I stumbled across this in a piece on the Russian election

The CPRF is nationalist socdems with a thin layer of red paint that panders to Soviet nostalgia on a very superficial level. They are Putin's controlled opposition that supports Russia's imperialist policies and protects the interests of the bourgeoise. Grudinin's candidacy is a sham supposed to lend legitimacy to Putin.

The Russian Left is dead. The last legitimate movements were sold out by right-liberals during the 2012 protests.

t. Russian

No, like all reactionaries, they're just anti-whatever-isn't-their-id-pol.

What about the party of russian communists and Limonov's party?

CPRF spoiler party. Doesn't amount to anything.

No longer relevant in any way. Among the movements that got shafted in 2012.

and what is their idpol?

Russian nationalism and 'tradition'

what's the difference between Mensheviks and Bolsheviks? I know Plekhanov was a menshevik and a dank theorist.

Mensheviks were class collaborant socdems. While Bolsheviks were for nationalization of land, Mensheviks were for municipalization of land and did not see peasants as a revolutionary force.

the bolsheviks were a small group in the beginning

if there's something that doesn't amount to anything then it's what you'll see in a mirror

also they are a very recent split that does pretty good
they also have a good organisation and support with many people, even into the KPRF against zhuganov

Russian communists are garbage. In other news, water is wet.

Lenin did nothing wrong.

What about the party that calls itself CPSU? My party has friendly relations with them

I don't know of a party that calls itself the CPSU, just an international group that is the Communist Parties of the Soviet Union. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_of_Communist_Parties_–_Communist_Party_of_the_Soviet_Union

Not only has Russia done far more for the world Left and the proletariat in the 20th century than any tranny-friendly Western country and it’s corresponding capitalist controlled “Left” but there’s nothing wrong with nationalism.

The classical socialisr Left was centered on InterNATIONALISM and not neoliberal globalism. Too many people can’t comprehend or simply wont the difference.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_the_Soviet_Union_(2001)

...

this is all we need to learn from this

back to /r/socialism you liberal dipshits

Quit possibly one of the most incorrect things ever written.
Mildly put.

It's what literally everybody tells me, but whatever. Even my own mom who is usually pretty left told me recently "you know, they actually just care about immigrants and all this tranny shit. They'll drop the economic things for that"

Будь честным. Tы из Ольгино?

It might have some truth about the west, however I am more referring to the part where it says that Russian communists are for workers.

Honestly there is some truth to this, think about these two scenarios:
1) A western leftist says they are supporting an economically liberal but socially "progressive" politician because they can't allow minorities to face increased oppression. For example many popular western leftists, such as the Chapo's, said they were supporting HRC over Trump with little to no backlash.
2) A western leftist says they are supporting a protectionist, public ownership supporting, welfare oriented but socially reactionary politician because they want to protect the native working class even at the expense of migrants, LGBT, minorities etc. Someone who did this would face much more backlash, for example admitting you voted for Le Pen in the second round of the french election would get you called a fascist and totally blacklisted in leftist circles.

Basically western leftists while claiming otherwise behave in a manner which show that they privilege issues of race, gender, and sexuality over those of class and yes this includes the self-described communists/socialists/anarchists not just left-liberals.

...

...

Russian communist here.
We dislike European and especially American communists.
They are generally very detached from the workers and the real struggle, most are decadent college kids. They never went through a incredible poverty of the 90ies, they just want to be edgy anarchists/syndicalists.
They regurgitate whatever anti-Stalinist anti-Soviet propaganda they are fed in school and claim that they are the new left.
They call themselves communists, yet let capitalist media decide for them what countries are democratic or not, who is dictator or who is not. They would criticize socialist country fighting against imperialism for alleged "authoritarianism".
Not to mention they are usually into the progressive bullshit that is irrelevant or counterproductive

As a Russian communist, I want to let you guys know that this comment

is better than this one

...

Also >orthodox communist
That is pretty much impossible in Russia, so nice false flag.

I can not really blame them for it, it's not their fault they were born in America. They live their whole life in the bubble of propaganda from their schools, their films, even their parents. When a guy tells them about Marx on the college campus they aren't going to forget all that.

The comment that I liked clearly states that CPRF has nothing to do with communism.

Faith and Church are different things.

It's not cool generalizing people.

Yes, but it does not mean that Left is dead. How can it die in the birthplace of the revolution? Even if the real left parties are in the obscurity, people despise deputies, oligarchs, current power. People are not stupid, they realize that oligarhs are growing rich on what once was theirs.

Религия есть опиум для народа.

It was a generalization, however on a political spectrum what is slightly left/populist in Russia is communist in America.

It does not, but it's really hard for left to grow when most of mainstream left is mostly right wing, socdems.

Religion and Faith are also different things.

Most of the 'communists' in Russia are socdems who are unsuccessfully trying to win
votes with nostalgia. Not to mention huge ammounts of near-facsits who want return of the Soviet Union rather than communism.

So long as the state exists there is no freedom. When there is freedom, there will be no state.

