Maximun left-com oportunism And Dumb pseudo leninism

So why do some of you guys even call youselfs leninists? You If youre going to be a leninists at least try know whats It means and not to do It Just for memes

Other urls found in this thread:

The worst leftcoms are also leninists.

Its Impossible to be both Lenin hated left-coms And If he actualy Saw a leninists of today he would probably have shame of them even calling themselfs leninists.

Because bordigafags are lelinists. The communizationfags are ancoms in denial. Leftcom is a bad and dated term irrelevant outside the second internationale, the only common trait is intense autism and pretentiousness.

i've been disconnected for a while, wasn't that xexizy guy a leninist? he even posted with the lenin hat in this board

muke is a Holla Forums meme who is whatever is raging here at the time. He started as a libertarian leninist because when he was here anarchists and mls were 85% or more of the board.

Bordiga was a leninist, and he was undoubtedly the shittest of all the leftcoms, and that's a real accomplishment.

Lenin was a good, pragmatic leader and a shit theorist. Kautsky-Englesism is one of the worst forms of revisionism.

I guess most left-com "leninists" havent read this book. And probably never Will.

Trash book. Knowing history, can you really unironically make the claim that Lenin's conclusions were correct?

I guess most people who use that book as an argument have never read past the title. And probably never will. Let alone read left communists theorists themselves.

You know, I'm gonna stay out of this autistic shitfling for once.
If you want to see an actually mature discussion and critique of leftcommunism, specifically Bordigism, see this thread:

Wow really BTFO

Asking whether history factors into their endorsement of the book's conclusions isn't shit flinging tho

The history of leftcommunism is littered with just as much failure as the history of leninism. Lenin make's some good points in that book, as he does in a handful of other places, and if we are going to discuss theory, we should begin with a discussion of actual points.

I used to be a Leninist but recently I've been more of a Marxist with Leninist sympathies. Tankies just wanna purity test.

Lenin's conclusion that Leftcommunists and Mensheviks should be vehemently opposed was based on the assumption that communism had already won over the mass of workers. In hindsight this obviously isn't true, so the conclusions that Lenin comes to in this book is flawed. I realize that Leftcom history is full of failures, but that's irrelevant to my question.

yes, I doubt many would contest his conclusions were politically motivated. But there was more to the book than his conclusions.

Well yeah, but there's plenty of other things that don't hold up very well other than his conclusions. How much of what Lenin had to say about the KAPD has stood the test of time given how poorly the 2nd Comintern's policies were at advancing communist goals?

Oposing the only method that works is Pretty much wrong unless you show me a left com revolution that actualy worked. Oh wait, they dont exist.

Nothing has "worked" and we were all born and will probably all die under the crushing weight of capital. The idea that I have to be beholden to whatever was subjectively the best thing so far is asinine.

Even Lenin acknowledged the pragmatic nature of his methods, user. Dogmatically adhering to the methods Lenin used misses the point of Lenin's pragmatism entirely.

Show me a revolution that has actually worked and didn't collapse back into capitalism.

Just like CPUSA Muke used to be good. Now he’s something else.

There is no leftcom revolution or Marxist-Leninist revolution there is just proletarian revolution.