Daily reminder that if you showed this to most self-proclaimed communist today, they'd call it "reformism"

Daily reminder that if you showed this to most self-proclaimed communist today, they'd call it "reformism".

I don't get it.

OP is more than likely one of the recent immigrants from reddit who is having a really hard time shedding his liberalism for actual radical left theory and thus decided to make a thread where he attempts to insinuate that the original 9 demands that the Communist Manifesto suggested Socialists should make in their parties and organizations appear to be "reformism" in light of self-righteous Leftists who try too hard to be radical.

The problem is that this probably stemmed from said former Redditor actually having read closely the Communist Manifesto for the first time and despairing at the fact that revolutionizing society from the ground up is really hard so he's trying to, by arguing against some strawman he's built of "edgy Ultra Leftists who never accomplish anything through their obsession with sectarianism and ideological purity" actually say that reformism and Social Democracy are okay, therefore being able to rationalize his decision to side with those things as they are what is easiest for former Liberals to gravitate to once they slide Left.

What he doesn't realize is that 1) Social Democracy/Reformism's failures for the last half century demonstrate precisely why these 9 demands were written in the first place and 2) that his argument itself is stupid since it relies on false pretenses and self-denial

you'll learn one day OP

...

That isn't what I said it's what I implied OP was trying to say and make a case for so that he wouldn't have to actually become a radical Leftist even though he knows better

Good job with that atrocious reading comprehension though

That pretty much describes /r/socialism though

well we're not reddit, are we

just barely

Good job making a claim you have absolutely no evidence for.

Okay? My point is these people exist in sizable numbers, it's not just a strawman.

It IS reformism but the goal was teaching workers that they had to fight for themselves in order to improve their lives. At no point did Marx ever suggest that this was in and of itself revolutionary communism.

You realize that the commifesto was written around 1848, during the revolutionary wave in europe? Euphoria was omnipresent, having a political program was en vogue.

Read some Trotsky. And before you say "but this is Marx and Engels, way before Trotsky" - yes, Trotsky didn't invent the transitional demand, he coined the term and wrote about its usefulness, but transitional demands can be seen used by Marx himself in this very passage of the Communist Manifesto.

no, i'd say that's marxism leninism as implemented in the soviet union

1. Debatable
2. Reformism.
3. Ye, ok.
4. Wut?
5. Ye, ok.
6. … Isn't this how it's supposed to be?
7. Ye, ok.
8. Ye, ok.
9. Ye, ok.

So, 1 and 4 are out of context and 2 is reformism, but that doesn't make it bad.

Anything else?

When you leave the commune, the property you left behind belongs to the commune. Pretty obvious, really.

A, ye, ok.
That's why I said it's out of context.

You fucking idiots realize that communism wouldn't work tomorrow right? There would still have to be "reformism" in a "transitory" state. By the way a direct democracy regardless of how neoliberal it starts as is very, very easy to turn into communism which is why leftists with a road map want it.

Socialism, yes, what?

In today's environment a direct democracy would degrade into fascism within a year.

[Citation needed]

It's a quote from The Communist Manifesto iirc.

t. Leninist