off topic stuff from maoisim in turkey thread

[Queercommie Girl]

Maoism is still making more of an impact than tiny little ultra-leftist sects, for sure. :rolleyes:

[black magick hustla]

the republicans make more of an impact than us too

anyobdy who uses that dumb argument needs to check their brains for empty cavities because its as valid as me taking a piss on a container and selling it as mango juice

[Queercommie Girl]

the republicans make more of an impact than us too

anyobdy who uses that dumb argument needs to check their brains for empty cavities because its as valid as me taking a piss on a container and selling it as mango juice


Your crude shitty comparison and ad hominem notwithstanding, how can you ever hope to beat the Republicans without becoming more powerful than they are?

Where is the virtue in simply being "correct" in the abstract sense, other than to masturbate your own ego? "Truth" in the abstract is worth nothing without power to back it up. Good luck with beating the right-wing with your great weapon - abstract "truth".

If the majority of the working class (i.e. real workers) are simply not interested in Marxism, which is supposed to be an ideology of the working class, whose fault is it? The fault of the working class, or the fault of ultra-left sects?

But then there is no point in arguing with you verbally here, as if verbal argument actually means something. Those without real power always like to sound verbally tough to make up for their actual impotence.

All I'm going to say here is that I know which side I will be standing on if another Kronstadt happens in the future...

[black magick hustla]

Your crude shitty comparison and ad hominem notwithstanding, how can you ever hope to beat the Republicans without becoming more powerful than they are?

Where is the virtue in simply being "correct" in the abstract sense, other than to masturbate your own ego? "Truth" in the abstract is worth nothing without power to back it up. Good luck with beating the right-wing with your great weapon - abstract "truth".
i dont particularly care about the right wing or the left wing. they are both my enemies and i am sure that in the final stand against capital and the state and everything that exists they will stand as its more zealous defendants.




If the majority of the working class (i.e. real workers) are simply not interested in Marxism, which is supposed to be an ideology of the working class, whose fault is it? The fault of the working class, or the fault of ultra-left sects?
i dont know what is your obsession with "ultra left", nor i know why do you think our "sectarianism" is so venomous, its not like we are large groups with large followings. anyway, the "ultra left" doesnt have any fault on the state of the working class, to think otherwise is pure voluntarism. anyway, i believe in the party in the broad historical sense. those elements of the working class that have decided to take a fight till death against capital and its defendants are already members of the Party - from those who riot, strike and burn their bosses in India, to the strikes and housing riots in Algeria. As the crescendo of the class struggle grows, elements like this become clearer politically and when this happens, the world Party in a more formal form will appear.







All I'm going to say here is that I know which side I will be standing on if another Kronstadt happens in the future...
thanks for implying you want me seen shot dead. i dont really care about you, i only know that your posts are particularly inane and you have a hard time understanding arguments that dont come from the most boring and stale of orthodoxies

[Queercommie Girl]

i dont particularly care about the right wing or the left wing. they are both my enemies


That's one of the problems of ultra-leftism. Even Trotskyists would correctly understand the need to apply entryist tactics and transitional strategies among the broad left-wing. Treating the broad left-wing as quantitatively the same as the broad right-wing is a mistake.

Writing off every single person who doesn't subscribe to your narrow understanding of what "socialism" is completely isn't going to win a lot of followers to your cause.



anyway, the "ultra left" doesnt have any fault on the state of the working class,


It's not about assigning some kind of "moral fault" on people at all. I don't care about that. It's all about how to achieve political victory.

It's one thing to be anti-voluntarist to some extent, but it's another thing to wait for the consciousness of the working class in general to become revolutionary like the proverbial hunter who waits for rabbits to come to him while sitting under a tree in the ancient Chinese parable.



thanks for implying you want me seen shot dead.


Only if you initiate hostilities first...;)



i dont really care about you,


I feel the same.



i only know that your posts are particularly inane


You disagree with me on this particular issue, and now suddenly my posts in general are bad?



and you have a hard time understanding arguments that dont come from the most boring and stale of orthodoxies


Funny to see a dogmatist complaining about orthodoxy. LOL :lol:

[Omsk]

An argument all ready? Magical.

[caramelpence]

An argument all ready? Magical.

An argument? On a discussion board? Unacceptable.

[HEAD ICE]

That's one of the problems of ultra-leftism. Even Trotskyists would correctly understand the need to apply entryist tactics and transitional strategies among the broad left-wing. Treating the broad left-wing as quantitatively the same as the broad right-wing is a mistake.

I don't think anyone treats the "broad left wing" the same quantitatively as the "broad right wing." However, qualitatively, I don't see any point in allying with pro-capitalist bourgeois groups of any kind, be it Social Democrats, Stalinists, Republicans or Democrats. Communists should understand that workers will come in all shades of political opinion and must not confuse the most basic point that form is the same as content. Just because there is a "Worker's Party" whose membership is based largely of workers doesn't make their class content as such.

It is not that the two are the same, just neither have anything to offer the working class. Plus, just because people are on "the left" doesn't make them closer to us (meaning communists). My congressman actually called Barack Obama "uppity" and writes race baiting shit about "food stamps" in the paper. Should I advocate voting for the person who is clearly to his "left", the Democrat? Socialism is not the triumph of democracy, where every little "democratic" thing brings us 'closer' to socialism.

Also I find it amusing you call the "ultra-left" sectarian and bring up Trotsky, when the actually history shows that the "ultra-left" wasn't sectarian enough. How about Amadeo Bordiga in his ridiculous adherence to party discipline basically handing over the Communist Party of Italy to Zinoviev's gang in the Comintern and leading the way for Stalindroid Gramsci and the dog Togliatti (who you must be fond of, you seem to be a fan of communists getting murdered) to expel the majority of the membership of the PCd'I (which included the great bulk of working class members) who are erroneously called the "ultra-leftist sect of Bordiga" ?

Trotsky operated in a totally opportunist and sectarian manner towards the Italian Left in exile, though official Trotskyist "history" paints a different picture (such as the amusing selection of documents that Marxists.org has on the subject). Trotsky sent letters to the Italian Left in exile praising Bordiga (Zanthorus has the quote in his signature) and their work in Prometeo, while offering comradely criticism of some of their positions. When they responded back saying that they were against forming a new international in the absence of a revolutionary situation, and that a united opposition amongst the left must take more than anti-Stalinism, Trotsky flipped his shit, started making things up in the air (such as calling them "national communists"), and hilariously attacked them for being "sectarians" because they didn't attend a meeting that they weren't invited too. When Trotsky was in his good mood he would call them "Prometeoists", but in this case they were now "Bordigists."

However, even though the Italian Left didn't agree with the formation of a Fourth International (and their criticisms proven correct by history by it's complete degeneration) they still personally worked with Left Oppositionists in France and Belgium. They even published Trotsky's sectarian slander against them in their press (which, by the way, had a larger readership than any Trotskyist literature). However, all the joint work was called to a stop personally by Leon Trotsky.

I really don't mind being called a "sectarian", simply because most people (including you) use it incorrectly, and I actually agree with your incorrect usage. I am a full on sectarian towards the capitalist parties and proud of it.