Who is your favorite marxist-leninist? Mine would be pic related, love what he stands for and acomplished.
Descansa en paz, Comandante
Who is your favorite marxist-leninist? Mine would be pic related, love what he stands for and acomplished.
Castro. He's the only one that managed to produce a lasting revolution.
Only correct answer.
Love him too. Probs in my top 5 favorite communists
Um, try again sweetie
I guess you can say that too. However, I only have respect for Kim il Sung though. I don't hate jong il and un, but they aren't really my type of socialist.
Basically I think sung did pretty much everything, so yeah in a way I kinda agree with you
Can't pick Lenin obviously, so I guess it has to be Stalin. All the other ML leaders posted so far ITT also loved Stalin.
Yeah, it's pretty nice how non sectarian Che was. Loved Stalin but also appreciated reformists like Allende. As a matter of fact, even Allende had a liking for Stalin
Well, I guess you could call that "non-sectarian," but that's really standard Marxism Leninism– showing solidarity to all movements that resist empire, fascism, and capitalism, regardless of ideological purity.
If Lenin isn't an ML then Stalin.
Not to disagree with you, but I would say that is mostly true. But when you look at the history between MLists and anarchists, things kinda tend to fall apart.
However, yes I would say marxism-leninism is probably the least sectarian marxist ideology
Even though he disliked anarchists, Sankara did little to nothing wrong
Didn't he kill some anarchists? If so, they must have been wreckers.
I wouldn't be surprised if he did. But to be honest anarcho-syndicalism can be seen as more reformist than revolutionary (an-coms and an-syns in Japan were at eachothers throats during the early 20th century). On top of that, the use of union strikes can be co-opted by right wing governments. It was one of the initial tacts that the chicago boys used in Chile during Allende's time.
I'd call Sankara paranoid in hindsight, but considering any revolution can be subject to sabotage (look no further than Stalin funding liberal republicans to crush the popular revolution in Spain), I can't necessarily blame the mind.
I think Kim Il Sung and Enver Hoxha have been the most pure, anti-revisionist one.
dead commies = good commies
Tossup between Che and Uncle Ho.
Came to post him.
Kwame Nkrumah was pretty cool too although he may have been less radical
I didn't know this. Not contesting it, but do you have a source?
Really? The fact that he thought it was a good idea to kill all sparrows and totally bring China's ecosystem out of balance, alongside his "Cultural Revolution" insanity, makes him kind of an embarassment to Marxism imo
I guess socialism in China was okay but I don't see what's specifically appealing about Mao
Why did the Great Leap Forward program fail?
lol, you got butthurt
really made me think
Either Mao (even though he eventually degenerated into liberal ideology and paved the way for Dung) or Sankara
Was Deng really a liberal?
/marx/ BO seems to like him a lot and he usually knows his shit
marxism means destroying temples and killing birds
the more temples it destroys and birds it kills the more marxister it is
Are you denying that his ecological decisions were incredibly bad and caused famine? That his regime was probably even more repressive than Stalin's? And that basically all forms of culture got targeted and destroyed during the "Cultural Revolution"? Fuck Mao tbh
The world lost a real visionary when we lost Sankara
Yes. He liberalized the economy.
Ismail is a fucking Brezhnevite turbo revisionist who believes modern China is a socialist country. He knows a fuckload of stuff but don't listen to him when it comes to what countries are/aren't socialist. His analysis literally boils down to how much state ownership there is.
Say that to my Hind D, Yeltsinite.
Fidel Castro and Cuba. Despite a lot of hardships he has managed to provide a high quality of life for Cubans. His best trait is that he is perhaps the greatest internationalist and most sincere leftist.Cuba, per capital, is leading country when it comes to humanitarian aid.
So did Lenin. Tbh while Deng was clearly instrumental in the return of capitalism to China, I don’t think we can ever say for sure whether or not he did this with permenant intent or if he intended it to be a kind of NEP.
H O X H A
Х О Д Ж А
Tbh though, if he would have liberalized the economy as the NEP, and not permanently, why did he keep it liberalized for such a long time? Pretty sure his intentions were permanent liberalization
Long live the immortal Juche idea!
Either sankara or hoxha
Not a M-L btw.
Hi Jason, you ready for Thursday's debate?
Thanks for this, comrade
isn't that a dubious thing that's only asserted by Cuban sources themselves?
I would pick Lenin but you can't really call him a Marxist-Leninist, so probably Mao or Castro tbh famalam
No. A quick internet search gives plenty of Western Sources to back it up.
Here is an example related to recent Ebola crisis.
