Comrades, we need to address the naming problem, this is fucking ridiculous. The anarchists appear better than us since they don't call themselves Proudhonist-Kropotkinist at least. Can we come up with alternative, saner najes for tendencies?

Council communism (councilism?)
Class collaboration
Stalinism or authoritarian social democracy with taylorist characteristics as that one leftcom likes to say
Class collaboration with hide-in-jungle characteristics

Yeah, just get rid of references to people. Social Democracy, State Socialism, Third Worldism, Libertarian Municipalism…


*Democratic Socialism

those names are fine

If you want to go with Marx, you should just call it "Scientific Socialism" with different tendencies, so…

Says the literal marksuc

you found us out
Proudhon, the ultimate class collaborator

There's a reason mutualists are called crypto-ancaps m8

Cult of personalities seem to be a must with marxists

I've come across some Mutualists who call themselves 'Proudhonians'. I've never seen an anarchist communist or an anarchist collectivist call themselves a Kropotkinist, Malatestite, or Bakuninist.

But, in answer to OP. Marx and Engels called their theory 'scientific socialism', Luxemburgists would just be left communists or councilists, De Leonists could be syndicalist socialists and Leninists and Marxist-Leninists could be vanguardists or democratic centralists.

we don't need any of these tbh..

Are you actually rejecting the immortal science of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism-Titoism-Luxemburgism-De Leonism-Kropotkinism-Hoxaism-Posadism-Bordigism-Proudhnism-Stirnerism-Zezikism with Chinese Characteristics, comrade?


Isn't council communism different than rosa, because rosa still supports a certain amount of vanguard control?

Well luxemburgism doesn't really exist

Scientific socialism is more-so a historical descriptor denoting the adoption of materialism; it doesn't really speak to any other major ideological principles beyond that and would be rather useless on its own today considering utopianism hasn't been a prevalent/relevant movement for a long time now.
Also Third Worldism likewise describes a tendency within Maoist thought rather than the ideology at large. That's equivalent to re-branding Trots as Permanent Socialist Revolutionaries: accurate, but puts needless focus on a single characteristic of the school of thought.

From my understanding, Rosa supported the revolutionary party as a platform for organization, but rejected the proposal that it have a position of systemic authority over the workers councils; a party without the vanguard if you will.

I'm a communist. nothing more needs to be said. Those who identify with one tendency or another tend to get cultish as they dive deep into one thinker or organization for all the answers, which they won't have. Whatever theory and praxis that seems to work at advancing the communist movement is what is to be pursued

This. I just call myself a generic communist. Follow the path the people want to take to get to communism and we will have communism.

Pretty much the most reasonable i think, i call myself a communist on the internet but socialist IRL

What's with lefties and their schizophrenic plethora of versions of communism?
How the hell are you going to unite if every special snowflake has his own ideology?

I feel like giving every leftist a lobotomy to the area of the brain responsible for these kinds of labels and identities.

This. It's the main problem of all left-wing movement. We're really decentralized. In my opinion there are only 2 groups: communists and opportunists (i.e. anarchists, social-democrats, other versions of communism). But don't forget everyone has their own opinion on communist theory.