>there are people on this board RIGHT NOW who shill 24/7 for Pisspig/Chapo/Rojava

watch them swarm this thread

Other urls found in this thread:


Don't be gay

Seems like you attracted the mods.


I'm telling you man, this ain't a joke.(YOUR MOM IS A JOKE)


phil and leftcoms are insane, but this is an allowable kind of shitposting imo

just as long as OP doesn't spam too much

Fair enough, thank you for unlocking this thread.

Damn, I got owned.

(Different leftcom:) Nice.

TFW the only reason he got temp banned so fast is because critique of Rojava and its clique is incredibly triggering for the few utopians we have.

Little cucc boi leftcom being obedient

thank you

Anyone who says this anymore

Automatic ban


How can YPG be US pet militants if they're getting shelled by Turkey on the reg? Also isn't the common wisdom that the Americans are going to sell out the Kurds for Erdogan?

Don't tell Phil to think, he gets paid by the hour

I don't think Phil is a shill tbh

He's committed, I'll give him that.

We need Phil and Red Kahina to release their tax returns to be sure.

Can we just crowd fund Phil Greave's and Red Kahina's assassination please

Sorry I don't conform to your [current year] sensibilities and adherence to the increidibly valuable developments in image board etiquette.

You've posted that ebin meme twice already, friend: . Low energy. Sad!

I hate that I share the critical side towards the Kurds with tankie idiots like him. All they're motivated by is ideological purity and a drop in movemental popularity through the fact that Ocalan abandoned their utopianism (ML) for another (libertarian municipalism).

Because even Erdocuck can come to terms with the Kurdish nationalist movement as long as its being built in someone else's country (read: Syria, Iraq, Iran). Besides Erdogan=/=America, and its likely the US will play both sides to keep their interests in the region in check.

Hmmm kinda like how the US """"abandoned the Kurds"""" in Iraq by giving them a region that was practically autonomous after the Iraq invasion and arming them up. Or when they """abandoned the Kurds""" by creating a no-fly zone in Iraqi Kurdistan under Clinton effectively violating Iraq's sovereignty in the process and laying the ground work for the 2003 invasion.

The US will continue to support the Kurds in order to split any resistance coming from the Arab nation-states against US-Israeli-Gulf monarchy hegemony in the region.

Just cause you can see the heartbreak coming down the bend for the Kurds doesn't mean that their seeing it. Ocalan is a deluded idiot who believe the US won the Cold War because it was "freedom and development" and even called himself "more of a Turk then the Turks" when he was trying to strike a deal with Turkey.

I believe we can crowd fund the assassination of red kahina, phil greaves, and even you.

Do not talk shit where it is not needed. You will suffer for it.

I think he probably unwittingly gets info out from the feds.


But like, if you seriously believe this stuff I don't care if you get banned. Might ban you myself if I get annoyed. To be safe, you should put something like "imafag" in the name field so nobody will take you seriously.

Isn't Red Kahina/Molly a heiress millionaire or something? Do you pay tax on inheritance?

someone pls screencap this and send it to phil

Sorry for daring to question Supreme Leader not being a believer in the libertarian revolution of Rojava, comrade!

It honestly beats me if I get banned; it would only confirm just how fragile the beliefs of the New Left are today with a nice little update on the recent development of Kurd asskissing. Just a trend away from the idealization of Palestinians as revolutionary subject, which is interesting but not very fresh tbqh.

Hm I actually appreciate this analysis, thanks for posting comrade.

The leftcom flag already takes care of that.


There's plenty to be critical of, but some leftcoms and people like Phil Greaves are parroting genuine Turkish propaganda. Yeah, Turkish shilling triggers me. It's some of the most insane and obnoxious disinfo out there, easily as bad as hardcore settler movement or climate denial stuff.

From a Leftcom??

Who just freed Kobane? Left communism?

