Mugabi a communist??

[RED ARMY FACTION]

I do not know anything about mugabe, he is said to be evil, cruel a beast beyond imagination, but when someone said he was communist i thought, well they said stallin was evil, but he was our saviour.

[Spawn of Stalin]

I've done a fair bit of reading on Mugabe and he isn't really the tyrant he's portrayed as, yes, he's done some pretty damn ridiculous things, he ain't no liberal, but his main crime seems to be what can only be described as economic mismanagement, something that Mao was also guilty of to a certain, admittedly lesser extent.

[RED ARMY FACTION]

so what is his ideology comrade?

[punisa]

Hello comrade Red Son, I see that you are knowledgeable on Robert Mugabe. Could you point to some good reading sources on the man? I'd like to learn more too.
One thing that I remember reading about him is that he has like 10 college degrees or something like that, he was very active in his years wasn't he :)

Another thing I remember, from rather tiny bit of resources I've studied on him, is that Zimbabwe was the most prosperous of all African nations once liberated (70's ?), even more then South Africa.
Economic mismanagement - yes. But lets not forget that economy is a mighty imperialist weapon. When you have US against you, you're bound to take a steep way down.

[gorillafuck]

well they said stallin was evil, but he was our saviour.
Even if you have a positive view of Stalin referring to him as "our savior" is nuts.

[RED ARMY FACTION]

how, he kept the russian revolution alive when the german and other revolutions crumbled.
He increased grain to4 million tonnes a year to 40 million tonnes a year, turning russia into the superpower it became.

[FSL]

Mugabe for the most part of his years in power governed exactly as he was supposed to, leaving everything to the few had them already and nothing to everyone else.

As tensions rose there was a forced appropriation of land owned by white "conquistadors". The only thing he did that was half decent but certainly not making him a leftist, maybe someone who like his position of power?

There weren't any other major changes in the economy (not much support to the new farmers, no effort in training them etc)and the economic attack that followed by the west and primarily England -that obviously couldn't stand to sit and watch as (white) people lost the land they took with so much (black people's) blood- crippled the economy even more.

[Spawn of Stalin]

so what is his ideology comrade?
ZANU-PF is kind of a pan-socialist party, it was formed as something of a national liberation movement during white rule in Rhodesia with their main concern being land reform. Mugabe became a Marxist-Leninist with strong Maoist leanings during the liberation struggle, I don't know if he still identifies as a Marxist-Leninist, but he is extremely anti-imperialist and certainly still supports socialism as reflected by his allies in Libya, Cuba, DPRK and the South African Communists.

Hello comrade Red Son, I see that you are knowledgeable on Robert Mugabe. Could you point to some good reading sources on the man? I'd like to learn more too.
Okay, there isn't much other than articles and books with a pro-imperialist slant, so it's up to the reader to do the thinking and analyisng. Martin Meredith wrote a good book called The State of Africa, it covers all aspects of African independence and has a lot of writing about Mugabe's revolutionary activities in Rhodesia, there's also a lot about Mandela in there too. Dinner with Mugabe is an excellent biography and is fairly accurate as far as facts are concerned, it takes an anti-Mugabe stance but the important thing is how you interpret the information presented to you.

Lalkar have published some good material on Zimbabwe and Mugabe, no, it isn't unbiased, it takes a pro-ZANU-PF stance, so like I said, analyse the information how you will.

Zimbabwean Elections and Imperialist Propaganda (http://www.lalkar.org/issues/contents/may2008/zim.php)
Zimbabwe: Imperialism's attempts at regime change in the name of concern for human rights (http://www.lalkar.org/issues/contents/nov2007/zim.php)
Oppose continuing demonisation of Zimbabwe (http://www.lalkar.org/issues/contents/jul2005/zim.php)
The truth about Zimbabwe (http://www.lalkar.org/issues/contents/may2005/zim.php)
Zimbabwe will never be a colony again (http://www.lalkar.org/issues/contents/nov2004/zim.html)

Imperialist propaganda on Zimbabwe has traditionally focussed on human rights concerns, but more recently it has turned its attention to alleged electoral fraud, I don't know a great deal about what actually happened so I'm not really qualified to comment, but one important thing to keep in mind is that the capitalist media never tells us how ZANU-PF lost control of parliament in the election, and accepted this defeat, because this of course, makes ZANU-PF, look pretty good.

