and must be taken into consideration. Antiimperialist struggles so widely loved mostly ended in capitalist states instead of actually undermining capitalism. Pacifying the workers has been easier than thought and nationalism is a stronger weapon in the hands of capitalists than socialists. ML transition states have been proven to fragile and not capable of internal change and reformation towards socialism.

Bookchin was completely right to make a difference between statecraft and politics and identifying politics as the realm where socialism actually happens.

I have yet to see a Leninist making a honest analysis why their states failed here.

is right though, thats why discussion with leftcoms and non retarded marxists has to be maintained and a way to be found that protects communalist projects from being mere reformists in the long run. Maybe a party that dedicates itself to statecraft,maybe better explorations of dual power. Communalism is a fairly young ideology and there is room to improve on and to develop non sectarian platform together with Marxists and Anarchists. Leninists though seem to be focused on imagining themselves to still be a dominant power in the relevant left.

I mean, at least Anarkiddies didn't actively fuck over their own goals.

kek, Bookchin is a staunch opponent of single issue based struggles and reasons at lengths why a coherent larger platform is necessary. While ML/MLM/DemSoc parties still try to build a wider movement solely through engaging in single issue struggles.

How about the fact that the industrial proletariat on which Marx placed his hopes is dying out in all Western nations? Far from becoming the universal class, it has almost disappeared and everyone is instead working petite-bourgeois service jobs or not working at all. This will only get worse with automation. Furthermore, every single revolutionary event we've seen has been driven mostly by the peasantry. The proletariat has proven to be extremely reformist and unwilling to rise up, not even after the capitalists murdered an entire generation in WW1 and then collapsed the world economy. It really looks like this mythical worker's revolution will not happen.

His criticism is valid; the solutions he came up with in the beginning stages of capitalism back in the 19th century should not be taken as gospel.

I'm not even a Bookchinite, it just pisses me off how this place seems incapable of realizing the left is literally fucking DEAD. Completely. There is no left. And yet we all sit here roleplaying and fighting over whom our favorite dead Russian is. It's fucking retarded.

As a Bookchinite, I agree and think this is a really important point. A huge point of Bookchin's ideas, is to try and recreate the left. To give birth to a new New Left, but one that recovers the coherence of the Old Left.

My problem with Bookchin is that his ideas seem extremely absurd. What, we're supposed to take over our municipal councils and use the tiny amount of power that gives you to somehow take over the world? Also seems to be seriously on the "make a state but don't call it one" side of things, except he makes up his own special snowflake definition of state to mask this.

This is literally the consensus opinion on Holla Forums you're just mad that the """LARPers""" wont tailor their politics to this accordingly. For good reason: its a defeatist approach and it doesn't go anywhere. Ironically, few people here believe, in the bottom of their hearts, that the Left can succeed but the Right sure as hell does.I mean Jodi Dean is basically right we should accept that there is a living Left even in countries like Burgerstan even if its not what we want it to be.

You think Trump's not worried about the Left? He and his team know that the opposition that doesn't come from the Neocons in the gov will come from the Left. That means the mass pressure that he really has to worry about.

The discussions about "dead Russians" are important because they still draw lines of demarcation today. We can't dismiss discussions along these lines as "roleplaying" even if it gets tendentious because we need the masses of people to become interested in the ideas of left-wing thinkers. People seem to forget too that making propaganda is a real part of the struggle, one of the reasons the Right is dominant is because they are quick in issuing counter-propaganda and their propaganda reaches a large number of people.

Sentiments about despair and the Left being dead are exactly what people in power want us to believe. It cements a cynical rightwing-liberal consensus.

Seriously, I need this.

What Bookchin suggests is that we should have a confederation of municipal governments, which are economically and politically interdependent, and put up this confederation as a dual-power against the nation-state.

Why Bookchin makes this distinction is because their take on government and social contract theory is basically Aristotelian. It's government which is structurally different than states as generally understood.

Shows how out of touch Bookchinites are even the most conservative neoliberal would be right there with you nodding his head when you start spouting off about destroying the nation-state. Globalism isn't just a meme lad, the people in power have been contemplating the fact that global problems can't be fixed with national or nationalist solutions for sometime. Their answer is to tear down the nation-state and its power of regulation as one of the last barriers to the complete domination of capital over human society.

Relocating, you mean.

What is wrong with you? It's not like your clothes and tech are made in US.

And quite a lot of industry remains in US.

Like October?

If you don't have Left in your Poughkeepsie or wherever you are from, it doesn't mean that there isn't any Left anywhere.

And I must say, the louder people are screaming that Left is dead the closer Revolution gets.

Nation-states don't exist. That is, they're imagined.

"In an anthropological spirit, then, I propose the following definition of the nation: it is an imagined political community - and imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign.

It is imagined because the members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their fellow-members, meet them, or even hear of them, yet in the minds of each lives the image of their communion… In fact, all communities larger than primordial villages of face-to-face contact (and perhaps even these) are imagined." - Benedict Anderson

However, in all revolutions the city has been to locus of struggle. We must recover the Enlightenment ideal of the citizen, as well as recover real politics.

Lenin ruined Marxism in the same way Paul ruined Christianity.

Its not necessary to take over the municipal councils, its nice but not the primary form of organising. You can run parallel structures just next to them to just fine. Local confederated organisation in comparison to national organisation.

Long term involvement and recruiting in communities instead of single issue event based organisation. Thats exactly the same strategy all locally strong remaining communist parties have in Europe. Its not magic at all. Just that communalists try to politicise the communities they operate in by involving them directly.

Communalism action against the nation state is only long tem. Engaging in useless "antiimperialist" solidarity struggles for capitalist nationstates and other futile confusions of statecraft and socialist organisation are left for Leninists and Maoists. Weak parties trying to involve themselves in unimportant geopolitics is retarded af.

I agree, the proletariat is not dead at all. but we still need to organise in the west where community issues(neglected local politics play a huge role in the rise of idpol) dominate. Or in not industrialized 3rd world where opposition to oppressive nationstates is the issue and different local identities are strong and need to be reconciled.

ohhhhhh snapppppppp boiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

okay this triggered me

Off-topic, but can someone post the atheism on the left/christianity right verison of the pic in OP

why do hardline MLs have such an obsession with accepting EVERYTHING marx and lenin ever wrote instead of properly analyzing it and looking at how things have changed? Saying 'not everything Marx said is relevant not' is not the same as 'throw Marx into the trash, don't even bother reading him anymore'

*is relevant now

I couldn't word it better. It ensures you have a framework that can replace the state post-revolution without having to build a new one.

Embrace your communalist overlords. Google Murray, Bookchin

is this opposite day or something?

...

You know he was the GOAT