Fuck off you faggot I hope you get banned again

Don't confuse us; Greaves is a clear Stalinoid part of the e-ML clique of Molly Klein and others.

doubt.jpeg; the biggest and most notorious critiques of the dubbed Rojava revolution are Dauvé's handful and leftcom.org's one, do not form their critique in the realm of allegations and suspicions. They critique Rojava on a purely theoretical-rhetorical level; weighing the supposed principles of the theories and concepts the Kurds draw from, where they are either utopian or reformist, and where these things actually come to fruition in practice.

Again, you'll be hard-pressed to find an ultra shilling for Turkey, or any nation at all. Personally, being a Croat, you can be I have an innate hatred for the Turkish state in particular.

To emphasize: leftcoms are communists, i.e. internationalists: they've never seen concepts of national liberation or localized statecraft to be particularly adequate avenues for proper resistance to capital and a base of overthrow for capitalism whatsoever, but especially since the merging of Dutch-German and Italian communist movements and communization theory, it has been completely thrown away once it became very clear in discourse analysis that national liberation can only be an avenue towards regression in our now tacitly global capitalist paradigm (the same goes for trade unions, although they can still be instrumental).

I will.

I doubt your opinion on this matters.

There's a laugh

If anyone is interested:



Careful there, buddy.

>for internationalism
>against national liberation
really makes u think


Who just freed Kobane from ISIS?


No they didn't. Step aside shut up or die



>be left communism ultra, it's [current year]!

>critique? go to gulag, tovarisch let a hundred flowers bloom! die, you fashist!!!!!11! he is probably turk as well!

Zizek does next to shit for the world just like you.

Would not cry a day in hell if you two weren't shot dead blindfolded in the desert/

[cries in Italian]

You're not killing anyone, I think you agree.

You think the West keeps you safe? The internet isn't your friend. Use it wisely.

lol @ actually believing this

No, because I don't idealize violence as an unconditionally revolutionary or anti-capitalist principle; it needs proper use and impetus. Brutally murder (GONE SEXUAL) some more trashcans now, why don't you?

I've told you before; I'm a Croat. 30 years ago I couldn't even get into the fabled liberal west, and today I could only do it if I were enticed enough with a life of slightly higher wages at the cost of losing my current poverty, including my very important armchair, collection of second hand literature and alt-tankie era remains of Yugoslav architecture.

Bordigapost thread? Bordigapost thread.

I'm not asking questions.

I'm threatening you.

why are so many people on this board constantly threatening to kill each other

Aiya! Acqua in bocca, pazzo assoluto!

The poverty of activism rules on the left, and to LARP is to tango.

your critique is self defeating and any positive program you ascribe to has already been tried. fuck off.

he also said this

I still believe he is correct in both statements. We should not focused on localized, isolated actions, virtue signaling, and life stylist, but national and international arguments, movements and strategies.

Because the actual left is fighting ISIS and it wouldn't be uncommon to find a skull in the desert in the night ala the future in fucking Terminator

But leftists like

Think the West can keep them safe. It won't. It doesn't. With the internet, it can't.

ISIS dies in the desert, so does our enemies

Where? First post ITT with content, so put in some effort pretty please.

I don't ascribe to any program because I'm consciously aware that the critical side is undermanned and thus incapable of actually giving us something worth trying.

In his commentary, you're confusing properly guided divine violences with struggles in the realm of the particular. This is why Zizek actually bothers to talk about the Maoists in China and why they're important despite getting maybe one piece of coverage for every one thousand pieces on the super progressive(tm) female Peshmerga units.

On Obama: it takes nothing to back a liberal democrat and see them do some good in spite of the "kind slave" wave they inevitably are performed to ride; a simple vote, some vocal support, et cetera; it follows the line of intentional alienation from the processes of society being a thing we all somewhat desire, but that we on the same side invariably want the harsh part to not be there along with this soft side: to have this auxiliary process be fully functional and operative as well as being outside of our influence and participation.

These levels of LARPing are definitely disconcerting, comrade. You've got me now, you madman!