One thing that I remember reading about him is that he has like 10 college degrees or something like that
I think he earned most of these while he was in prison, and he has a bunch of honorary degrees too, some of which have been revoked at the request of the British government.

Even if you have a positive view of Stalin referring to him as "our savior" is nuts.
Actually, this may not be true, if it wasn't for Stalin we might all have ended up with Nazi puppet governments.

[A.R.Amistad]

Even if you have a positive view of Stalin referring to him as "our savior" is nuts. Sing it comrade.


how, he kept the russian revolution alive when the german and other revolutions crumbled.
He increased grain to4 million tonnes a year to 40 million tonnes a year, turning russia into the superpower it became.

Hmmm sounds like some other imperialist power that I know :/

[RED ARMY FACTION]

are you seriously condeming comrade stalin.

[Philosophical Materialist]

He's certainly influenced by Black nationalism and Maoist thought. The original ZANU was backed by the PRC, emphasising the liberation struggle as led by the peasants. Then there was ZAPU, backed by the USSR which emphasised the leadership of the small urbal proletariat.

Britain and the US initially favoured ZANU due to its ties to PRC (post-Nixon China was favoured by US diplomacy as a counterbalance to the USSR) and in return Mugabe accepted a very generous post-Rhodesian settlement for the white farmers.

The white farmers remained a strong base for supporting the newly-merged ZANU-PF (ZANU and ZAPU) in the 1980s, and Zimbabwe received British military aid for supporting the interests of the white economic elite.

Mugabe attempted to tackle the land problem in the 1990s, but Britain stopped transfer of compensation under the original 1980 treaty and as such Mugabe fell out with Britain and the US when he tried to use the Zimbabwean state to evict the white farmers.

Due to Anglo-American attempts to destabilise the government, Mugabe met this with a certain amount of state repression as he suspected most opposition to be linked to or funded by the West.

ZANU-PF has been guilty of some atrocities against its opponents, but the conditions of the time need to be analysed. While corruption is involved in the Party's hierarchy and takes resources away from social wealth, the West's sanctions have a part to play in the fall of living standards in Zimbabwe.

[rednordman]

Strangly enough, I have heard somewhere that the reason for success of zimbabwe after the liberation struggle, was due to his socialistic policies. It was when he became powermad and abandoned them that things starting going badly wrong. This was mainly due to the fact that he started to persecute white farmers, who where good at there jobs and replaced them with people who had zero experience (mainly his party cronies).

I do not know whether any of this is actually true, but it was cited on skynews once (hence the emphasis on the persercution of white people:rolleyes:). Which is very strange (the appraisal of anything other than capitalism). Could anyone rectify this for me?

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

He has not made any steps towards workers control henceforth he can fuck of and die.

[FSL]

It was when he became powermad and abandoned them that things starting going badly wrong. This was mainly due to the fact that he started to persecute white farmers, who where good at there jobs and replaced them with people who had zero experience (mainly his party cronies).


That screams propaganda.

White farmers weren't good at their jobs, they were good at telling others to do the work and then reaping the profits. Unless you think that their estates where small pieces of land barely enough for substinence farming.

But the new owners didn't have the capital or the state's support and also had to work in a hostile global environment that doesn't care much for social justice.

I 'm sure Mugabe still finds genuine support among the people now even with the economy in ruins, but he didn't do almost anything that could characterise him as a "popular leader" (other than the land reform years and years after he got on power).

[rednordman]

That screams propaganda.

White farmers weren't good at their jobs, they were good at telling others to do the work and then reaping the profits. Unless you think that their estates where small pieces of land barely enough for substinence farming.

But the new owners didn't have the capital or the state's support and also had to work in a hostile global environment that doesn't care much for social justice.

I 'm sure Mugabe still finds genuine support among the people now even with the economy in ruins, but he didn't do almost anything that could characterise him as a "popular leader" (other than the land reform years and years after he got on power).Thats what I thought, just it surprised me that they all said that he was the dictator that started off well, but then lost the plot. So I guess, they see it as ok so long as the whites (ruling class in this case) could profit from the hard labour of the working class without persecution.

