|
Pomeroy posted:Seconding Joe, and if anarchist adjacent Maoists don't want to hear this sort of thing from Marxist Leninists, here's a Maoist, from a party actually in process of waging people's war: https://josemariasison.org/on-the-question-of-peoples-war-in-industrial-capitalist-countries/ Not in reference to those specific quotes, but this piece started a whole international debate because it’s a very classical ML take that maoism was supposed to have a hard disagreement with. But no, the big authority of still ongoing people’s war is saying that it’s not possible in the first world and people’s war can at best be used as a metaphorical call. Looked at from a maoist maoist perspective, it speaks in favor of a sort of inverse third-worldism: while third-worldist claim that the subjective conditions for revolution don’t exist, Sison’s claim implies that the objective conditions don’t. Why? Because one of maoism’s original core claims is that classical insurrection is a basically unworkable revolutionary strategy that only succeeds on the off chance that everything goes your way and you land in control of a real military with highly qualified officers and so on almost without a fight. The conditions for classical armed insurrection will never be ripe on their own, so all that is left is supporting the efforts of ”the global countryside” to change the objective conditions in the metropoles.
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 13:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 00:10 |
|
|
MizPiz posted:Semantically, "politics is war without bloodshed/war is politics with bloodshed" implies war and politics are dialectically opposed; "war is politics by other means/politics is war by other means" implies war and politics are alternative versions of the same concept. idg how the first one implies opposition, since it also posits politics and war as different versions of the same concept, depending on the presence of bloodshed (which would be the "other means" from the 2nd quote)
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 13:47
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:They are ridiculous, who recommended them? Kotkin is a right-wing nut. Kotkin is the good kind of nut who believes communism to be so self-evidently evil that his big contribution should be downplaying all the bullshit weaved about Stalin’s personal or theoretical imperfections and make the real horror about how Stalin was a regular person and a communist responding to issues based on practical application of the ideology to the conditions. He became the leader because he was the guy who could get results. It’s sort of a cautionary tale for millennials not to trust the nice communists because they’ll raise up and idolize a Stalin given that that’s who it takes to make their long held dreams closer to reality. I wish Black Book etc weren’t part of his canon, but it’s worth it as a whole. ”Leftist” takes from at least trot-sympathizers, anti-totalitarianism libs and ”Stalin did nothing wrong” types are just miserable in comparison. uncop fucked around with this message at 14:09 on Jun 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 14:02
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:They are ridiculous, who recommended them? Kotkin is a right-wing nut. Me
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 15:23
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 15:45
|
|
|
uncop posted:Kotkin is the good kind of nut who believes communism to be so self-evidently evil that his big contribution should be downplaying all the bullshit weaved about Stalin’s personal or theoretical imperfections and make the real horror about how Stalin was a regular person and a communist responding to issues based on practical application of the ideology to the conditions. He became the leader because he was the guy who could get results. It’s sort of a cautionary tale for millennials not to trust the nice communists because they’ll raise up and idolize a Stalin given that that’s who it takes to make their long held dreams closer to reality. I don't think dispelling the "evil warlock" myth is really enough, Magnetic Mountain (for example) had sketchy archival work and he would even respond to the obvious bs he was doing with statistics. quote:The key moment in Kotkin’s volume is Stalin’s decision to go for all-out collectivisation of peasant agriculture. The standard story says the grain procurements crisis of 1927 made it necessary for the Bolsheviks to take radical action. But this argument has always had the weakness of not explaining why collectivisation was the radical action necessary, and Kotkin will have none of it. On the contrary, he says, collectivisation was a wild gamble – a move arising out of Stalin’s conviction that Russia could not achieve socialism without doing away with small-scale peasant farming. Nor was there anything necessary about sticking to all-out collectivisation through thick and thin. That happened because “right through mass rebellion, mass starvation, cannibalism, the destruction of the country’s livestock, and unprecedented political destabilisation, Stalin did not flinch. Feints in the form of tactical retreats notwithstanding, he would keep going even when told to his face by officials in the inner regime that a catastrophe was unfolding – full speed ahead to socialism.” Btw the entire part about collectivization is complete bull crap, collectivization was a response to a squeeze in trade credits after November 1929. I don't get this thread. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 16:04 on Jun 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 16:02
|
|
|
this was my take the last time this conversation happened GalacticAcid posted:Kotkin is certainly anticommunist but he lays out his assumptions and treats his subjects with good faith, without demonizing them, and lucidly outlines vast historical trends to contextualize events of the revolution.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 16:45
