5 Random Questions

[Bud Fox]

Hello Ladies and Gents, a have a handfull of questions regarding the revolutionary left. Would really appreciate any response.

1. Is there a general consensus on the EU? disband or further integrate?
2. Why are 'primitivists' restricted members? arent some forms of anarchy and subsistence living considered left wing and sort of primitive?
3.If a person was socially conservative and christian but economically Marxist then what ideological and political party position is this?
4. Is there a disernable difference between Trotskyist and Leninist communism? Isnt Trotskyism just modern Lenninism?
5. Are there national-socialists (non-facist) on revleft?

Thanks.

[ReggaeCat]

didnt undeerstood all your questions but i'll answer to those i understood
3.how can some1 be economically marxist conservative and christian??
he firstly need o get his shit straight and then chose a party....
4.trotskyism is not modern leninism....who told you that???
5.how can a national socialist be a non fascist??if not hitler then surely mussolini or any other i-want-to-close-my-country-borders organization will be his aim...so...yes..uhm are there any of em her??i dont think so...they too dumb...:D not like us:cool:!!:laugh:

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

1. Is there a general consensus on the EU? disband or further integrate?

Some folk support it due to the open borders but most oppose it as a neo liberal organisation.


2. Why are 'primitivists' restricted members? arent some forms of anarchy and subsistence living considered left wing and sort of primitive?

No. Anarchism is left wing, social retards demanding the life span drops to fifteen years of gang rape and eating shit stolen from animals is not.



3.If a person was socially conservative and christian but economically Marxist then what ideological and political party position is this?

Confused.


4. Is there a disernable difference between Trotskyist and Leninist communism? Isnt Trotskyism just modern Lenninism?

Oh no she did'nt


5. Are there national-socialists (non-facist) on revleft?

Thanks.


No they get banned because they waste bandwidth and time.

[Rjevan]

1. Is there a general consensus on the EU? disband or further integrate?
Generally the concept of a united Europe would be something we welcome very much but since the EU is a capitalist alliance, serving the interests of corporations and the stock market and not the European people we are opposed to this European Union. If you have some time, read Lenin's "On the Slogan for a United States of Europe (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1915/aug/23.htm)" (*klick*), it's a short and understandable article and sums up things pretty much. Example:

But while the slogan of a republican United States of Europe... is quite invulnerable as a political slogan, there still remains the highly important question of its economic content and significance. From the standpoint of the economic conditions of imperialism—i.e., the export of capital arid the division of the world by the “advanced” and “civilised” colonial powers—a United States of Europe, under capitalism, is either impossible or reactionary.
A United States of Europe under capitalism is tantamount to an agreement on the partition of colonies. Under capitalism, however, no other basis and no other principle of division are possible except force.
...
Of course, temporary agreements are possible between capitalists and between states. In this sense a United States of Europe is possible as an agreement between the European capitalists ... but to what end? Only for the purpose of jointly suppressing socialism in Europe, of jointly protecting colonial booty against Japan and America...



2. Why are 'primitivists' restricted members? arent some forms of anarchy and subsistence living considered left wing and sort of primitive?
There is Anarcho-Primitivism but still, Communism does not aim at some "back to the nature" goals, quite the contrary, we want the developement of humanity and not a step back. Primitivism is reactionary and does not in the least serve any of our goals. Industrial growth and developement, improved living conditions are expected after the successful proletarian revolution, as it was the case, e.g. in the USSR. Compare the USSR with the tsarist Russian Empire. Primitivist? Certainly not!


3.If a person was socially conservative and christian but economically Marxist then what ideological and political party position is this?
This could be hardly possible, how should anybody who is not totally and utterly confused be a conservative and hold Marxist economic views at the same time? We do have some Christian Communists here, who claim that the Christian faith contains communist elements and that Christian faith and Communism can be combined, personally I consider religion as deeply reactionary and don't think this is possible but well.


4. Is there a disernable difference between Trotskyist and Leninist communism? Isnt Trotskyism just modern Lenninism?
I'm not sure what you mean with "Leninist communism", if you mean Marxism-Leninism then yes there are important differences. Generally we Marxist-Leninist reject Trotsky's theories, especially the "Permanent Revolution" theory and in contrast to Trotsky uphold the theory of "socialism in one country", the USSR as true socialist state (till the late 50s) and Stalin's leadership and theories as truly Marxist-Leninist. The Trotskyists also refer to Lenin and see Trotsky as the "true heir of Lenin", we see Stalin as "true heir of Lenin" and refer to some of his works where he outlines that Trotskyism is reactionary and incompatible with Marxism-Leninism, of course Trotsky does the same with "Stalinism".