[bailey_187]

Could you point to some good reading sources on the man? I'd like to learn more too.

You could try Harpal Brar's book called "Chimurenga! The Liberation Struggle in Zimbabwe"

http://www.cpgb-ml.org/index.php?secName=books&subName=display&bookId=5

Also available from Amazon

[Spawn of Stalin]

Good call, I need to get a copy of that, it supposedly reconciles black liberation and nationalism with proletarian struggles.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Well you seem to like Stalin a lot so I can see why Mugabe would appeal to such a person. I personally don't like because he is an enemy to the working class.

[FSL]

Well you seem to like Stalin a lot so I can see why Mugabe would appeal to such a person. I personally don't like because he is an enemy to the working class.


I like Stalin because of the millions he persecuted, Mugabe would score something like 0.3 in my "You're awesome!" scale.

[RED ARMY FACTION]

I like Stalin because of the millions he persecuted, Mugabe would score something like 0.3 in my "You're awesome!" scale.

This nonsence of millions in gulags is total crap cooked up by western capitalist powers.
Even trotsky said it was tens of thousands at most, and most were capitalist agents, theives etc.

Comrade stallin was a glorious leader, with whom i would of been glad to fight for, if necesary die for.
He was the greatest man of the USSR after only lenin maybe.

[chegitz guevara]

Comrade stallin was a glorious leader, with whom i would of been glad to fight for, if necesary die for.

Socialism is about your fellow man and woman, not about glorious leaders.

[Искра]

Comrade stallin was a glorious leader, with whom i would of been glad to fight for, if necesary die for.
He was the greatest man of the USSR after only lenin maybe.
:laugh:

[The Count]

Comrade stallin was a glorious leader, with whom i would of been glad to fight for, if necesary die for.
He was the greatest man of the USSR after only lenin maybe.
So-called "glorious leaders" should not have to kill off their opposition to stay in power. This is the mark of a man who is not confident in his abilities, and knows what he's doing is wrong.

That being said, Mugabe may have implemented some Socialist policies such as the re-distribution of land; however, if he's a Socialist, then so is Hitler.

"Our party must continue to strike fear in the heart of the white man, our real enemy!"

"The white man is not indigenous to Africa. Africa is for Africans. Zimbabwe is for Zimbabweans."

National Socialism promoted through hatred of an ethnic group? No, thank you.

[RED ARMY FACTION]

i did not claim to like mugabe, stallin was a great leader and was what the USSR needed at that hard time in history.

[Spawn of Stalin]

I'm not such a huge fan of Hitler myself. I'm down with Stalin but Hitler was just a murderer.

[FSL]

Hitler was pretty ok for the german capitalists, not his fault probably if they wanted to go from junior league to world masters in 10 years.

[Radical]

Mugabe has had some Marxist Leninist tendencies.

It is stupid, ignorant amd irrational to consider Mugabe an uninteligent person. He's studied at Oxford University and has a P.hd.

Mugabe gave his life resisting colonialisation and Imperialism of Zimbabwe. (Something which Trotskyites and Anarchists dont give a shit about)

Regardless of weather you agree or disagree with Mugabe's politics. He is a heroe of the resistance to imperialism, racism and monopoly.

[Искра]

i did not claim to like mugabe, hitler was a great leader and was what the USSR needed at that hard time in history.
you mean Stalin?
Now you wont get in the "commie paradise" when you die.


Originally posted by Red Son:
I'm not such a huge fan of Hitler myself. I'm down with Stalin but Hitler was just a murderer. When some one say that Stalin was "nothing more about a murderer", you (Stalin loving guys) go idiot, liberal, ractionary, haha.
You should post this on Stormfront. :)