|
|
|
The actual best book on josef stalin is, of course, Blood Lies
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 16:47
|
|
|
THS posted:prediction: none of these marxist groups will grow meaningfully in either membership size or influence, and they will continue to be largely filled by white people who read theory but fail to relate with or lead ongoing movements against the state Its probably worth noting that movements like this dont spring from zeus's forehead fully formalized, they're developed by on-the-ground communist or anti-amerikan-justice-system groups doing invisible but critical work that then allows for the opportunities like what happened in minneapolis. Heres a post from the good folks at the zzone about it quote:The story of the twin cities uprising began much earlier with the murder of Jamar Clark in 2015. Jamar Clark was a black man murdered by the police, most likely on the ground while handcuffed. Protests were organized by BLM and this was the birth of TCC4J, who has been truly at the heart of mobilizing this movement and doing the grunt work. Intermittent protests went on for months, with the end result being that no charges would be filed. This was the birth of a mass org, TCC4J (Twin Cities Coalition for Justice 4 Jamar). Since the birth of TCC4J, there have been dozens of black men killed by the twin cities police. Protests and community work have been done for each one including the celebration of birthdays for the killed each year, bringing in national speakers to the university to talk about racism and police repression, events on the days they were murdered, and organizing for the prosecution of the police for months. Attendance for these events has ranged from a dozen people to thousands, all the while the organizers on the ground have been tirelessly working to build the political education of people around why mass action against the police is necessary. One of the most powerful aspects of these events is the families of the killed is the involvement of family members in the movement to bring their stories and humanize the victims. If events significantly smaller in the public consciousness, such as the murder of Jamar Clark, can eventually snowball into what we're currently seeing, then as long as people are proactive about organization theres no need to be a debby downer leftcom about the potential for mass class consciousness. Cuz otherwise we're just all sitting on our asses waiting for the jdpon to overthrow the gvmt and ship the whites off the continent Algund Eenboom fucked around with this message at 16:55 on Jun 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 16:52
|
|
|
Algund Eenboom posted:The actual best book on josef stalin is, of course, Blood Lies this but unironically. Timothy Snyder may as well be a Holocaust denier and let me just recommend Losurdo's Stalin book yet again, which goes a long way towards debunking Khrushchev's Secret Speech gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 16:57 on Jun 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 16:55
|
|
|
My hatred for Timothy Snyder is volcanic.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 17:01
|
|
|
Doctor Jeep posted:idg how the first one implies opposition, since it also posits politics and war as different versions of the same concept, depending on the presence of bloodshed (which would be the "other means" from the 2nd quote) I know, that's why I said it's semantics. Also, I'm pretty sure Clausewitz was the type of person who would be appalled if you said "politics is war by other means".
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 17:01
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:this but unironically. Timothy Snyder may as well be a Holocaust denier Wasnt ironic. Losurdo pwns as well
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 17:02
|
|
|
Vince mcmahon face Chomsky | V Parenti | V Losurdo | V Furr
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 17:04
|
|
|
Algund Eenboom posted:Vince mcmahon face Parenti V Losurdo V Chomsky/Furr
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 20:05
|
|
|
uncop posted:Not in reference to those specific quotes, but this piece started a whole international debate because it’s a very classical ML take that maoism was supposed to have a hard disagreement with. But no, the big authority of still ongoing people’s war is saying that it’s not possible in the first world and people’s war can at best be used as a metaphorical call. Assuming, of course, that "Maoism" really refers exclusively to Chairman Gonzalo and a few dozen angsty Norwegians... ah, and the tiny handful of Afghan Communists that sided with reactionary landlords and CIA backed torture squads, of course.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 20:13
|
|
|
So was there any opinion on 'Lenin' by Sebestyen? It kind of opens with the 'boo USSR bad' intro but it's been pretty fair thus far. There is a part where (allegedly), Lenin, supposedly in full disguise, can't help but 'well, actually' lecture some conductor about revolution lol
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 20:30
|
|
|
Danger posted:Fine and Saad-Filho's 'Marx's Capital' is absolutely the best onramp to Marx's critique. It is short, digestible and comprehensive. I bounced off this book pretty hard to the point where I just found it easier to try and read Marx lol
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 20:30
|
|
|
Scionix posted:what should I read to learn about the russian revolution and politics thru stalin, as well as the equivalent history for china through mao i liked china mievelle's october which covered feb-october 1917
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 20:32
|
|
|
