Why are leftcomms and ultras such fucking traitors...

Why are leftcomms and ultras such fucking traitors? Just by the way they talk you can tell they aren't your friends or allies, they spew "arguments" which are very little from the same propaganda spewed by capitalist governments.

I don't fucking care if Lenin or Stalin made some bad decisions along the way, they were human beings like everyone else. The problem I have is how these morons use this to then condemn the USSR or Eastern Bloc states entirely as "state-capitalist" or other bullshit.

Lenin created the world's first socialist state (ignoring the commune because it was so brief), and Stalin essentially industrialized and modernized it to the point where it could compete with the imperialist powers. If you don't at least recognize and salute that achievement, and instead choose to childishly write-off the USSR then you're a fucking sectarian and your a tool of capitalism.

Other urls found in this thread:

m.youtube.com/watch?list=PL22a5iyzAVe-auVkLf9CVuQmYsmGmaFAJ&v=WsC0q3CO6lM
8ch.net/leftypol/res/2018404.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Why are Jacobins and revolutionaries such fucking traitors? Just by the way they talk you can tell they aren't your friends or allies, they spew "arguments" which are very little from the same propaganda spewed by monarchist governments.

I don't fucking care if Napoleon or Berthier made some bad decisions along the way, they were human beings like everyone else. The problem I have is how these morons use this to then condemn the empire or sub kingdoms entirely as "literally monarchist" or other bullshit.

Napoleon created the world's first non monarchy(ignoring any revolutions because they were so brief), and he essentially industrialized and modernized it to the point where it could compete with the anglo powers. If you don't at least recognize and salute that achievement, and instead choose to childishly write-off france then you're a fucking sectarian and your a tool of monarchism.

Sure has been a lot of tankie butthurt recently.

Top kek. Really hope this turns into a meme

Because they don't understand revolutions

Come on dude learn your history

quality post

It is not a strength of the working class that it is able to halt production, it is merely a fact. If we talk about working class strengths then we may be encouraged to try to appeal to their good side, we may say to the amorphous working class (through our unread leaflets) that they are the ones that hold the strength (or whatever), to stop the capitalist economy, so they must wise up and get to it. But, oh misery, they don’t listen to us, and we are left with only one course of action – to try to get the numbers of people who subscribe to anarchism or communism to rise; the essential workers won’t listen but maybe others will? Maybe, if we try hard, we will be able to kickstart a movement that will reach some critical number and then we can have a revolution, for it is often said by tired old pro-revolutionary hacks that it is only a movement (imbued, of course, with worthy characteristics) that can destroy capital. This seems to be the sad and a-historical plan of every group and individual in this political milieu from formal, recruiting, anarchist organizations to the core of informal networks such as Echanges et Mouvement. Here, incidentally, we are back at the question of putting carts before horses, which we explained in our “Reply…”.

So let’s drop our fixation with working class organization, which for many is merely another term for Movement. The revolutionary organization (that is, strategies and tactics for their defence) that workers will be involved in will only appear after production has been halted; it cannot happen before. Before this point only other forms of worker (or people) organization can appear or exist: things like unions, clubs, or informal or formal political parties.

There is a theoretical brick wall that the anarchist and communist milieu refuse to confront, this refusal makes them intellectually weak and causes them to be the tools of authority. This brick wall is the fact that events will shape people’s consciousness; events will make people act; consciousness is determined by the material structure of our lives; mass changes in consciousness come after changes in the material base of society. If communism ever appears it can only do so after the collapse of capitalism. Communism is not a movement, or a question of organization; it is only a vague description of a possible way of life for humankind. Communism comes after revolution, and revolution will not be made by any of us. Our inevitable and necessary failure as pro-revolutionaries is written on this wall, just as is our failure, and our parents’ failure, to live fully as human beings. Against the missionary and dishonest optimism of pro-revolutionaries we posit a basic nihilism.

you're a moron and are worthless to the left
yes, commodity production is still fundamentally capitalist.
only before immediately banning all factions and turning Russia into an undemocratic totalitarian state because he couldn't handle dissidence, and then handing a psychopath the throne.
"muh sectarianism" is a fucking meme invented by you tankies. Socialism has to be done right or not at all.

I'm not even a leftcom but you are just a whiney cunt.

No, I am not the ally of the edgy socdems known as Marxist-Leninists.

m8 the issue is that the USSR was never socialist before or after Lenin. Lenin himself conceded that it was a capitalist state. Maintaining the commodity form is not socialism nor will it ever be and we've already had a thread about this very thing. Making another one won't make you right, it will just give us another opportunity to point out how wrong you are.

Not an argument

You made me ejaculate with you humble words.

Could you link me the thread pls

This is literally no different than something a pro-capitalist liberal/libertarian would say.

The point is that like tankies complaining about how ussr was actually socialist, someone who supports napoleon might defend the empire from a jacobin pretending that the empire was actually revolutionary while both are obviously untrue

m.youtube.com/watch?list=PL22a5iyzAVe-auVkLf9CVuQmYsmGmaFAJ&v=WsC0q3CO6lM
Tankies take note.

Nothing in history qualifies as socialism then

Not an argument and see the video I posted, it mentions this line of reasoning.

It's almost like socialism has never been successfully brought about.Primitive humans didn't have commodities btw

8ch.net/leftypol/res/2018404.html

Marxist Leninists aren't all bad, and people like you give the rest of them a bad name.