Originally posted by Radical:
Mugabe gave his life resisting colonialisation and Imperialism of Zimbabwe. (Something which Trotskyites and Anarchists dont give a shit about)
That's right. We anarchist don't give a shit about upper class building it's national states, while making an ethnics cleansing of all other nations and in the case of Africa, tribes which they do not like. We anarchist don't give a shit about bourgeoisie stuff like nation and national state, because all that matters to us is proletariat, as international class. We are the correct line.
And I'll tell you one thing, because I'm fed up with this "search for socialism" in politics of parasites such as this idiot.
Slobodan Milošević was member of communist party of Yugoslavia. He was one of the most responsible politicians for Civil war here, he was responsible for ethnic cleansing of Croat, Muslims (here as nation's name) and Albanians. Off course, he had some "socialistic" politics, but only regarding his nation - Serbs, which he in the end exploit for his benefits and blood thirsty ideas. He was also against USA's Imperialism, and you should know that USA bombed Serbia. So, at the end of story some of you could use Radical's argument and put him here. And when some one from ex Yugoslavia would say to him that "Milošević was nothing but mass murderer" you will all shout reactionaries.
But, I don't care. I would just ask you when did it became communist to support nationalism?

[Pogue]

Mugabe has wrekced Zimbabwe with his awful leadership. It is widely achknowledged he has some sort of pscyhological fixation with the British, and he is also very clearly ruthless in his pursuit of power. He took a potential success story of independence struggle and corrupted it, thats all that can be said.

[FSL]

widely achknowledged he has some sort of pscyhological fixation with the British


No comments needed on that one.


when did it became communist to support nationalism?

Whenever nations are being opressed. You should read about it.

[bailey_187]

Mugabe has wrekced Zimbabwe with his awful leadership. It is widely achknowledged he has some sort of pscyhological fixation with the British, and he is also very clearly ruthless in his pursuit of power. He took a potential success story of independence struggle and corrupted it, thats all that can be said.

Come like you would even give a fuck if it was 'successful'

[Wanted Man]

It is widely achknowledged he has some sort of pscyhological fixation with the British

Of all the reasons to oppose Mugabe (and there are many good ones), this has to be one of the strangest. Where does this come from?

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Just thought I'd chime in with Mugabe's views on homosexuality:



Degrades human dignity. It's unnatural and there is no question ever of allowing these people to behave worse than dogs and pigs. If dogs and pigs do not do it, why must human beings? We have our own culture, and we must re-dedicate ourselves to our traditional values that make us human beings... What we are being persuaded to accept is sub-animal behaviour and we will never allow it here. If you see people parading themselves as lesbians and gays, arrest them and hand them over to the police!"

[RED ARMY FACTION]

Homophobia is a digrace

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Homophobia is a digrace

It is and anyone who condemns Homosexuality is a reactionary and cannot be considered Communist.

[Pogue]

Of all the reasons to oppose Mugabe (and there are many good ones), this has to be one of the strangest. Where does this come from?

Richard Dowden, Africa: Altered States, Ordinary Miracles.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Am I wrong in thinking that Mugabe was installed by none other than the Imperialist British?

[RED ARMY FACTION]

i agree no one who is homophobic can be communist, but fidel and che were slightly homophobic, yet not anti gay (they thought gay men were less masculine)

[Pogue]

Mugabe has had some Marxist Leninist tendencies.

It is stupid, ignorant amd irrational to consider Mugabe an uninteligent person. He's studied at Oxford University and has a P.hd.

Mugabe gave his life resisting colonialisation and Imperialism of Zimbabwe. (Something which Trotskyites and Anarchists dont give a shit about)

Regardless of weather you agree or disagree with Mugabe's politics. He is a heroe of the resistance to imperialism, racism and monopoly.

Actually I'd say the people who actually fought racism, imperialism and 'monopoly' are the heroes, not a tyrant who starves his own people and orders his soldiers to rape opponents. Do you think people who tell soldiers to rape civilians are heroes?

He kept alot of the racist Smith government's repressive laws in order straight after gaining power, such as the law prohibiting people coming together to discuss politics in large groups, so a ban on protests basically.

He had 25,000 people murdered with many rapes, lootings etc in Matabeland in the Gukurahundi campaign. I am sure he is stilla hero of numptys like Radical though.

He has also obviously become progressively more corrupt, this so called Marxist has ignored the law he himself set in place on the ownership of land and second homes. Zimbabweans are the poortest they've been in decades now, even since during the war, because this man is an appalling leader. Do I even need to focus on his other atrocities like 'Operation Murambatsvina'.