What did he mean by this?


reply to all shills with "stop posting NuJohn"

Right fuck off my hard drive failed one time and I couldn't come up with a better name

r u ok buddy? :-//

people in the party in rojava practice production for use at least, and the organization is very egalitarian and is actually similar to how libertarian socialism could function revolution won't happen all at once magically, may there need to be some successful experiments before people start believing an alternative to capitalism is even possible

maybe there needs*

Humiliated I fucked up that bad dragging a file into the slot tbh

the party is leftist as fuck dude,they're all commies and hate capitalism, want production for use and egalitarian distribution

what's the one thing i should read by bordiga

Poor Švabo NuJohn; either an imaginary meme our LARPing friend decided to torment instead of me, or truly a tormented innocent. I will tell Kleiman of this tragedy.

Thing = left wing doesn't mean thing = good. Vulgar example of things social democrats being left wing and not being worthy of anyone except classcucked liberals, otherwise "democratic socialism" is alos discardable as utopian reformist-possibilist bullshit (on top of being a socdem rebrand), or Owenism and other utopian shit.

Nah, they're "libertarian socialist", which is a term that emanated in reaction to the failure of 20th century ML, and this failure being rightfully perceived, but the reaction being high quantities of unconsciously reformist ideas and concepts. LibSoc has some good ideas, but it's explicitly a step away from the communist movement.

Is also deceptive because while the latter is in principle true (but yet to be applied outside of Potemkins) for the Kurds, their insistence on municipal-level markets of cooperatives is an invariably non-use value primal productive relation.

libcom.org/library/fundamentals-revolutionary-communism-amadeo-bordiga if you want the general idea of his theory and practice in his time, marxists.org/archive/bordiga/works/1922/democratic-principle.htm if you want his general critique of democracy (although I would always say Badiou's critique is much more refined and recent so read that too if you want an interesting take: lacan.com/jambadiou.htm).

once again, fuck off.

kek, you really have no idea, do you? no one around here seems capable of getting off their ass and doing anything but be critical and make theory. theory that somehow seems to be capable of critiquing everything but marx because of muh revisionism.

There's a reason Zizek called himself an /ironic/ leninist. You're doing exactly what he opposes! Refusing to get your hands dirty and fight for something our of the purity of your "beautiful soul"

That quote was from 2009, dumbass. And I don't give a fuck about iraqi pershmerga, Barzani is almost as reactionary as erdogen. But I'd take what Rojava is doing anyday over fucking Xi Jinping putting more marx in college curriculum.

I never claimed otherwise. What I did say was that we must get involved in these arguments and debates to challenge and provide an alternative to pro-capitalist ideology.

Here is zizek expanding on that same point on Obamacare elsewhere. We should be demanding very specific things which highlight the contradictions of capitalism and expose their ideology.

I was expecting to see autism, and I was not disappointed.

Kill yourself, hotpockets. Do it.

So while everyone is busy throwing insults at the leftcom poster could anyone tell me what exactly this whole "Rojava revolution" is without telling me to read some guy who's idea of making socialism relevant was forming eco-communes or some shit like that.

You're confusing illiterate shitposting and comedic "discussion" of current events on an image board to be proper engagement in the realm of praxis. If that's how you view things; how you view a proper and sufficient take on critique (yes: critique, not necessarily or explicitly not self-critique), then you may be beyond discussing this on.

He never did. He called himself an ironic Stalinist; in a setting explicitly not in that of a lecture or talk, but in a comedic interview at his apartment in Ljubljana.

