The Left's obsession with "the masses" is harming us

The Left's obsession with "the masses" is harming us.

Most of the times, when some leftist talks about preaching to the masses, to the common people and so on, this means dumbing down our theoretical principles, softening our organizational principles and moderating our political principles in order to become more affable to the regular person.

However, we'll never succeed if our praxis doesn't involved raising the masses' cultural standards. We're educated by and socialize in bourgeois Ideology, and people will not rebel against it if they're not instructed on its social foundations. Theory is essential, and without it we'll be consistently conforming with the status quo in order to follow the rabble. So, despite selling itself as a more practical and down-to-earth approach to politics, the "dude, let's talk to THE PEOPLE" approach is usually what leads to all the idiotic attempts of Leftists who think they will co-opt religion, nationalism, and sometimes even liberalism in our favor. They can't talk the average person out of its prejudices and illusions, so they try pathetically to make use of them instead.

IMO, what's blocking our advancement in any direction is that we always think of this as our idea of praxis, so we're not motivated to act because the average person is a boob. Instead, we should rethink the scope of our activity. We should own up to the closed, elitist, somewhat conspiratorial nature of modern Leftism and focus on self-improvement through study circles and small units, like the early Marxist cells in the late 19th century Russia. Once these units grow and become cohesive, disciplined and active, we can gradually expand into more and more segments of society and then move on to mass politics again. Until then, we're wasting our time with the pseudo-populist shit.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=FnIoNKK00bg
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Definitely reading this

Isn't what you're describing essentially vanguardism?

Every time we admit that the common people are not exactly open to radical politics, someone drops the V word.

That's exactly what it is.

Well there's nothing wrong with vanguardism, it's a sound strategy.

...

I still think Vanguardism refers to an elite substituting itself for the masses. This isn't the case, the masses are brought in eventually.

What you want is impossible. The masses cannot be educated, they can only be led and manipulated like sheep.

So you all admit that you want to replace the bourgeoise as the masters of the human race?

It's really another dictator replacing the old dictator and declaring itself to be a benevolent dictator.

So the masses much be ignored, and have communism forced onto them?
So what I understand from all over you mass murdering, power hungry communists is that you are willing to kill billions of people, if it means you will have control over the Earth, over the remaining humans? Where you can force your ideology, repress thought, speech and render the masses as slaves for the communist party?

Jesus, this is too corny writing even for Holla Forums. Which hellhole did you two spawn from? Did the National Review just publish an article on Holla Forums?

Yes, the masses must bow down and serve the vanguard elite.

Vanguardism is not simply about replacing one master with another, it's simply to ensure the masses are educated to the point that they can run the state.

Admittedly leninism is best suited for less developed countries, such as rural russia.

It's not corny, you power hungry tankie.
If you talk about how a vanguard is need for your revolution, and also talk about how the masses don't know what's best for them, you are effectively forcing communism onto billions of people. Millions will die, possibly billions.
You will likely send the normal people who criticize communism, likely most people, into gulags to be tortured. The Left cannot comprehend the idea of the majority of people rejecting communism.

lol

Given how serious Leftypol is in creating a vanguard party, therefore killing millions and installing a global dictatorship.

I think i'll email the FBI and CIA this thread.

Yet I don't believe tankies when they claim that they will suddenly give up power to the people.

Oh shit pls don't

It's not about giving up power. if there's one thing lenin did wrong it's not immediately give over the means of production to the workers. Without the need to protect private property what else will the state do? The state cannot exist without class antagonisms. The NEP ruined the soviet union.

So then basically, all you are is a bunch of déclassé intellectuals who failed to be part of the ruling class, under the current system and want to dominate the proletariat by another means.

Is replacing one elite ruling class with another really a revolution?

low quality bait

Uhm, you do realize that the other imperialists were still there?
Even if the USSR would have given over power to the workers, the wouldn't have withered away because it still needed a fucking ARMY. And don't start this fucking shit about "muh militias", have you seen the Kekalonian "military" and it's track record of lowest discipline in the history of warfare and 0 wins?

You don't fucking deserve your Lenin hat, change that shit to donkey.

Can your brain tumor be operated on, or did the doctors give you bad news?

Do you touch yourself while you imagine yourself as the supreme leader?

Haha if your stupid enough to trust them it won't be long until they stab you in the back.

I'm not, I'm not under the belief that the average prole is a boob but certainly a large enough plurality of them are that porky constantly temporarily empowers to frustrate leftist efforts.