5. Are there national-socialists (non-facist) on revleft?
No, of course not! National-socialists are in no way socialists, no matter what they call themselves and if you mean "left" nazis, like Strasserists or National Bolsheviks, then also no. National Socialism is directly opposed to 99% of all communist aims, just as fascism and therefore totally incompatible with the revolutionary left. Nazis get banned here, just like fascists.

[Bud Fox]

Thank you for the replies :). I am still slightly in the dark about Q4: the difference between Trotskyism and Leninnism though? and also Q3 as one of my co-workers is a christian who has the seemingly conservative belief in standard family units, law and order, monarchy etc... but also seems very anti-capitalist and spoke once about the labour theory of value etc... there has to be a collective with which they identify but I cant possibly figure out which. :confused:

[Bud Fox]

Rjevan really nailed Q4 for me. Thank you for the indepth reply.

[Rjevan]

Thank you for the replies :). I am still slightly in the dark about Q4: the difference between Trotskyism and Leninnism though?
Have you seen my reply above yours? Or do you have any more specific questions on that topic?

EDIT: Oh, solved then. ;)


and also Q3 as one of my co-workers is a christian who has the seemingly conservative belief in standard family units, law and order, monarchy etc... but also seems very anti-capitalist and spoke once about the labour theory of value etc... there has to be a collective with which they identify but I cant possibly figure out which. :confused:
Monarchy??? :huh:
As I said, some people claim to be Christian Communists and for the family and law and order: we do not want to abolish law and order, there will be law and order both, in a socialist state and in a communist society, and the anarchists want "armed workers militia" to protect the people. I'm not sure what you think about when you say family unites, there are claims that Communists are opposed to the concept of a family and want to "abolish" it. This is false. We are opposed to traditional gender roles and the bourgeois (capitalist) family role.

[Aesop]

1. Is there a general consensus on the EU? disband or further integrate?

I guess most people here would be anti EU but pro Europe. Meaning that we oppose the Eu as it is just a merely economic/political conglomerate of nations whose aim is just to rival the USA/Nafta/ Ii is anti-democratic in which make laws are made by the unelected European council. These one just some of the reasons why we are opposed.



2. Why are 'primitivists' restricted members? arent some forms of anarchy and subsistence living considered left wing and sort of primitive?

The major critique of primitivism is although it joins the field of being anti-capitalist, though it is not revolutionary in a sense that you can’t call it. From what I heard is that they reject the process of industrialisation, although we as the revolutionary left acknowledge the process industrialisation has caused the deaths of many and the centralisation of productive forces. We recognise in a post-revolution society these forces will probably be improved i.e. renewable resources being able to light the streetlamps, and they still will be used. But primitivism seems more concerned with living life of subsistence and living in caves.



3.If a person was socially conservative and christian but economically Marxist then what ideological and political party position is this?

There is no such thing as being economically Marxist. Marxism is a philosophical/scientific thought it can be applied to about everything: archaeology, sociology, and politics, just to name the few. So technically you can be a Marxist-capitalist many city banking/financial institutions which are pinnacle of capitalism, apply Marxism (specifically das capital) to city examinations



4. Is there a disernable difference between Trotskyist and Leninist communism? Isnt Trotskyism just modern Lenninism?

What do you mean by Leninist communism?


5. Are there national-socialists (non-facist) on revleft?

National-socialism an oxymoron.(Nazis are not allowed here)

[FSL]

Thank you for the replies :). I am still slightly in the dark about Q4: the difference between Trotskyism and Leninnism though? and also Q3 as one of my co-workers is a christian who has the seemingly conservative belief in standard family units, law and order, monarchy etc... but also seems very anti-capitalist and spoke once about the labour theory of value etc... there has to be a collective with which they identify but I cant possibly figure out which. :confused:


As said there are christian communists, if your co-workers identifies himself as one I have no idea. Marxism and religion are generally incompatible but religious people can support progressive causes and have done so, mostly in certain latin american countries. Google "liberation theology" if you like.


And Trotskyism isn't modern leninism. Generally, there are 2 wide trends that claim to continue from where Lenin stopped. Trotskyism is one of them with its most important characteristic being the "permanent revolution" theory. This says that workers can gain political power even in the undeveloped countries where the peasants are the majority but also that for socialism to be built you'd have to have worker revolutions in the developed countries as well. The other trend in Leninism is one that supports the efort to build socialism in the Soviet Union (the "Socialism in one country" theory) despite no succesful revolutions in other countries. This trend thinks that for the final victory of socialism, the spreading of the revolution is necessary, but that socialism could start being built in countries such as Russia.