Lol imagine actually believing this. ☭TANKIE☭s are probably the most sectarian. Their reaction to dissent and disagreement is putting a bullet in the other person's brain. This manifests itself online too when LARPing red fashies ban and silence all their detractors, even with other Marxists
Dissent is a codeword for "I want the bourgeois back in power"
Tankie tolerance for western radlibs, social imperialists, and left-communist purists is very low because they are on the wrong side of history and are actively sabotaging revolution. Any serious appraisal of ☭TANKIE☭ political stances will concede that they are NOT ideological purists– they show solidarity to demsocs like Maduro, non-Marxist socialists like Qaddafi or Assad, non-socialist national liberation movements, and even anti-imperialist religious parties like Hezbollah.
Bullshitters, dilettantes, and social climbers hate ☭TANKIE☭s because they base their evaluation of movements on the material results of the movements, not marketing and big talk.
same here, but i admire che and fidel equally.
Yeah buddy this is exactly what I'm talking about. I'm not even going to get into your retarded anachronistic views on "imperialism" except to call them what they are. You align yourself with clear non-allies and call other socialists non-socialists with violent behavior. That's not being accepting. You guys suck the fun out of everything because you're hateful non-humanists, image-obsessed kiddies who need to grow up
to the cunts talking shit about ML being "sectarian"
remind me again who is shitting on all the nations under imperialist threat while MLs are standing with them?
who is arguing in favor for the rights of the venezuelan people and their government?
it is always anarkiddies and other liberals siding with the US empire against peoples liberation struggles
Literally 90% of stalinstache's posts on here are him doing that
Lol, if only he realized how much of a sad loser he looks from the outside in
I'm not even an anarchist, but that's just as much a non-argument as pointing out that socialist states never lasted longer than a human lifespan or often plunged into dictatorship after a few years therefore "socialism can't work"
i like your posts, but there are some decent ancoms on Holla Forums too.
now, i agree with you about anarchists, a lot of them are basically liberals in disguise and their behaviour and actions are often detrimental rather than helpful for the whole political left and the image of the communist worker's movement in particular. "antifa" LARPers being a prime example.
however, don't forget that mister 'stache wasn't exactly a strategic mastermind outside the battlefields of wwii either, without him ruthlessly purging opponents of all sorts arguing pro socialism and communism would be much easier infront of a neutral audience.
i wish all you sectarians would put more energy into improving the image of socialism and communism instead of flinging shit at each other all the time.
Right on all counts.
Mao, because he had some good ideas, like the Mass Line and the Cultural Revolution. And Tito, because he was a good leader, a war hero and his people loved him.
That is, if you count them as MLs.
I like the idea of it. I think it could theoretically apply to Australia.
Meaningfully distinguish between Maoist cultural revolution and SJW cultural warfare.
You got me interested now. Why would it apply specifically to aussies?
For one, we have a lot of working class history. First off, There would have been a distinct class struggle between the Proletarian Convicts used as slave labour to work on the farms of the Bourgeois settlers/soldiers/landowners. I also reckon that the Convicts would have gotten along with the Indigenous population (William Buckley springs to mind) and even today, working class Australians get along more with Aboriginals in my opinion.
Secondly, the Gold Rush saw a worker's uprising at the Eureka Stockade. The miners sought to own the product of their labour and fought against the Imperialist power of Britain. Not to mention Ned Kelly being seen as a Robin Hood figure in Australia, fighting against an unjust police force. Also, a lot of our Bush Poets write about Proletarian protagonists (the Swagman, miners, small farmers and sheep shearers).
Thirdly, Our relationship with China is unique. We fought alongside them in WWII (in the same theatre, no less). Gough Whitlam opened up relations with China. We have a significant Chinese minority dating back to the Gold Rush. Kevin Rudd was a diplomat to China and speaks Mandarin.
Fourthly, Australians value things like Mateship, Egalitarianism and Solidarity. My Dad was saying Australians have the 'cut down the tall poppy' mentality. We already have a decent workers culture (which I feel is being eroded by Capitalism).
The thing is, being as objectively as possible, it was a good idea that could've been better implemented
Since Lenin is not an option
legitimately what made me a leftist
The SJW's are right, they just need to be more militant.
I hope this one's bait
Worst """socialist""" leader with the possible exception of Pol Pot
Maoist cultural revolution was about removing the revisionists/capitalist roaders from power
SJWS dont give a shit about socialism
He may have been somewhat friendly with the west, but he was still better than Tito.
How? He extorted his own people and destroyed a part of Bucharest's old city to build his megalomaniac palace. AFAIK repression was much more severe than under Tito and I don't think Ceausescu adhered more to actual socialist ideals than him.
Sankara was a beautiful human being.
Anarchists are trash anyways so I don't really care.