Anarchists and their moralism get shredded

youtube.com/watch?v=hbDuogV1Ono

Anarchists and their moralism get shredded.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_class#.C4.90ilas.27_New_Class
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Bumping

The video is being watched now.

"BOSS" IS NOT SPECIFFIC ENOUGH I SWEAR THE PROBLEM IS NOT ONE WITH HIERARCHY BOSSES ARE FINE OKAY!

WE'RE THE TRUE SOCIALISTS AND YOU'RE THE LIBERTARIAN DEVIATION, OKAY, SO DON'T FUCKING CALL US AUTHORITARIAN THAT'S MEAN, OKAY?

...

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH TO SAY SOMEONE SHOULD LEGITIMIZE THEIR AUTHORITY OVER OTHERS IS MORALISM!!! WAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH! IT'S NOT FAIR AND IT'S VERY MEAN!

WE NEED TO USE A METHOD THAT HAS FAILED A HUNDRED TIMES AT ACHIEVEING SOCIALISM IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE SOCIALISM! THIS TIME IT WILL REALLY WORK YOU GUYS!

Is there anything in the world half so beautiful as anarcho-asspain? I think not.

What right-winger should TheFinnishBolshevik go after next?

The Mongol Bolshevik is right on classes. If you really want to criticize the nomenclature of the USSR you should rather call it "red bourgeoisie" (Đilas). But this conceptualization is still problematic from a Marxian POV, see:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_class#.C4.90ilas.27_New_Class

The Mongol Bolshevik's arguments from "dis is reyality, mane" and "dis how it's just is, mane" are rather weak.

where does this meme even come from

from listening to anarchist arguments, reading anarchist theory, tbh

for your health

The origin of morality is the idea of people as inherently evil, incapable or dumb.
Vanguardism is this abrahamic morality wedged into the socialist movement, a moralist deviation.

so much asspain

You must understand that even when you say that something is socially constructed is not the same as something is born simply from an idea. The latter is idealism par excellence. You could take the line of argument which posits morality as created due to really existing social forces (like classes), but even that would oversimplify the matter in my opinion.

Your mum is abrahamic morality.

Class societies create conditions in which the most materially depraved people tend in fact to become evil, incapable of political action and self-determination, deprived of the means of self-betterment and studying, etc. These are factors which aid upholding such societies. Just to remind you: I'm not making a moralistic argument here.

Supposedly something which strives to a large extent to counter the aforementioned conditions: offer help, education, agitation, and maybe most importantly: collective discipline.

I find that people who are critical of discipline are, ultimately, critical of collectivism as such.

Never said that. Of course, the idea that people are evil, incapable or dumb is often born from the social need to believe that.

However, beyond the empty semantics, this idea is the cornerstone of moralism.


No, but your line of thought has origin in Abrahamic moralism. The poor are dirty, evil and unwashed. They and untermenshen who must be led by a hierarchical force, otherwise they will kill and steal from each other the second they're free to do so. It is the same kind of mentality that makes Christians say stuff like "but why would people not murder and kill each other without God"?
In this lies the very worst of Christian morality within Leninism. That people are inherently dumb, unenlightened, destructive and that they must be lead away from all this through the enlightened leadership of the Philosopher kings or they will succumb to their wretched human nature.


Absolutely. The only value a collective has, the the value it can offer to the individual.

gob bress uhmeriga

Isn't that the dictionary definition of individualism, tho?

...

I guess I will only follow the collective interest of the White Race from now on then. After all, the value that collective can offer me as an idividual is arbitrary :^)

You just proved that you aren't a collectivist, thus a communist. Just stop falseflagging. You make other ancoms look bad.

You're right.
I am not a collectivist, because I'm not a Nazi.
I will never bown down to a collective if there's nothing in it for me as an individual. This is why I will never be a fascist or a red fascist like you.

...

Okay, if the value of collectives are not to be judged by their utility to the individual, why shouldn't I be a racist, nationalist or fascist?

Bolshevism and Marxism Leninism will never be tried again in the future.