To create a revolution you have to educate people in the most precious position in our global economy.

Porky has unimaginable wealth relative to even middle class people. All porky has to do to stop any change is give the most menial concessions to a poor worker.

I don't blame poor workers for this, I come from a working poor family. But your asking the most vulnerable people to pull double duty. Bear the most white hot exploitation in capitalism, then be educated enough to resist the temptation to take a porky concession.

This is why I support reformism. Capitalism is not rational and is rife with contradictions. Leftist have gotten through these openings have gotten and most importantly maintained gains for the proletariat. When every porlitariat in a given geographic area is able to enjoy a gain, it becomes extremely hard for porky to take it away later.

The neoliberalism we have now took 30 years.

Pic related, you have 2 million active duty soldiers willing to blow away at a moments notice any prole standing in the way of porky's interest.

You'd literally have to order them to kill every white child in the US before they even BEGUN to question their orders.

the state won't suddenly be gone. They can still raise a proper military. The state withers over the course of decades if not centuries. By the time the state does wither most of the populace will be properly trained operating on the same principle as cubas literacy propgram.

Our media co-op produced a short animation illustrating the huge income gap between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie.

youtube.com/watch?v=FnIoNKK00bg

Don't exist except in a Big Otherish way.

100% agree.

Sometimes when I'm just about to reach climax, I remember that vanguardism has democratic checks and balances and my cum is ruined. The poopy diaper smell coming from the Ultras' hideout, the dumpster, also puts me off.

nice porky you snuck in there

Yeah. The biggest indicator that this dude hasn't ever done political work is in thinking that masses exist as a useful category for political action.

The 'masses' will never be ready for communist measures–the 'masses' always present the reproduction of capital's unknowing representation of itself to itself. It's a completely empty concept.

The masses are empty universal representation of what's really a particularized set made up of southern blacks, urban youth, intellectuals, Hispanic immigrants, skilled white labor, trans weirdos, rural poor, etc.. Class is lived through particular, concrete circumstances.

Identity politics recognizes this and it's a positive moment as such, but also one to be negated and overcome by returning into the universality of class.

So instead of insulating yourselves into study groups and cliques looks around at the actual existence of class struggle and stop waiting for the emergence of pure class/mass action. It's not gonna happen.

It's far from impossible. Indeed, it's already happened several times.

Go ahead, even their own laws and courts say I'm free to say whatever the hell I want politically, as long as I'm not giving a name and a time. If that weren't so, their porky asses would have long been roasted.

So are you saying to start agitating for an emergence of a pure-class movement? Or are you saying we should primarily use idpol to lead in to discussion of class?

Lets be honest. A lot of revolutionaries are basically created from "elite overproduction and elite competitoon". Then the elite aspirants who are losees basically rally the population to overthrow the last elites.

The endpoint would still be better.

Given how american soldiers in 1960s didnt exactly have the friendliest attotude towards the american state, I would suggest the breaking point is probably easier than that. You can likely radicalize at least some of the ROTC students in civilian universities given theyre not subject to the same processes at US military academies (people apparently dislike the academy trained officers as they're cliqueish and dickish?)

So Leftypol admits that it hates the proles, thinks they are too dumb to want to be enslaved by communists or anarchists in your shit utopias.
Leftypol just wants to replace Porky, it doesn't give a shit if the majority of humanity wants capitalism.

Poor quality bait m8.

Not at all, leftism is inherently anti-authoritarian.

...

Leftism is synonymous with anti-hierarchy and has been since the French Revolution. What the fuck?

i wish!

anti-hierarchy =/= anti-authoritarian
even anarchists will have to impose their voluntary utopia with violence

It was like that in the 1960's because of the draft. You had a bunch of petite-bourgeoisie young men that were not used to the level of exploitation that the military put them through, so they rebelled and nearly broke the army.

Now you have an "all-volunteer" (read: only poor people join) military. And all those problems are gone, since everyone in the military is actually pretty desperate to be there.

If you read up on it you'll find unanimous rejection from military officers for a return to the draft.

You can't raise the masses cultural standards until you've removed the systemic barrier that keeps it lowered.

Actually that's EXACTLY what it means. Damn…

No.

Anarchists, however, are against unjustified hierarchies. Reddit likes to think anarchism is about abolishing every hierarchy they can find and somehow find pleasure in living in a vague confusing mess.

Please read a book if you're going to tripfag

It's not supposed to be given away, the state is supposed to wither away when people start doing the things the state would oragnize on their own.

Fuck leninists tho.

Bumpo.