Doubtless now we'll see the usual shitstorm tsunami of tankies coming to defend another dictator, who cares, its only further evidence of why their ideology isn't right to shit on, anyway, this was Mugabe, a typical Marxist-Leninist.

[Pogue]

Am I wrong in thinking that Mugabe was installed by none other than the Imperialist British?

He wasn't installed as such, but he was very accomodating to them and them to him early on in his presidency back in the 80s.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

He wasn't installed as such, but he was very accomodating to them and them to him early on in his presidency back in the 80s.

Yes I thought as much. So I don't understand why people like Radical can claim he is some sort of anti-imperialist hero.

[Pogue]

Come like you would even give a fuck if it was 'successful'

Unlike people such as yourslef who, when they are not naming there wordlview after other men, are desperately apologising for all manner of brutal dictatorship, I value human life and developement a great deal, especially that in Africa, and I would have considered a succesful independence struggle from imperialist rule as a victory for the African working class, hence why I regret that again, in this national liberation struggle, a Marxist has, again, failed to deliver freedom for the working class, as all Marxist-Leninists who engage in national liberation struggles have consistently failed to do throughout history.

[RED ARMY FACTION]

by the way scientists found out that some animals, CHOOSE to engage in sexual activity with other animals of the same sex as preference, so contrary to what some morons say, homosexuality is NATURAL.

[Искра]

i agree no one who is homophobic can be communist, but fidel and che were slightly homophobic, yet not anti gay (they thought gay men were less masculine)
and they were no communists. or should we change whole ideology because of them?

[Искра]

Whenever nations are being opressed. You should read about it.
Oh yeah?
So let me put this from my experience.
Serbia attacked Croatia and Bosnia. So communist should support Croatian and Bosnian government, because our nations are oppressed?

Fuck nations!
We should only fight with proletariat and proletarian don't have a nation.

[chegitz guevara]

and they were no communists. or should we change whole ideology because of them?

Fidel & Che = led revolution
you = have not led revolution

I'll take them over you, sorry.

[Irish commie]

From what i have read of mugabe he used to have heavy british support due to his counter revolutionary policies not commiting wholescale land reform. Hence he was given a knighthood by the Queen, he then became power hungry and imposed crazed economic policies crippling the economy leading to the starvation of many of the people of zimbabwe.

[Искра]

Fidel & Che = led revolution
you = have not led revolution

I'll take them over you, sorry.
That's why Cuba is state capitalist society, because they have leaders.
I'll never lead revolution, but I hope that I'll be part of it.

[Mälli]

Even if you have a positive view of Stalin referring to him as "our savior" is nuts.

Yeah, this is so fucked up.

[Lyev]

are you seriously condeming comrade stalin.

Yeah, he was a dickhead IMO; a total distortion of true Marxian ideology. He gave communism a bad name. He killed all enemies, it got to the point where simply being in the same political circle as Stalin became dangerous. Look at Zinoviev and Kamenev; by simply thinking in a different way to Stalin there were condemned to the guillotine. To me, 'Socialism in One Country' seems like a compromise and a fail too; we should be internationalists.

[the last donut of the night]

I would like to thank all the Anarchists in this thread for being the only leftists with a serious perspective on Mugabe -- a despotic shithead.

[FSL]

I would like to thank all the Anarchists in this thread for being the only leftists with a serious perspective on Mugabe -- a despotic shithead.


Anarchists are like that. "Who. that guy? Despot, fuck him."
Describing someone's policies and judging them from a working class point of view is too boring.

[Искра]

Anarchists are like that. "Who. that guy? Despot, fuck him."
Describing someone's policies and judging them from a working class point of view is too boring.
And from which point of view we should judge them?
From bourgeoisie or from your party's point of view?

[the last donut of the night]

Anarchists are like that. "Who. that guy? Despot, fuck him."
Describing someone's policies and judging them from a working class point of view is too boring.


Then you don't belong in this forum. Or on the Left. Out.

[RED ARMY FACTION]

be civil comrade, we are all anticapitalist, surely that should bring us together beyond anything else

[Das war einmal]

Then you don't belong in this forum. Or on the Left. Out.