Getting spooky in here.

Anyway, I'm OK with platformist anarchists.

Marxism-Leninism is the future.

...

...

As opposed to the glorious successes of… socdem? anarcho?

o w8, the 20th century is over!!!=

Stfu anarkiddie

What exactly have Marxist-leninists and Maoists accomplished so far?

The greatest proletarian state in the history of mankind: The Peoples' Republic of China.

Staying in power for a few decades? Building global anti-colonialist movement?

I'm not denying that it ultimately amounted to a complete and horrible failure, though. At least it had time to put to practice its theory from which we (well, those of us who are willing) can draw valuable lessons.

woah nice argument you got there you sure showed him with your hot opinions

The video pretty much displays the end result of completely denying the relevance of collective discipline.
(It wasn't me who posted it this time.)

It's going revisionist, IMO.

Well, if US collapses before China goes down, I'll agree to "greatest".

...

I don't get what you're trying to imply.


How is China not full capitalist already?

Probably

Heavy State Owned Enterprise presence and the leadership of the smartest ML party in existence.

workers have far worse conditions then they do in many capitalist states though, so fuck it

The "smartest ML party" seems to consist of millionaires managing a free market economy with state owned enterprises being lent to international capital, tbh.

An Empire is an empire, even if they use pretty little red banners.

how did the USSR exploit Eastern-Europe in your understanding?

Comrade Xi Jinping is crushing the corrupt officials with all his might.

Corruption is systemic, not something the baddies do.

You know there's a reason communist are more popular in Russia than in Poland. Obviously one party wasn't very satisfied with the allocation of resources and the other party was very satisfied.

Poland should've become an SSR tbh.

Also Rhodesia got fucked over because of racial segregation and the monopolization of all positions of power by whites.
Poles weren't discriminated against, nor did russians come in and rule over everything. You can call it a puppet government but it wasn't a fucking colony.

I asked you a simple question. Please explain to me in your own words how the USSR exploited Eastern-Europe.

...

By not allowing them self-determination and by exploiting their workers, by allocating their resources in any way they saw fit.

Oh I see. Poles simply misremember how awesome soviet imperialism was.

So by your terms the USSR colonized itself too?
I'm just trying to point out that you are bastardizing the meaning of the word.

...

That's state capitalism for ya m8 :^)

Socialism / Capitalism are not binary. Even USA is not full capitalist now.

China has (partially) planned economy and regulates it quite heavily.

I agree

And regulation isn't socialism.

worker ownership and private ownership seem pretty binary to me

...

It is Socialism (not the whole of it, but an element of it), if it is done in the interests of people, according to the will of the people.

Idealist, remove Lenin Hat.

So I guess since there are coops in the USA, and coops can be a transitional part of socialism, the USA is even more socialist!

fugg off, plz

Go away, porky.

It might as well be at this point with the religiousness that Marxists treat it with.

Insofar as workers in the Russian SSR were also basically slaves? Sure, like they were in the British and French empires.

This post would've been much more persuasive if you were capable of explaining what Materialism means in Marxist discourse. Refuting it in Hegelian discourse is pointless, after all.

I have no idea what meaningful definition of diamat he's trying to force to justify his ridiculous claim.

Why?

Neither Capitalism nor Socialism are static states. They are processes.

You think of them as binary: either Socialism, or Capitalism. This is Idealism (i.e. formalism). Abstract reasoning divorced from real world.

You don't dare to consider possibility that some parts of society might be Socialist, while others - Capitalist. Moreover, Socialist parts might have processes than turn them Capitalist, while Capitalist parts migh have Socialist processes. And speed of those processes might vary.

You believe that you have chemically clean Capitalism in US, just because someone said this to you. Even if practice (labour laws, yes) demonstrably proves that US has Socialist processes going on.

You are wrong.

What "why"? Why the same words might have different meaning in different context? Because we aren't machines, that's why.

starvation? permanently embarrassing the left? oppressive dictatorships?