mila kunis posted:i liked china mievelle's october which covered feb-october 1917 Cool. I like Mievelle's fiction stuff so I'll check it out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 20:38
|
|
|
mila kunis posted:i liked china mievelle's october which covered feb-october 1917 He's a good writer, but content-wise it's pretty much straight Trotsky, I'd argue you'd be better off reading his account directly, where it'll be a little more obvious when ego and personal rivalries are coloring his recollections.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 20:44
|
|
|
Pomeroy posted:He's a good writer, but content-wise it's pretty much straight Trotsky, I'd argue you'd be better off reading his account directly, where it'll be a little more obvious when ego and personal rivalries are coloring his recollections. otoh looking at my bookshelf, trotsky's book is at least twice as wide as mievelle's
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 20:46
|
|
|
Trotsky more like Notsky
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 20:48
|
|
|
mila kunis posted:I bounced off this book pretty hard to the point where I just found it easier to try and read Marx lol yeah i found good results just straight up digging into capital. it takes a little while to figure out why marx is setting all this crap up but the payoff is incredible
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 20:51
|
|
|
MizPiz posted:Semantically, "politics is war without bloodshed/war is politics with bloodshed" implies war and politics are dialectically opposed; "war is politics by other means/politics is war by other means" implies war and politics are alternative versions of the same concept. Am I right here that 'politics' in this context (and the original Mao quote) means international policy between nation states? Or am I looking for another definition here. I think I'm having another case of how is this word used in leftist canon versus its use in a liberal context. Placentaur fucked around with this message at 21:19 on Jun 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 21:14
|
|
|
nevermind.
Torpor fucked around with this message at 22:04 on Jun 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 21:39
|
|
Algund Eenboom posted:Wasnt ironic. Losurdo pwns as well Hoxha is a good anti-revisionist too. With Stalin: Memoirs from my meetings with Stalin. https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hoxha/works/stalin/intro.htm The Khruschevites. https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hoxha/works/1976/khruschevites/index.htm “Eurocommunism” is anti-communism. https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hoxha/works/euroco/env2-1.htm A4R8 fucked around with this message at 01:07 on Jun 9, 2020 |
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 00:59
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:this but unironically. Timothy Snyder may as well be a Holocaust denier if you think about it khruschev's denunciation of stalin was hate speech
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 01:35
|
|
|
stalin was POC
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 01:35
|
|
|
mila kunis posted:stalin was POC Правительства o' Совета
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 01:54
|
|
|
Scionix posted:what should I read to learn about the russian revolution and politics thru stalin, as well as the equivalent history for china through mao Just read the Short Course.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 02:42
|
|
|
mila kunis posted:stalin was POC wrong 
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 02:48
|
|
|
Needs to be a c-spam truth and reconciliation committee to document all the wrongs perpetrated against those of us who shat on bernie panders and Keith Ellison etc through the years....thankless work of posting, enduring unjust probations...
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 04:05
|
|
|
GalacticAcid posted:Needs to be a c-spam truth and reconciliation committee to document all the wrongs perpetrated against those of us who shat on bernie panders and Keith Ellison etc through the years....thankless work of posting, enduring unjust probations... That cannot happen until after we win
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 04:24
|
|
|
so what happens if i read all these here books and decide stalin was an rear end in a top hat, mao was a dumbass, and trotsky was a little annoying twink is that like third way marxism should i kill myself
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 04:59
|
|
|
Scionix posted:so what happens if i read all these here books and decide stalin was an rear end in a top hat, mao was a dumbass, and trotsky was a little annoying twink There are easier ways to get in touch with the vanguard that stands outside history, the demon hosts of Hell
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 05:34
|
|
|
Scionix posted:so what happens if i read all these here books and decide stalin was an rear end in a top hat, mao was a dumbass, and trotsky was a little annoying twink as long as you uphold Cuba and don’t talk to cops nobody gives a poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 05:37
|
|
|
someone get me a dnd alignment chart with famous communists STAT
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 05:41
|
|
|
Scionix posted:so what happens if i read all these here books and decide stalin was an rear end in a top hat, mao was a dumbass, and trotsky was a little annoying twink You aren't alone. We see you. We hear you
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 05:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 00:10 |
|
|
Karl Barks posted:You aren't alone. We see you. We hear you idk lenin seems mostly aight for now. Everything I read from marx was just  the whole time like bro you're from the 1400's dude how did u keep CALLING this poo poo he doesnt MISS
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 05:55
|
|