He was talking about the way anarchists judge someone I think

[Искра]

be civil comrade, we are all anticapitalist, surely that should bring us together beyond anything else
this post is referring to what?

[Искра]

He was talking about the way anarchists judge someone I think

Describing someone's policies and judging them from a working class point of view is too boring.
Charming isn't it?

[FSL]

And from which point of view we should judge them?
From bourgeoisie or from your party's point of view?


I actually answer that in the part you quoted.

Judging Mugabe from what his actions meant for the working class, we can see that whatever reforms he put forward came years after he was on power and as a result of the people's pressure, were mostly coward in their execution and only touched a very specific part of the economy. Thus, he can't be considered "good".

That he killed white settllers doesn't make him "despotic", it's the only thing giving him any credentials and the reason there even is a debate on whether he can be considered a communist.


And about that last thing I do believe that if everyone looked at everything from "my party"'s point of view, the worker's movement would strengthen. You don't believe that if everyone was an anarchist things would be better?

[FSL]

Dear god people.



Describing someone's policies and judging them from a working class point of view is too boring.


Can you please recognise sarcasm when it's so painfully obvious?
I was talking about anarchists being overly simplistic in how they responded to the thread (note:with the exception of one answer in some other page)

[RED ARMY FACTION]

Describing someone's policies and judging them from a working class point of view is too boring.
Charming isn't it?

comrade i think he was saying you dont care about the working class point of view, he did not mean himself.

[RED ARMY FACTION]

lol you beat me to it while i was typing it:)

[ls]

I do not know anything about mugabe, he is said to be evil, cruel a beast beyond imagination, but when someone said he was communist i thought, well they said stallin was evil, but he was our saviour.

Mugabe is our saviour much more-so than Stalin comrade.

For real though, he pretty much abandoned even the slightest speckle of communism when he actually started doing things.

[Radical]

But, I don't care. I would just ask you when did it became communist to support nationalism?There is a difference between oppressive nationalism and progressive nationalism. Zimbabwe, along with Cuba, Vietnam and Venezuela are all forms of progressive nationalism. They are progressive states that the Revolutionarys shall pledge support behind.

There is nothing in the Communist Manifesto telling me I cannot support Socialist and National Liberation movements. To ignore and surrender these progressive movements to Imperialism and Colonisation is to become Counter-Revolutionary (Something which 90% of Trotskites advocate)

There shall never be a perfect Revolution. It is easy to sit and crititze Successful Revolution Movements when the very idealogy you idealoise has never staged a successful revolution.


- Also. To say Homophobia means you are not a Communist is ridiculous. If that is so, both Lenin and Stalin were not Communists!
Along with 95% of Communists at that time, most saw it as faults of Capitalism.

I strongly support equal rights for gays. But even suggesting that Lenin, Stalin were not Communists is absurd.

In one hundred years time, part of our ideas may be proven wrong. Does that mean we were never Communists!?

[RED ARMY FACTION]

radical is very wise.

[Hiero]

From what i have read of mugabe he used to have heavy british support due to his counter revolutionary policies not commiting wholescale land reform. Hence he was given a knighthood by the Queen, he then became power hungry and imposed crazed economic policies crippling the economy leading to the starvation of many of the people of zimbabwe.

It is rather like this: Mugabe became a revisionist, he didn't fully implement a revolutionary government and didn't follow through with redistribution and instead followed IMF policies. The ex colonised people wanted redistribution of land, to follow through with anti-colonialist struggle. Mugabe followed through to maintian his power base. For following popular demand he was sanction by the imperialists.

There is an actually land struggle between former colonialist and former colonised, Mugabe is just a revisionist stuck in the middle trying to maintain his power,Tsvangirai is just social democrat stuck in the middle as well.

To say Mugabe is obsessed with the British is a tad racist, as it denies the history of colonialism. If Mugabe is obsessed with the British, it was because the British in 19th and 20th centaury was obsessed with Africa. It is like saying "the Jews" are obsessed with Nazis post world war 2, as if it is a personality disorder, not rational suspicion.

[rednordman]

Am I wrong in thinking that Mugabe was installed by none other than the Imperialist British?Nope not at all.....Magie "Baddy" thatchfucker.