Right, my Polish grandmother wasn't escaping Poland when she hid in the back of a truck traveling into Austria. She only snuck out of Poland because she wanted to tell the rest of the world how nice it was there. The only reason she never went back was cause she was still busy telling everyone how much fun Poland is.

It's not like 90% of my family died working in forced labor camps in Siberia or anything. I mean that's just anti-communist propaganda. They just all mysteriously disappeared one day because of divine intervention.

I don't want to be that guy, but it shows.
:^)

It's ok cambuddy. I'm a porky at heart :^)

You do realise how you look right now, don't you?

meh. Judge away, bucko

So what did they do? Whites? Nazis? Kulaks? Capitalists?

also

Nigger please, Soviet Union and anything associated with it was disliked here since its inception and all the stuff done by Stalin only added fuel to the fire.
Socialism is impotent in Poland for other reasons and there is a chance for it to recover, but I really doubt USSR will be ever loved here

you method killed millions, and has no freedom.

...

Is the notion that a nation-state could arrest people simply for what amounts to unfounded accusations in order to terrorize the population really so alien to you?

Meanwhile my family was fine (and some of them had been nazi collaborationists). Funny how anecdotal evidence works.

lool, mao accidently kills millions becuase he didn't know anything about food production.

china didn't even start looking like a nonshithole
until after mao died.

I'd like to hear his answer tho

Could that have had anything to do with poles having been spooked af nationalists with delusions of grandeur?

ww1 & ww2 didn't happen, tho

More like because after a century of being partitioned Poles wanted to do have a country again and since USSR wanted to end it, it was naturally seen as a threat, not to mention everybody here saw it as another inception of Russia. And then there was WWII with Mr. Stalin doing some mean things, which effectively killed any chance for communism to have any chance to be accepted here
The attitude presented by you definitely does not help at all.

The bird thing? Wasn't that a myth?

Except that's what they tell you now in schools to make you stay obedient to the porky and don't try Communism.

Just say I'm spooked and people executed during things like Trial of the Sixteen or Katyn were all reactionaries/fascists anyways, so we can be done with it and move on.

So our only options are unconditional support or absolute opposition to the USSR?

You're spooked and everyone who was killed was a reactionary or fascist.

Yes.
What were their crimes?

Can everybody and especially marxists stop using spook, its to damn ironic that its getting kidna pathetic.

No, but it's quite typical to read stupid shit like "everybody in Poland is brainwashed/indoctrinated/whatever", because he isn't acting like a model tankie, which is, delicately speaking, quite irritating.

No

That's just pitiful.

Also
It's been 25 years and it still isn't properly excavated. We have to rely on totally unbiased Goebbels claims and one incomplete and mildly edited report from small Polish expedition. Well, there also was one Soviet research, but Germans are obviously more reliable due to their inborn integrity. Now why would that be?

Mind you, I'm not even asking what happened to remembering all those Poles who got massacred by West Ukrainian nationalists, since those nationalists are currently best friends of Poland. This kinda contradicts your "enemies forever" idea.

Or why only one Pole ever went to space.

I don't think any Marxists use Stirner's methodology. I can, however, accuse people of Idealism.

It's really hard to find balanced opinions on the issue. Was there covert ops trying to undermine the USSR? You bet. Is the failure of the USSR is reducible to it? Of course not. Is there porky anti-communist propaganda drowning us? Sure. Does that mean we can't have our own criticism of the USSR? Of course not.

And those lovely documents, like the one sent from Beria to Stalin or the approval by Politburo, amirite? :^)
Lolno, many people are still quite angry, especially the right-wingers. Only centrists are willing to forgive since they're pragmatists, but conservatives really like to call Ukrainians "Banderists".

Lets see one one side we have anarchists who for all intents and purposes, the only barrier to them being useful is "its not possible so dont even try" argument and then we have Leninist's and Stalinist's on the other side.

Not a very hard choice really.

They held a moderate amount of land near Vilnus. Low aristocracy basically. They gave up the land, but Soviets still saw em as a threat and tried to wipe em out. I don't remember how my grandparents got away.

or at least that's how I heard the story.

any reason?

