|
Sheng-Ji Yang posted:Modern renditions of songs from the Cultural Revolution could be played on the loudspeakers 24/7, which would do a great deal to raise class consciousness. Titles could include “Without the Communist Party, There Would Be No New Florida” and “The East Coast is Red.” It was definitely a joke. The tragically now deleted sequel included this: "To our comrades in [redacted]—we are ready to serve you in this moment of need. Point where you want us to shoot, and we will fire without mercy. Give us the command, and we will annihilate all of your enemies in a sea of revolutionary flames. With our combined strength, we can end this destructive conflict and bring order to the American Left." You may recognize that last sentence (more or less) from a certain popular science fiction movie.
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2020 02:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 00:00 |
|
|
PostNouveau posted:What the gently caress is the Spartacist League? I'm surprised to see them named here, as far as I was aware, their SoCal supporters had all split to form the "Internationalist Group," who I've had the displeasure to encounter twice, once when they tried to hijack the Q&A at an ANSWER Coalition Korea Unification conference to denounce the WPK as capitulationist, and once when one of them tried to call me an antisemite (self-hating, I suppose) for disagreeing with their delusional worker-ist line on Palestine. They're sometimes called "ortho-Trots" because on paper they're closer to Trotsky's actually stated views, critical support for "degenerated workers states" against imperialism, and so on, but in practice they're narrowly economistic sectarians, they invariably find excuses to dismiss national liberation struggles as bourgeois, and they have a bizarre obsession with seeing antisemitism everywhere, to the point that they can be counted on to defend whatever Hollywood sicko is exposed on any given day as the victim of a fascist witch hunt. EDIT: that said, I wouldn't want this to come off as justifying the LA leaders in this particular controversy, if DSA twitter is at all accurate, they're wanting to get rid of him because he's loudly demanding a break with the Democratic party, and an endorsement of a third party candidate against genocide Joe. Pomeroy has issued a correction as of 09:11 on Mar 30, 2024 |
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2024 09:04
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:See this is why I don't read books I appreciate the bit, but I really don't think anyone could come to their views independently, without being coached as an impressionable student. Even a person had only ever read their bible, Trotsky's "Transitional Program," would be extremely unlikely to interpret it as describing a world economic and political situation identical to that of the present day.* *ie, they justify an ineffective focus on trying to poach members from relatively tiny organizations today, on the grounds that Trotsky wrote, in the 30s, that all the most advanced workers were already in the official Communist Parties. Pomeroy has issued a correction as of 19:20 on Mar 30, 2024 |
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2024 18:59
|
|
|
Second Hand Meat Mouth posted:I'm gonna become an ortho trot just to prove you wrong That'd be a good bit, they do like doing silly things to try and prove MLs wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2024 19:26
|
|
|
Weka posted:
Essentially, the DPRK’s willingness to discuss one country / two systems or negotiate over weapons testing was supposed to prove that the political leadership were opportunists, plotting to betray the Korean revolution and sell the country to US imperialism. The panel and the audience were, shall we say, unreceptive to this line of argument.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2024 23:24
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:lemme guess, WSWS member right Technically not, but basically yes. From what I understand there are at least 3, and likely more US Trotskyist organizations, with seemingly indistinguishable politics, that take this line.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2024 23:29
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:if you're going to pretend that you don't understand why the molotov-ribbentrop pact happened how can you possibly be trusted to discuss the rest of socialist history Yeah, there's no question the Soviet Union made mistakes on Stalin's watch, and they can be worth discussing, but condemning him for Molotov-Ribbentrop, or treating it as anything other than a desperate last resort, tells you someone isn't operating in good faith. Pomeroy has issued a correction as of 07:00 on Apr 25, 2024 |
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2024 06:49
|
|
|
F Stop Fitzgerald posted:im sure stalin made some mistakes. maybe one day we'll find out what they were Well, you'll notice I said mistakes on his watch, not his mistakes. It's clear, so much so that even Trotsky had to admit in his own letters, that Stalin was not on the right flank of the party, and fought against opportunist tendencies in the party and the international movement to various degrees at various times, it's unlikely that he was the originator or the driving force of the worst decisions made during his tenure as General Secretary, but let's not pretend the UN vote for partitioning Palestine wasn't disastrous in its consequences, and a serious betrayal of the most basic principles of Marxism-Leninism, or that it was a completely isolated incident. The trend toward appeasement of US imperialism, the delusions of peaceful coexistence that did so much damage under Khrushchev, have clear precedents in the Stalin era, though it's also unlikely that he would have willingly allowed them to go as far as the rightists in the party did after his death. The unjustifiable and ultimately suicidal position of Khrushchev, that the friendship of the USSR and PRC be held hostage to the political submission of the Communist Party of China to the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, also has its own precedent in the split with Tito.* *it shouldn't be forgotten either, that both splits originated with a party initially taking a stronger line against imperialism than the Soviet line, having their countries treated as enemies for it, and then ultimately resorting to accommodation to that same imperialist threat in reaction. Pomeroy has issued a correction as of 06:56 on Apr 26, 2024 |