True, but the best M-Ls are always the ones that abandon it for libsoc like serok apo.

Thanks famrade

Bemp

if Lenin actually worked towards making the USSR a WORKERS state then I wouldn't have been so harsh. but he literally went and did the opposite and he gave Stalin the advantage he needed to establish his dictatorship.

Wow, so Lenin was right you people are infantile

Not an argument. Explain to me how maintaining the commodity form isn't capitalism

this guy gets it

I hate to be the "every1 is dumb but me" but people who wear their sect on their sleeves are very tiresome.

How? Lenin died barely after the civil war ended and Russia was in a fragile position

that's the problem. his "temporary" ban on dissident factions lasted for 80 years after his death.

Lenin got support on the basis of "all power to the soviets" and then completely did a 180 on that. The idea that we need extremely inefficient top down bureaucracies to do things efficiently is a very anti-socialist position. It fits better with technocracy.

Except that modern computing means that a centrally-planned economy is very feasible, more so than the paperwork bureucracy that did everything in the USSR.

This. AI will make ML-style states a reality in the 21st century. Who needs a massive bureaucracy when a single supercomputer can plan production decades in advance?

So? Factionalism is essentially multi-party politics - ie capitalism. Why do you need multiple party parties/factions when you're only representing one working class? Political factionalism only makes sense in a capitalist system where there's shitloads of different competing companies/individuals/industries.

Centrally planned economies are already feasible without AI. You can have a democratic society with central planning m8. If anything, Bureaucracies are the real enemy of central planning since they're wildly inefficient and alienated from the people. I don't think anyone here is arguing against central planning, just the bullshit that Lenin pulled.

there was tons of political factionalism within the Communist party in the USSR.

Lenin had to form a strong centralized government and take extreme measures to win the war. What else would you've done?

...

I would've made the state a dictatorship of the proletariat, for starters.

Lenin - A massive powergap - Stalin

Should've let the NEP happen bruh.

I think that the idea that Lenin simply "had to but didn't want to" is factually incorrect, especially given this post here
It was more of a case of Lenin's own vanity not some historical necessity. I don't see highly inefficient centralized state bureaucracies as being key to winning any war.

You're going to open with that?

...

...

Commodity production existed in pre-capitalist societies.

Holy shit read Capital before you speak

Which is why Marx viewed the generalization of commodity production as the fundamental trait of capitalism, as opposed to subsistens farmers selling their surplus in earlier societies

what happened to "all power to the soviets!"?

The law of value happened.

War happened, &

This tbh. I like MLs and anarchists but while it's v important to debate, uncited repetitive shitflinging is retarded

Thread #6,473 of butthurt M-Ls trying to defend the honour of a revisionist state that collapsed 40 years ago, instead of thinking of any meaningful way to advance the future cause of socialism in the world today.

No, we call the USSR not state capitalist because of the mistakes of a few individuals, but because the state produced fucking commodities you fucking tankie trash.

The provisional government never gave it, so Lenin had to overthrow them to keep Russia out of the war.

Then Fascism almost happened so Lenin temporarily had to take away that power again, but then he gave it back and it was all cool.

Stop idealising Maximillian 'Killing Vendeans for the Revolution" Robespierre

"The left" is worthless to communists.

READ MARX
He explicitly says that commodities existed under feudalism, and that commodity production FOR EXCHANGE, NOT USE is capitalist. There was no production for exchange in USSR or any other socialist states.

Commodity production means production for exchange. There's no commodity production for use, since a commodity is, by definition, something that's produced for exchange.

There is no commodity production for use. A commodity _just is_ a good produced for exchange, hence the dual character Marx goes on about. You don't seem to know what you're talking about lol.
What about the wage labor and the money and the production for exchange :3

Because they dont actually want a revolution they just want to masturbate and feel superior

MLs be like "waaaaah everyone is a reactionary traitor, the USSR failed because of them WAAAAAH!"

lol no, nobody actually says that. You are far too irrelevant to actually have an impact on these things.

commodity = product made for exchange
that's the definition

not as worthless as Lenin

...

remember Kronstadt

Fuck Lenin

...

That was Trotsky.

Go on than m8. Fight off 5 countries without drastic action buddy.

Heh.

The elimination of the commodity form will mean the liquidation of 95% of the population, you literally cannot have a civilization without commodities.

...

I'd rather have fetishism than genocide

What did he mean by this?

Commodities are just a form of organizing social production, labour is indirectly validated as social through exchange. They're a social form of production which is historically distinct.

It means you go to the cotton gulag

And what other ways of organizing social labor exist and how could they maintain sprawling urban populations?

Where did you get this insane implication from?

The modern human lived without them for roughly 192,000 years of its existence, and up until a little over 350 years ago commodities were a minute part of societal organization, only becoming a generalized and dominant element in at first only specific parts of the world.

We've only been able to reach a population of 7 billion and counting by commodity for exchange, eliminating that would ncessarily mean an anprim return to nature

We've also only acquired dragon dildos and quinine through commodity exchange, and we reached 1,5 billion without commodity exchange too, subsisting just fine. So what? Marx was in many ways a fan of capitalism on top of the fact that it breeds in the conditions for communism precisely for this reason: it impulses society to constantly revolutionize production and invent new things, even if only always first to valorize.

The thing about your hot takes is that you never substantiate them. Get a flag or something so we can all ignore you.

...