Really fucking spooky.

Just makeing a point bout this whole anarchist v Marxists shit flinging that see been going on for years m8. The marxists always try so hard to shit on the anarchists and then say they're fringe and insignificant even though their hasn't been any kind of successful or useful Marxist action anywhere for decades. Not saying im for the anarchists in particular, but atleast they do things now, you marxists just complain about a lack of theory and talk about the russian revolution and the spanish civil war and point fingers and scream shit on everything. Its fantatsic to watch. To bullshit, i get popcorn whenever these arguments come up to see who gets saltier first.

Like?

Tankies really have lost it

Anyway saging gay tankie thread

Nuit debut, rojava, occupy.

Something. Anything.

NOT AN ARGUMENT

It's a mixed bag of movements.


While very important at raising class consciousness it was a shitfest of idpol and their anti-representationalism pretty much killed the organization. You might as well argue that socdems are at least doing something thanks to B████ and Corbyn…

Zapatistas, Food not bombs, The Anarchist Black Cross, the Iww (Though they are a mixed bag), Common Struggle, Rojava (Here comes the shit flingging), Riots (Debatable on their usefulness but hey, the fuck are you doing?) and shit tons of other shit. Meanwhile Marxists are confined to in-party politics and shitting on each other and everyone else for not following the true vanguard party's or doing anything for working people other than offer partys that get co-opted into the capitalist frame work anyway. Now, dont take this as me hateing all Marxists, ive worked with many, some are really dedicated revolutionaries, but even they recognize the importance or working within an organization that actually does something to they participate in anarchists organizations.

Autonomist/libertarian-marxist, really. But they are pretty opportunistic so they'll allow you to call them anything as long as they get your support. Not a very successful movement, either. They got stuck where they started. I guess that counts as 'doing something'?

You list a few local/country-wide names that are insignificant beyond that scope. It's not bad, but not as successful in their overall effect as Occupy, or B████. My point is: any Marxist party could list their own little projects in their own little parties and would look just as much ridiculous if they wanted to show them as proof that they are "more active" than anarchists.

I already stated the fact that they are for a creation of a state. This isn't a matter of opinion.

Sure, I wouldn't call them anarchists. But a democratic confederation is a hell of a lot better than the USSR.

other than that they used to own land and knew people? Not that I know of.

My grandmother escaped generations later cause the living conditions for almost everyone in Communist Poland were utter shit. It was corrupt as fuck too. What was left of my family lived in a tiny apartment with another family just outside Gdansk. The party officials lived in the former wealthy folk's homes in Gdansk proper.

The family purge happened was when my great granddad was young. He became a doctor when he moved to Gdansk and somehow secured extra petroleum rations and used it to bribe the right people so my grandma could escape. None of my living relatives were alive when we were land owners, but the older ones all remember what it was like in Communist Poland.

...

I'm not an anarchist, that wasn't me. I just don't like the knee-jerk leftist reaction to the YPG as a "national liberation movement" and therefore bad.

They were pulling an "it was all propaganda" about Communist Polan. All I'm saying is that you don't have to look that far to find how corrupt and violent tankies can be when you let em in power.

It's just abhorrent how violent revolutionary politics can be.

...

The YPG are not for the creation of a nation-state.

You mean the ones "discovered" by the rabidly anti-Soviet government during the anti-Soviet hysteria on 1990? The ones being flaunted at each and every occasion against the Socialist parties ever since? The ones nobody is allowed to investigate closely for over two decades?

Nope. Never heard of them.

The point stands. "Crimes" of USSR have nothing to do with anti-Communism in Poland.

kek. I don't need your sass fam.

Just messin with you.

would you gulag your own parents for communism, tho?

OP, here, actually I'm an anarchist. I do this to get anarchists to respond to the content of the video, but they never do. I'm partly to blame for making a thread in an obnoxious manner though. I think anarchists need to go read.

what was the party elite

High rank state servants. You can find such a thing in every capitalist country.

Capitalist countries like the USSR, you mean? :)

Yes.