[Diagoras]

be civil comrade, we are all anticapitalist, surely that should bring us together beyond anything else


Oh goodness, you haven't been on the Left very long, have you?:lol:

[Diagoras]

There is a difference between oppressive nationalism and progressive nationalism.

Not really, no. There can be progressive movements in which nationalism is present, and there can be reactionary movements with nationalism. Nationalism itself, however, is little more than a secular religion extolling the virtues of one imagined community or another. Good can happen in spite of it, but a nationalist mentality is always a negative, and a belief in a myth.


Zimbabwe, along with Cuba, Vietnam and Venezuela are all forms of progressive nationalism. They are progressive states that the Revolutionarys shall pledge support behind.

If those are your best examples of "progressive nationalism", then I thank you for making my point.


There is nothing in the Communist Manifesto telling me I cannot support Socialist and National Liberation movements.

Wow, this line right here says so much.


To ignore and surrender these progressive movements to Imperialism and Colonisation is to become Counter-Revolutionary (Something which 90% of Trotskites advocate)

Again the M-L fixation with artificial dualism.


There shall never be a perfect Revolution. It is easy to sit and crititze Successful Revolution Movements when the very idealogy you idealoise has never staged a successful revolution.

If the M-L states you are talking about (and I am assuming that the USSR can be included) are examples of "successful revolutions", then the problem isn't our incessant criticisms of authoritarianism (we're so nitpicky, I know :rolleyes:), but rather your willingness cooperate so fully with it.



Also. To say Homophobia means you are not a Communist is ridiculous.

If you consider "communism" as simply an economic organizational proposal, then yes, you can be a homophobe and a communist. That is an extremely narrow definition, however.


If that is so, both Lenin and Stalin were not Communists!

They weren't communists, but not because of their homophobia.


Along with 95% of Communists at that time, most saw it as faults of Capitalism.

Does the completely synthetic invention of statistics often play a large role in your argumentation?


I strongly support equal rights for gays. But even suggesting that Lenin, Stalin were not Communists is absurd.

No, not really. You haven't been exposed to many socialist ideas beyond whatever anti-revisionist site you frequent, have you?


In one hundred years time, part of our ideas may be proven wrong. Does that mean we were never Communists!?

Again, this depends upon your definition of communism, and the future labels and definitions used as new ideas and recognition/incorporation of marginalized groups occurs.

[Wanted Man]

Richard Dowden, Africa: Altered States, Ordinary Miracles.

Well, in that case...

Really though, the centuries of colonial intervention in Africa, even after decolonisation, are hardly a secret. There is no doubt that many governments, including Zimbabwe's, cynically use this threat to stay in power, but it always has to come from somewhere. There are plenty of southern African leaders who defend Mugabe for this reason only (e.g. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/6960506.stm). It's wrong, but it's not like they have some bad wiring in their heads that cause them to hate the British. Most of them have experienced British benevolence for themselves, and learned their brutality in governance from them.


Doubtless now we'll see the usual shitstorm tsunami of tankies coming to defend another dictator, who cares, its only further evidence of why their ideology isn't right to shit on, anyway, this was Mugabe, a typical Marxist-Leninist.

You mean tools like Radical or Red Army Faction ("stalin was our saviour"). C'mooooon.


Then you don't belong in this forum. Or on the Left. Out.

Coming from the person who opposes abortion and is here to preach the gospel? I would not become too arrogant, in that case. :lol: Some people here seem to take a lot of joy from getting people restricted for these "details". I'm not one of them, but just a heads-up.

[Lyev]

There is nothing in the Communist Manifesto telling me I cannot support Socialist and National Liberation movements. To ignore and surrender these progressive movements to Imperialism and Colonisation is to become Counter-Revolutionary (Something which 90% of Trotskites advocate)

There's nothing in The Communist Manifesto 'telling' you anything. Marx does not 'tell' people to do things. You accept and adopt ideas as your doctrine because you agree with them; not because everything that Marx wrote is an infallible truth. Look at my signature.

[spiltteeth]

On the plus side, Stormfront considers him a 'savage marxist,' so he can't be all bad.

On the minus side....

Here is a report from the working class of Zimbabwe :

http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=7870

And from a socialist perspective :
http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/6204