[ReggaeCat]

trotsky said that the russia was very backward to start alone an revolution and they should start looking at the western countries and get aid from there...lenin disagreed and started the socialism in one country...after that...stalin took lenin place and continued his work on the socialism in one country....always trying to start socialist revolutions in other countries like it happened on WWII where some countries embraced socialism.uhm...trotsky was exiled from ussr accused for reformism(or smth like that i dont know the english word) and continued to accuse stalin for not following the marxist leninist line.....in the 30's where the collectivization startede trotsky continued to say that socialism in one country was wrong and bla bla..but in the 1939-1940 when the WWII began he started telling that the socialism in one country was able thanks to the workers and not to stalin(????) and that people should revolt and overthrow stalin(when europe was in the edge of WWI) that's all i can say thank to english i know...if you were greek i could tel you more..:rolleyes:

[Bud Fox]

We are opposed to traditional gender roles and the bourgeois (capitalist) family role.

Could you expand slightly on this? What are 'bourgeois (capitalist) family roles' and why are they bad? what is the leftist alternative?

[ReggaeCat]

Could you expand slightly on this? What are 'bourgeois (capitalist) family roles' and why are they bad? what is the leftist alternative?

that the father is the one who works and get the money,wife works and take care of the kids,do all the works at home,kids are robots who have to learn at their school ar they are lost in the scum of the working class etc

the alternative is sharing your duties and rights in family and giving the child education and not information so he can pass a test and get a master and be some jerk in a company oppresing the ones below him..


that's how i get it

[ZeroNowhere]

1. Is there a general consensus on the EU? disband or further integrate?
No, leftists are generally opposed or apathetic (at least, as regards the EU under capitalism).


3.If a person was socially conservative and christian but economically Marxist then what ideological and political party position is this?Sadist. Though I suppose that depends on what you mean by 'socially conservative'. If you mean opposing abortion, euthanasia and so on, as opposed to supporting capitalism, they could be just about anything.


5. Are there national-socialists (non-facist) on revleft?'National socialism' refers to a specific historic movement which was fascist.

[Bud Fox]

This has been most enlightening, thank you. I will engage in some reading I think. :)

[ReggaeCat]

This has been most enlightening, thank you. I will engage in some reading I think. :)

please make me a favor...and read the ""another view in stalin" BEFORE you read anything else..will prevent you from very shitty propaganda that goues out there..

[ZeroNowhere]

^To be honest, I think that was in a way equivalent to me posting in random threads in this board saying that the OP should read De Leon.

[#FF0000]

please make me a favor...and read the ""another view in stalin" BEFORE you read anything else..will prevent you from very shitty propaganda that goues out there..

"Another View Of Stalin" was absurdly one sided though.

[ReggaeCat]

"Another View Of Stalin" was absurdly one sided though.


why you say that??

[ReggaeCat]

^To be honest, I think that was in a way equivalent to me posting in random threads in this board saying that the OP should read De Leon.

uhm..nope just i think that if there is something that has the biggest propaganda running on it its stalins life and history of the ussr in the period 1925-1953 so...

[#FF0000]

why you say that??

Because it was absurdly one sided. I'm pretty sure the author even said it was primarily a political piece, and not really a historical one. I'll find the quote.

[ReggaeCat]

but it had quotes form different books...from nazis from trotsky from some americans n stuff...what you expected??

[ZeroNowhere]

Regardless, there's a specific thread here for reading recommendations for beginners, so these threads should be dedicated to specifically answering the questions posed by said beginners, rather than giving them reading recommendations, which that post certainly appeared to be doing. Especially given that the book in question did give conclusions that are disagreed with by a large portion of the revolutionary left, so it seems to be to some degree simply promoting your tendency.

If the thread were asking for recommendations for works on the USSR, then you would be justified in posting that, and I in posting Chattopadhyay's book. In fact, it would probably be justified in a thread on the USSR and Stalin, though that depends on the details. This, however, was neither.

[gorillafuck]

Actually the term National Socialist was highjacked by the "nazis". I suppose you could say there are "National Socialists" on this site. Anyone here who believes in the right of nations to self determination could technically be considered a National Socialist... however I would avoid using the term it rings of inherent racism.
I don't think the term "National Socialist" was hijacked, I'm fairly sure the Nazi's invented.

[nuisance]

5. Are there national-socialists (non-facist) on revleft?
No/Yes. But the term national-socialist in political discourse used to define the ideology of Nazism. However the term could be split into either socialists that believe socialism in on country is possible/desirable and those that believe that State is the higher order that should be worked towards- creating a strong State is the aim.
Socialism is against nationhood, afterall the workers of the world have no country- to paraphrase Marx. Another flaw in the idea of individual socialist nations, if there were any- and as we saw Stalins 'socialism in one country' idea go to tits up, is that they would have to partake in the global capitalist economic system that necessitates competition. Meaning that a socialist nation would become State capitalist, in that the State is running the nations economy in a capitalist system.

[ReggaeCat]

ok sorry :glare: even if i didnt do it for that purpose but anyways...