You're doing exactly what he opposes: engaging in localized acts whose ultimate function is to make the system run smoother, and failing to understand what Zizek means when he says action through divine violence (consult Virtue and Terror for this). If the ability to grasp power was there, by all means I would take it; the question is what happens the morning after? We have only failure to consult in the 20th century and utopian or reformist sources to tap from the 21st; we must entirely assume that our only conscious way forward in power would be to simply be the most effective reformists ever; reformists whom as you said:
perform this function. Notice how this is different from movements whose followers purport themselves to be revolutionary but appear so fragile when you suggest they're not even functionally capable of following their own beginnings and principles? When you see them doing little more than national liberation and ask them what's going on, the only thing they can provide is a purely interpellated response; of "well why aren't you eating shit with me, huh? Fucking armchair critics!"; replies so inundated in their notions of good intentions defacto equals good praxis that they unironically start e-LARPing you like it's May '68 in a feminist vs. police escalation?

Except Zizek supports Rojava you retard, he even wants to travel there to lecture

I know: kurdishquestion.com/oldarticle.php?aid=slavoj-zizek-kurds-are-the-most-progressive-democratic-nation-in-the-middle-east.

And guess what: I do too, simply on the basis that the Kurds are well-intentioned and a breath of fresh air away from the more vanilla national liberatory efforts in the middle east. And it is precisely in this support that I critique them, or at least their supporters whom I can actually reach (though other ultras have managed to critique them and receive a reply, n.b. Dauvé and his pieces have been responded to); because I want success, not failure, and recognize anyone's muh privileged position as critic as one they must not be afraid to utilize to the betterment or improved success of things.

This is why Leftcoms are the most consistent Marxist, they recognize Marx's project as one of critique.

The sheer irony of a leftcom saying this is killing me.

>Marx and [I have] fought harder all our lives against the alleged Socialists than against anyone else. (Engels to Leipzig, 1882: marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1882/letters/82_10_28.htm)
>It is all the more clear what we have to accomplish at present: I am referring to ruthless criticism of all that exists, ruthless both in the sense of not being afraid of the results it arrives at and in the sense of being just as little afraid of conflict with the powers that be. (Marx to Ruge, 1843: marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1843/letters/43_09.htm)

Don't get where the OP was getting at either; left of communism has nothing to show in practice, but it has then principally always been about opposition to the "right" of communism (Bolshevism, Stalinism) before anything in a hard attempt to steer things in the right direction. These are purely theoretical and critical contributions, although if we are to follow Marx himself in the second of , left communism is perhaps the biggest contributor in this sense (of course we shouldn't forget the communist left in Italy, The Netherlands and Germany organized gigantic nation-wide wildcat strikes, had parties with members in the ten million members, were very influential in politics, et cetera, but never had an active revolution outside of the early Marxist KPD and German revolution, which can only spiritually be conceived to be a proto-left communism; Luxemburg being critical of Lenin while being Marxist communist).


Oh yes, I'm totally seeing all that leftcom self critique through their baffling inability to critique themselves or marx.

ctrl+f "lenin"

And what, pray tell, are these localized acts I am engaged in?

I am perfectly aware of divine violence and his admiration for the jacobins. this doesn't change the fact that there is more than one effective tactic and strategy to advance leftism today.

the morning after we establish proletariat democracy. A framework which makes even the resistance to the transitional state a movement towards communism.

Oh yes, because the 'scientific' socialists had nothing to do with anything that happened during the 21st century!

Which is why I don't support so called "revolutionary movements" in the west. Rojava, however, seems quite capable.

the kurds aren't even demanding independence, they are demanding equality.


The entire left failed. What achievement do we have to hold up? At least tankies have technological milestones to look up to. But I'm curious, why is it you think the "Orthodox Marxist" failed.

The reformists have their reforms, the tankies, their industry. The orhodox marxists have neither human emancipation nor communism.

Proving that when faced with possible economic freedom and autocratic regressive reactionary slavery people will choose a chance for freedom when presented to them. Twice, in two very authoritarian societies this choice was made and it will be made again some day soon. Obviously the USSR and PRC were/are trainwrecks and were essentially Totalitarian State Capitalist dystopias, but the symbolic power of their existence in direct contrast with the West is still important historically.

