[dude with glasses in a communist t-shirt, arguing] I’m the only leftist here, your opinions are TRASH
[dude holding a theory book on smug, arguing] Read theory you losers, you’re all WRONG
[dude in an anarchist hoodie, arguing] Nuh-uh, I’m the only leftist here, you’re SHITLIBS
[the three dudes are now caught in a cartoon fight, glasses gone flying, punches everywhere, while a firing squad of nazis are targeting them with rifles]
[a confused nazi asks] Why… why are they still arguing?
This is what happens when hyper-individuality becomes a core of your (western) society. It’s also a byproduct that inadvertently benefits the ruling class. They want division and leftist pockets are already doing it themselves in a lot of cases. Purity tests can fracture communities and needlessly push away potential allies.
It’s why I tend to quote Fred Hampton often. He correctly understood that it was a working class versus ruling class situation and that arguing amongst ourselves was detrimental to organizing. It’s a vertical fight and horizontal attacks waste energy. You can still point out errors in what a comrade says. Criticism, self-criticism, and debate are all components of democratic centralism.
The problem lies when one particular set of “leftists” thinks the best way foward is to have a literal capitalist state with a red flag and execute anyone who could even be a minimal obstacle to that.
The more nuanced communists understand that the past doesn’t have to define the future 1:1, but they also have the uphill battle of people agreeing with everything they say, until they actually mention the word “communism,” thanks to decades of propaganda.
It’s not only decades of propaganda.
Whether you like it or not, but many countries have suffered enourmosly (genocides, extermination of local language and culture) under the banner of regimes that claimed to represent communist ideals and allegedly aimed to develop a communist society.
I was born in the tail end of the USSR, so I honestly don’t really remember it. But from the stories of my parents and relatives, it was trash.
You can’t just dismiss the association between the USSR and attempts at achieving communism.
I’ve talked to a handful of people that lived through that era in Russia and none of them had positive things to say. They were all working class folks. I trust their judgment over someone on the internet, and I don’t get sucked into team sports identity type shit. We can pick and choose the good ideas and acknowledge the shitty ones.
That’s my point. USSR and the CCP have arguably permanently damaged the communism “brand”.
And you talked to russians, things were even worse for nations occupied by the russians.
Trying to decouple the term and core ideas from the past actions is going to be an uphill battle forever. That requires imagination and forward thinking, but you have the folks dunking on it because of the atrocities carried out under it, and the folks on the other side that have managed to embrace those parts so hard that they can no longer sea reason or find nuance.
Yes it is exactly like how antichrists have co-opted the term Christian. For many if it ever was, it will never be clean again in their lifetime unless there’s some massive Purge. They never were Christians and, will never be christians. But as long as they’re allowed to be the face of Christianity it’s only going to hurt it as a whole. At least more than it already hurts itself.
Yes, we need a “brand” that builds upon the ideals (and some of the theory) of communism/Marxism while taking in account both history (e.g. even something as simple as democratic governance being non-negotiable) and the “spirit” and challenges of our times.
So, utopianism.
It took centuries before any liberal or democratic project managed to produce a society that wasn’t far more brutal than the USSR. Yet you don’t see people going around saying “the French Revolution permanently damaged the Democratic brand!”
Because the French Revolution didnt permanently damage democracy as a political system. And democratic system in one form or another existed for millennia before the French Revolution.
The USSR and China under the CCP permanently discredited (without any chance of rehabilitation) communism as legitimate ideology.
No one in their right mind would want anything to do with communism. It’s like asking for genocide, mass killings, gulags, lack of free expression and poverty. No one is going to do that.
And I not saying this in the polemical sense used by pro-crime/pro-corruption Americans (“this is such a socialist shirhole”).
Ok. Neither did the communist revolutions of the 20th century permanently damage communism as a political system.
As have anarchist and communistic systems.
No. They didn’t. Only too western liberals who were always hostile to communism would say that. The idea that communism is permanently dead just because capitalists didn’t like it is pure “end of history” Neo-liberalist nonsense, and basically ignores the fact that a large chunk of the worlds population still actively feels positively about these revolutionary projects; to say nothing of the people who don’t like those particular ones, but still agree with communism in general.
Besides, so called “liberal democracies” have done far more evil than the USSR or Communist China. In fact, they’re doing a repeat of the Holocaust as we speak. Does that “permanently (without any chance of rehabilitation) discredit democracy as a legitimate ideology”?
Sure, if you’re a complete dullard who has mainlined nothing but pure, concentrated cold war propaganda without any thought or consideration, without ever bothering to open a single book on political theory. Everyone else is not that stupid.
And guess what? You have genocide, mass killings, gulags, lack of free expression, and poverty now, no communism needed. In fact, communism has almost always been associated with a reduction in those things if you actually check the stats.
Yes, you are. That is exactly how you are saying it.
Under capitalism you can criticize capitalism. under communism, dissension is met with punishment.
If not death, or being institutionalised.
But you can also get institutionalised or killed under capitalism too if you say the wrong things (China, Russia, the Gulf States).
While you might not be killed in the US, but you can be harassed via lawsuits or deported to a foreign internment camp if you say the wrong things.
“claimed” and “allegedly” being the keywords here
I am aware of that. I’m just like… I see a lot of “leftists” that think “successful socialist projects” have to replicate the USSR 100% with everything good and bad about it mixed in. If your definition of “building a better world” is killing or enslaving people for disagreeing with you, you are not a leftist, you’re a nazbol.
And like, the USSR clearly does not exist anymore, and for most of its existence it made a joke out of socialist principles.
We’ve also seen years of what Russia in its current state and Putin are capable of. None of it is good. Hell, when I was more active in activist circles I was in very close proximity to a Russian-driven disinformation campaign in 2016 that used and exploited leftist organizations for its own benefit. It wasn’t some “hey, we’re friends” situation; it was the Kremlin using and disposing of people to destabilize in the same way the US and western powers have for decades themselves. Hitching your wagon to other political powers is a shit idea. There is a reason I don’t trust any politician.
How did you uncover this information?
Articles started popping up and an activist group near me, as well as a couple others across the country, were also involved. A Russian very obviously associated with the Kremlin, was flowing money to these orgs under the guise of a common goal and alignment. Their ultimate goal was to sow chaos during election time and to take votes away from other candidates. It was US-esque tactics on US soil.
I didn’t uncover anything and was merely volunteering with one of the groups when I could, but it was one of those “oh fuck” moments when I saw articles involving the group I was working with.
What do you mean “articles”? Articles where? Based on what?
Involved in what? How did you determine this?
What do mean “very obviously associated with the Kremlin”? How did you determine this?
Again, how did you determine this?
What was? What actually was found?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Ionov
The organizations him and his company worked with were also pulled into that investigation and, in some cases, charged themselves. I was no longer working with them by the time the charges came, so it was scary to suddenly see articles years later being published about this.
Well… How hard to they want to use that word?
Even more because if everybody is actually agreeing, that means they didn’t wander anywhere outside of the “Social Democracy” boundaries of communism, and don’t need to use the generic label that fascists stole long ago.