So what the fuck is the deal with MLs?

And I don't mean 'authoritarian socialists' in general, the 'we need to supress counter-revolutionaries, long live lenin' kind. I hate this dichotomy of 'if you're not ML you must be a pacifist'.
I also don't mean the kind of tankies you see here, the 'stalin did nothing wrong, kulaks deserved worse, fucking revisionists'.
I don't mean people who like Marx and Lenin.

What I mean are people who have succeeded in completely neutralizing themselves, without any need for COINTELPRO or alphabet soup fuckery. The 'we must support X against western imperialism', 'long live the DPRK' and 'china is still socialist' crowd. These people aren't even useful idiots, they're useless idiots. Their parties are cults and completely out of touch with modern day material conditions and the working class. Nobody wants to hear you defend North Korea.

I don't know.

t. smashie

If you have a better idea of what should be done go ahead, don't just be an embarrassing crybaby

Ironically, this is the average tankie response to criticism. Whenever somebody criticises something in their ideology they revert to "but our ideology achieved stuff and yours didn't", which, besides being a falsehood, doesn't disprove the criticism at all.

I think they are mostly self identify as socialist because they like the USSR. They dont see it as a attempt to learn from, its the very basis of their identity as socialists.

MLs try to repeat what Lenin did, while Leninists focus on what Lenin wrote and excuse what he actually did.

Go back to wanking in your ten man party.

Yeah, I think so too. It is like their reason for being socialists is related more to the aesthetics of the Soviet Union rather than the final goal of communism.

Tankies are tankie because they are fed up with the state of the world and the capitalist powers.
To counteract this, they seek to idolize the USSR and leaders like Stalin who wanted to change the status quo of the world.
While doing this, they see themselves as being 'rebels' and feel proud of the fact that they have non-mainstream views.
They see criticisms of the USSR and Stalin as attacks on communism as a whole and as submission to capitalism and its propaganda.

Prioritization of 'pride' and anti-imperialism are more important to them than worker's ownership of the means of production.

t. former tankie
Google Bookchin

I would suggest not being complete spergs who often end up behaving themselves worse than autistic smashfags. From supporting opportunists to outright fascists because of imperialism, MLs sometimes show where their true passion lies, in getting back at the US. Wanting policies as well that are completely unnecesary when it comes to socialism, which of course end up alienating the proletarian mass. An example of this are the kind of autists who screech at the thought of religion of communism. Rather than let these things run their course and take action only when these groups would end up supporting reactionaries, some want to outright prohibit religion.

MLs on the internet, and probably in real life, behave themselves like fucking cults.

fam just admit you got too emotionally invested in 20th century socialism and you're doing massive mental gymnastics to defend shitholes like north korea or china

Well there you have it OP, that's the answer to your question.

The fact that they equate communism with the Soviet Union falls perfectly into anti-communist propaganda. Porky wants people to see that as the only form of communism, so that the proles will think that the only alternative to being exploited by the bourge is to be exploited by the party elite.
It is a sort of orwellian nightmare where the definition of the word to express the only alternative to capitalism is changed to represent capitalism as well. So the workers lose the vocabulary to express dissent.

I made this

Nice. I will put this meme to good use.

what is socialism though?

And M-L is the easiest ideology to "master". The only thing you have to do is worship historical figures and states and dismiss everything as "revisionist" or "bourgeois propaganda". It's also the first far-left ideology someone usually discovers due to the Cold War and nostalgia in general.

Do MLs actually want to recreate the bolshevik state structure and economy though? Like do they look at Russia in 1917 and think "hmm lets try exactly that again, but in modern capitalism"?

I was merely asking what his plan of action was because all wrote was tankies lmao

I'm going to ignore that part. If you are too ignorant to see what merit lies in having an anti-imperialist edge (as opposed to supporting US proxys like you average Bookchin dumbass), you're beyond saving anyway and don't know how geopolitics work. Socialism can't be achieved in your hippie commune.

Yeah, diversification of economy, industrialization, mass education and complex central planning are totally unnecessary.

Unlike Anarkiddies with their "respect my 42 genders"?

You're ignorant about how religion worked in pre-revolutionary Russia if you complain about state enforced atheism. Again, stop with the bigotry, the CNT raped nuns in Catalonia

Unlike you who's just trying to gaslight people

For once I don't support China after Deng, secondly it seems like everything every practically applied is "mental gymnastics to you"

Since this thread is full of cancer and my time is limited I just answered the ones quoting me.

They usually claim to have learned their lessons without really specifying them beyond vague statements like "keep the bueraucracy in check", make sure that only "true communists" gain power, better planning ect.

Another thing is that they are often genuinly retarded like exhibits perfectly.


Funny because leftcoms are the greatest perpetuaters of capitalism these days, literally denouncing everything which isn't Stark Trek

Stop sperging your faggot. Give me your definition of fascism

Whereas tankies literally accept anything as socialism, as long as it has socialist aesthetics.


Unironically posting that meme means you have never read Marx

So you disagree that socialism is a system where the workers own the means of production?

ultra authoritarian right wing nationalism that fetischizes power and "might makes right" ethics.