When the Syrian civil war kicked up, Assad's regime sorta left the area of northern Syria (ie. Rojava, aka Western Kurdistan). The PYD (civilian wing) and YPG (militant wing) now control things there, with some direct democracy, socialist economics, etc. They also fight ISIS. It's definitely not perfect, but their conditions are not good. Leftists should definitely support them.

Put some respect on my man Bookchin's name

See, this is a much more reasonable, nuanced position that I agree with as well. Self-criticism is useful for improvement (the party in Rojava have self-criticism sessions), but then why was your OP so edgy? Bait? To make people hate leftcoms even more?

There is no such thing today. When you speak of orthodox Marxism you speak of Marxism as it was in its orthodox infancy: the International Workingmen and young Marx periods, and so on. Marxism is ever-evolving, and while it can vary in tendency (today this mostly be Leninism, post-Maoism and the New Left Marxist wing), it can never regress to prior, pre-developed stages, because its whole principle is that of imanence and discursive discoveries. The ultra left stance today simply uses this ever-ambivalent pillar of Marxism: critique, and this critique in itself has changed through the ages, both in form and in what it targets.

And what is the benefit of either of these? How have they curbed Capitalism in the long term? Why we we get into a dig waving concept about who's failed State or party is the best?

Marxist-Leninist are not "Orthodox Marxist". Orthodox Marxist have never been in charge of a State. Orthodox Marxism refers to the strain of Marxism that arose in the wake of Engels death. Leftcoms aren't Orthodox Marxist either, which is why I used quotation marks.

Actually leftcom is right. His definition in better than mine.

kill yourself

Nice cherrypicking my post. I asked right after that: what have they done to curb Capitalism in the long run. Why don't you answer that? If you're interested in mere concessions then godspeed, maybe you'll get shitty single payer healthcare in the United States in a few decades. Maybe you can join the conservatives to fight for UBI!

there is literally nothing wrong with being a Left-Com

Is "everything failed, especially the communist left in steering things the right way or being properly articulate" not enough for you? Strongly suspecting you're that one marksuccs who fails to realize when it's time to stop in discussion and then inevitably falls into the trap of babbling for its own sake.

>In this ironic sense, I am a Leninist.
Similar to how he says, "but here, paradoxically I am anarchist" in European Angst or "in this case I am more of an ironic Stalinist"; it's a function of parallel or particular cases. Zizek is an otherwise full-blown Leninist, writing and releasing a book on the Leninist stance for today later this year called "Lenin 2017", and he always incorporates Leninist discourse into everything (he released a piece just now if anyone is interested: thephilosophicalsalon.com/la-la-land-a-leninist-reading/).

Figure of speech, my dude. Also, if anything you're even less relevant than I am, because you're both not LARPing in full support of your favorite local national liberation in this very moment, are not engaging in the critique of political economy by princple nor are you on the actual ground fighting ISIL and the the reactionary rebels of the civil war!

Which as I said, assuming you are rereferring to your prior Zizekian stance on unraveling reform, I am in support of.

"Advancing" leftism is a hollow husk of a principle. We want to advance our material conditions; develop a field of theory within the left capable of leaving the rest in the dust. "Advancing" the content of this doomed left is of no value; the point is to categorically find what works and what does not and to what end, not salvage things on principle of sharing a half of the political spectrum with them.

Sick empty platitude, but now give it form. Explain how your DotP displays itself; where you draw support and resources from, how you envision the lower phase of communism, how productive relations are to be organized, et cetera. The closest we've ever been to a genuine communist society was direcltly post-'17, when the Soviets assumed majority control of the economic field and we had a genuine use-value centric society. And yet this failed to be explosively productive enough not to adopt NEP and be able to deal with geopolitics, the nascent development of capitalism, reactionary royal loyalists in the Whites, and the fascistic developments that first started in Italy but were known to arrive in Germany sooner or later.

Not really, no. The New Left explicitly abandoned Marxism in favor of "socialism with a human face", reformism without conscience of it and no spine.