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2024 06:13
|
|
|
Weka posted:Some realpolitik is required and that will mean doing things your principles oppose. It has worked for China. Israel was a huge fail though. Stalinist non-conflict strategies have also worked for China. Don't blame Stalin for Khruschevite prostration beyond the fact that... "Realpolitik" is not a blank check. Compromises and retreats are often necessary, but this does not mean that anything and everything is permissible, and it does not mean that any decision that does not prove fatal is correct in hindsight. Communists recognize that strikes, and insurrections, and wars do not always end in victory, that one makes peace with enemies, not friends, and not always on the terms we would like. Communists also recognize that there is a difference between handing over a wallet, or even a pistol, to a bandit at gunpoint, and voluntarily assisting that bandit in subsequent murder and pillage, to wit: Lenin posted:Imagine that your car is held up by armed bandits. You hand them over your money, passport, revolver and car. In return you are rid of the pleasant company of the bandits. That is unquestionably a compromise. “Do ut des” (I “give” you money, fire-arms and a car “so that you give” me the opportunity to get away from you with a whole skin). It would, however, be difficult to find a sane man who would declare such a compromise to be “inadmissible on principle”, or who would call the compromiser an accomplice of the bandits (even though the bandits might use the car and the firearms for further robberies). Our compromise with the bandits of German imperialism was just that kind of compromise.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2024 21:17
|
|
|
Second Hand Meat Mouth posted:posting words I wrote elsewhere to address this Stalin slander re: Israel: I mean, I would hope no one here thinks Stalin was an ideologically committed Zionist, but that's beside the point. Many, maybe most opportunist errors and betrayals are made because the people making them think they're necessary or will have positive effects. Though if you're really arguing Stalin was fool enough to think Zionist colonialism would work out well for Arabs specifically, I think you're the one slandering him. Edit: and it isn't as though Communists didn't know what Zionism was, even the almost entirely Jewish Communist Party in Palestine, not to mention the COMINTERN, had recognized at least a decade prior that the actual base for revolution and anti-imperialism in Palestine was the Palestinian masses. Pomeroy has issued a correction as of 23:36 on Apr 28, 2024 |
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2024 21:24
|
|
|
Cassian of Imola posted:this genocide is bad. unfortunately, however, everyone who currently opposes the genocide is also bad. Houthi concern trolls hijacking my Temu deliveries hurt everyone, including disabled Gazans who rely on Red Sea shipping to literally eat Could you find a different topic for your trolling? This poo poo sucks.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2024 21:33
|
|
|
Cassian of Imola posted:I'm mocking the R&R guy here. not trolling you. sorry if that didn't come across but I thought I was laying it on pretty thick, both with that and posting the image of the tweet advocating turning anti-genocide protests into votes for AOC fair enough, think I'm just in an irritable mood.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2024 23:38
|
|
|
Weka posted:Post the times Stalin sucked off the imperialists Again, you're personalizing the matter, reducing it to our speculations about the motives of Stalin the individual. What are you actually asking here? If I give you a straight answer, without clarifying terms, I am implicitly accepting your framing, thereby abusing Stalin as having "sucked off the imperialists" - this is not a good faith question. Do you think Mao was slandering Stalin when he called him 70 percent good and 30 percent bad? What was the 30 percent? As far as mistakes that were made on his watch, in relation to imperialism, apart from accommodating Zionism (and I think some folks here are drastically underselling the significance of that betrayal), Mao touches on the Chinese case here: https://www.marxists.org/subject/china/documents/polemic/qstalin.htm If you want another example, there's always Greece, and then the follow-on effects that brought about in Yugoslavia. Weka posted:Well, not Palestinian Zionism at least, I'm unsure in a more general sense. Zionism was not something the Bolsheviks were unfamiliar with, it was not new in the 1940s, and it was, from the beginning, explicitly a colonial project in search of imperialist sponsorship. In the Russian context, the Zionists were openly in league with the most counter-revolutionary Tsarists and pogromists in the country before the Revolution. Pomeroy has issued a correction as of 03:43 on Apr 29, 2024 |
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2024 00:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 00:00 |
|
|
rudecyrus posted:virgin khrushchev vs chad mao It's a great piece. I'd rate his polemic against Togliatti higher, on a similar subject, but it's close. Pomeroy has issued a correction as of 05:18 on Apr 29, 2024 |
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2024 01:55
|
|