Bunch of platitudes. You are illiterate and don't care about economics. Go back to your pussy grabs back march against le literal fascist Drumpf

Socialism isn't capitalism with cooperatives, that's for sure.

No, but it also isn't capitalism with the state owning everything.
The workers see no difference in being exploited by the bourge or being exploited by the state.

why do MLs always say stuff like this? i've probably read and understood Marx more than you.

Its core of their ideology to declare sole ideological and organisational leadership of the proletariat. Also explains their cultishness.

The state and the individual aren't a dichotomy in Marxism-Leninism. That's liberal ideology. In Marxism-Leninism, the state becomes all encompassing so that you can even draw the line between the state apparatus and the proletariat. Everybody is included in the political process and ressource allocation. When everybody is a bureaucrat nobody is. Marxist-Leninist never just nationalized everything, they fundamentally destryoed the old state and build something new.

Right, because you know what the average worker feels

Doesn't matter, you don't know what fascism is as you focus entirely on culture and ignore material conditions and economics

Read Jรผrgen Kuczynski and Monopolgruppentheorie

MLs, just face that the Soviet Union's policies weren't shaped by Marxism-Leninism, but Marxism-Leninism was shaped by the Soviet Union's policies. It served to justify the party's power and actions and nothing else.

All you're doing is ruining Marx and Lenin.

Ah, I see. This is a special state where you, the exploited and dominated class, can feel like you are an equal to the rulling class, because of ideology. Either that or you have a system where workers assemblies elect recallable delegates in a democratic way. But if you had that you would not be an ML.

Yeah, and you know it too, even though you try to deny it to yourself.

user, don't you know that the commissar has your best interests at heart? You have the same class interests after all :^)


that 2nd image gives socdems more credit than they deserve

No surprise here.

The difference between a Leninist and an anarchist is 6 months

I couldn't imagine a cooperative system that still had usury, stocks etc. tbh

Marxism-Leninism and Stalinism aren't COMPLETELY synonymous, for example Trotskyism is technically Marxism-Leninism. And Stalinism is certainly a step up from social democracy. You have a voice in your workplace, however small, and aren't required to work more than you need to.

So do you have an actual argument, orโ€ฆ

all your responses so far have been just trying to belittle me and claim i dont know what im talking about. this is insane and i dont think we have much more to say to each other

this kind of vague "definition" is why left is plagued with all kinds of populist retards
even in coops decisions are made by consensus
collective formal decision overrides individual decisions
so can anyone really say that someone who voted against majority decision is really owns shit in the strict sense of the word? ownership implies full control of the use of property, doesn't it?
for you, it seems, the only problem was that plans were not formally ratified by referendums

This is literally a Holla Forums tier understanding of socialism.

I'm going to ignore that part. If you are too ignorant to see what merit lies in having an anti-imperialist edge (as opposed to supporting US proxys like you average Bookchin dumbass), you're beyond saving anyway and don't know how geopolitics work. Socialism can't be achieved in your hippie commune.

Well done, you ignored the example and instead strawmanned.

Learn to read

What did he mean by this?

Your concept of socialism is terrible, something you'd expect of a memer who has been on this board for a month. I would tell you to read Marx again, but you will say you already did, then go on spouting these idiotic memes.

Fucking read, socialism is not capitalism with cooperatives, this is a utopian socialist conception of what it is.

Those people are not real MLs whether they think themselves to be or not.

It's simply the logical conclusion of basing your ideology on 20th century socialism. You basically wouldn't want to admit that socialism doesn't exist anywhere.

Just another day on Holla Forums

Just another day of willfully retarded sectarians

That doesn't really follow tbh. There are plenty of ML groups that admit that socialism that socialism doesn't really exist anywhere now (this is the main line in the Hoxhaist and ๐Ÿ€๐Ÿ€๐Ÿ€Maoist๐Ÿ€๐Ÿ€๐Ÿ€ movements around the world) but that doesn't mean there's nothing worth emulating or learning from those who advanced 20th century socialism.

ML revolutions happened because ML theory translated into better praxis then its competitors. That's the truth. It inspired cheap imitations like Cuba, PRC, Vietnam etc. but there was a reason why anarchist/leftcom revolutions didn't succeed/happen.

The capitalist world doesn't want socialism in any form to be successful of course. But let's ask what kind of theories are out there that can help aid the revolution. Imo nothing will work that can achieve socialism unless it has a solid Marxist basis; no amount of autistic screeching about the failure of Marxism by pomo anarchists will change that.

Theoretically I suppose a leftcom revolution could work but most leftcoms reject the kind of praxis that could help bring a revolution about and some of them maintain it can only happen in the core capitalist countries (Trots maintain this to) which are the hardest to make revolution in.

Most people who are legit tanks just aren't very smart they can't distinguish between Khruschevism, Maoism and genuine leninism. Some people feel more strongly about being anti-Western imperialism then pro-revolution its understandable in our current time of counter-revolution with America being so horrible and all but to me it doesn't follow logically.

The graph in actually implies that

Too accurate