It remains to be seen, although I am not impressed whatsoever until now.


Pathetic. You're not even trying at this point.

You can find right wingers who support UBI because they (rightly) view it as a way for Capitalism hold itself together. Prove me wrong.
Pro-tip: you cant''.

He's right: youtube.com/watch?v=e6HPdNBicM8 (note the necessary).

Also investigate the welfare state from a historical perspective, for which Michael Heinrich is very enligthening in this excerpt: youtube.com/watch?v=0cEzK5Mz0OA.

Going to sleep now; almost 6 AM here and I'm very intoxicated. Check back later nerds.

Ok, that makes sense. They already support state intervention to save them from their inevitable crises.

However, you're not gonna find any Republican (or Democrat) advocate for UBI, so that's where I was coming from. Political figures, not just neoliberal businessmen.

lel no. It's confederal and communalist. There's the "democratic nation" but this not something that is defined by territorial boundaries. It's not a nation-state. Nation in this way means a shared mindset, ideology, or culture. The way of achieving liberation is not through the construction of a nation state, but through a program of democratic confederalism i.e. libertarian municipalism.

No, but right wing pundits all of all stripes have come in support of it. My point is that "ur strain of leftism din do anythin!" isn't an argument because most of what the left has done is useless or worse.

At least Rojava is doing something

it is when you disassociate yourself from that same left. in which case, its not self critique, but just critique. not to mention, that still lives marx up on a pedestal, free from any responsibility.

the point remains that Zizek here invokes leninism as a call for action, not inaction.

for one, just because I critique you and your ilk doesn't mean I don't critique capitalism its principles. Two, I wouldn't be of much help as a warrior to begin with. I do what I can from where I am, that is, working with groups like the DSA and Democracy at Work to demand the reforms that highlight such contradictions of capitalism, particular the contradictions of freedom and democracy with capitalism. I believe the internet also serves as a massive battlefield of propaganda, particularly one being won by reactionaries, so I do what I can to promote leftism without identity politics. I myself, stay in the background, but I'd be willing to bet I've done things that have influenced the way even you communicate online, and I don't mean through (you)'s.

you mean the stance of supporting reform?

Which is in direct contradiction with staying on your ass in your armchair.

Everything worth saying has already been said.

It is when we get to define and shape the left.

Yes, because the leftcoms have supplied us so much more.

The DotP displays itself through a political democracy without legal monetary influence, without the participation of capitalists, as well as through workplace democracy and greater political control over the distribution of the means of production. You draw support from workers who will find themselves in generally better working conditions and welfare. I envision the lower phase as one where ownership in all major industries, save those completely nationalized, is split between the state, the people and the workers, and markets are permitted within a framework where the competition they create eventually leads to full automation and production for use only. These are all just rough ideas of course, but they are ideas.

I had meant to type 20th century. Regardless, scientific socialist 'theory' such as pic related hardly helped. See that, that's lenin

Literally never seen that. Could you cite some examples?



Milton Friedman.

Not really. What do you mean, what would you like him to do? He identifies as a leftcom and critiques left communism. You're really grasping as straws here. What would be good enough for you?

That isn't really what leftcoms do.

How so? Are you going to ignore all the critiques of Lenin that were written prior to his death by communist like Luxemburg?

I havn't read Bordiga or Pancakeman but what leftcom lit I've read I liked. I feel obliged to defend leftcom poster against strawman.

No he doesn't. Show me where he's critiqued left communism.

No, in fact I completely agree with Rosa on many of her critiques. There's certainly things we can learn from scientific socialist theorists. But it's not "the answer" and treating Marx and Lenin as holy cows on the grounds of muh revisionism is not helping. I'm sure you and our leftcom friend over here will deny that charge, but there's a very wide gulf between what's said on this topic and what's done.

I read Bordiga's on the Democratic Principle recently, not very impressive. pic related. if we are to forsake democracy as a principle, I see little reason to replace it with centralism.



hey there white supremacist