Situation in Russia is very comparable to the USA.

the bolsheviks being fiercely supportive of minority groups was literally their one good point you crypto shits

Like I said in other thread, Soviet support of third world was their best trait.

So are you calling Stalinists near-fascist now? Woah, is this the power of anarchists? Goal of Communism is abolishing state when material conditions are ready, not immediately only to get crushed 2 years after like any anarchists in history.
It's not the situation that is similar, it's you who are similar to so-called American "left".

What exactly is wrong with voting for Clinton over trump? The chapo boys were Bernie diehards before he lost the primary. Both candidates were on track to expand empire and oppose social programs, Trump is just worse on social issues.

Nice projections.
KPRF is not stalinist and even of KPRF was stalinist I remember Lenin saying that communism is soviet power plus electrification. I don't remember Stalin saying that stalinism is nostalgia + minimal social democracy.

And I might be similar to American left, but you are similar to American right.

Where have i said that i support KPRF, you are arguing with a straw man in your post. KPRF along with the liberals would be the first to get the bullet.
Direct democracy, syndicates, anarchist communes is utopia that can not or should not work without material conditions in place. And you are quoting Lenin out of context, he did not mean what you are implying.
Means of production need to belong to workers without burdening them with managing it, ideally economy should be managed by central authority, but without human involvement whatsoever (OGAS, Cybersyn).

Well you did sound like for some reason linking their policy to stalinist…

For the westerners.

Such defeatism is one of the reasons for poverty and crapitalist dictatorships in Eastern Europe.

Whenever someone criticizes someone or offers a harder solution like revolution people always something like That's impossible Things could be worse Most important thing that there should be no war Do you want like in Ukraine

Now back on topic. Why would someone say that in the year 2018 when almost everyone has a gadged and access to the internet direct democracy is impossible ?

The internet is basically a giant surveillance apparatus controlled by Americans, it's not a good example of how your utopianism is suddenly possible. Discourse is manipulated and atomised in a way that was previously impossible, conditions are worse for the organic consensus community you fantasize about. But you need this idea of technology to hand-wave away criticism. American left does the same, it's just more petite bourgeois nonsense.

kys

...

There would literally be nothing wrong with this, if Trump was really a protectionist, public ownership supporting, welfare oriented politician. He's not though. None of his campaign promises have been fulfilled. Trump is Obama for white people.

what's new.

Huh, imagine being for workers *and* for minorities.

t. Redditor

t. polyp

Imagine being this much of a political illiterate.

Oh wow I didn't brown people in Americlap where bourgeoisie.

But you have minorities that are workers.
Even illegals. Especially illegals. Porky freaking loves undeclared cheap labour.

...

Right-wing trash.

Indeed.

Hitler was obviously a commie because he practiced Not SocialisM. And driving to work is in fact interPLANETARY travel!

lol wordfilter

Universalism renders your pluralism redundant, redditors.

Yes, like how Stalin supported the Tatars by killing 70% of them or by sending gays to gulags.

...

Stalin also murdered over 600,000 communists including most of the old Bolsheviks.

And about the counter institutions? Why is there no one trying to rebuild the soviets? What about the Left front?

There is no one to organize alternative power structures. Left Front was kill in 2012. Leftists have nowhere to go except CPRF.

Leftism in Russia is dead. It is waaay worse than you can imagine. It might seem absurd to an outside observer that the cradle of the revolution could fall as low, but I legit think the US has a better shot at communist revolution than Russia at this point.

On the other hand, leftists should just read Lenin and do entryism into KPRF and reform it from within. They should also embrace new technology and promote their ideology on the internet, as well as use old school methods like newspaper.

There are websites like Levoradikal and Lenin Crew. But they are too few.

You can't take over the CPRF without numbers either.

I know about the few websites and few channels. But what I would like to see a united and coordinated one big website, one big youtube channel, one big facebook and one newpsaper, in which different people would use their expertise to promote leftism. Some could make documentaries about corruption, other could make songs, other could make comedic news that are very popular these days.

Ideas are more powerful than guns, and guns are more powerful than numbers.

It definitely would be nice to have these things, but it's kind of like stating "we should do a revolution". Of course we should, but for starters it would be nice to have at least one real and active organization that isn't a bourguin front or some red-tsarist wackos. We're currently lacking even that.

Didn't he just impose trade tariffs on steel and aluminum? Sounds pretty protectionist to me.

Sounds like class collaborationist fascism to me.

Oh, so they're NutSacs. Good to know.

Who needs "workers of the world" to unite when you have ~natives~

nationalism

Mensheviks held more influence in the intelligentsia. Bolsheviks held more influence in the rank-and-file. Hence, Mensheviks were Minority-men and Bolsheviks Majority-men despite the fact that most of the pre-October history they had about equal numbers.

Under a revolutionary context, this meant that the Mensheviks tended to keel towards the interests of the petit bourgeois, while Bolsheviks tended to have a grasp on radical labor.

bolshevik and menshevik means that one faction had the majority in this one specific 1903 party congress and the other didn't, nothing more