What the hell is a reactionnary?

[Le Rouge]

That's a word used very often here and i can't continue without knowing who they are.

[Dimmu]

A person who wishes to return to the "good old times when everything was better".

[Thirsty Crow]

A person who wishes to return to the "good old times when everything was better".
Nope. In communist and anarchist parlance, a reactionary is anyone who opposes workers' social revolution, on any ground (so, for example, social democrats and fascists are reactionaries irrespective of actual differences between their political positions).

[Dimmu]

Nope. In communist and anarchist parlance, a reactionary is anyone who opposes workers' social revolution, on any ground (so, for example, social democrats and fascists are reactionaries irrespective of actual differences between their political positions).

Well, you are right. I read the topic title and made a general definition.

[Nox]

Reactionary = Not Communist

[Fawkes]

Someone who has raised a point you don't know how to refute.

[Art Vandelay]

I could be wrong but I have always considered it the opposite of progressive.

[Rafiq]

Nope. In communist and anarchist parlance, a reactionary is anyone who opposes workers' social revolution, on any ground (so, for example, social democrats and fascists are reactionaries irrespective of actual differences between their political positions).


Nope.
It means a person who wishes to return to a previous state of affairs. Your definition is incomplete

[Thirsty Crow]

Nope.
It means a person who wishes to return to a previous state of affairs. Your definition is incomplete
Notice the "in communist and anarchist parlance", which is directly relevant to the question posed by OP (in what way is it used here at revleft). This definition is entirely sufficient. Or would you argue that commies are wrong in determining that socialdemocrats are reactionaries?

[Joseph S.]

Wel tbh i think it's a label sheeple give sheeple
just like revolitionary is a label.
For an exampel some one in Rusia this time hoping to one day relive the glory day's of Stalin cold be labeled a reactionary witch is absolute bullcrap of course

[Manic Impressive]

Notice the "in communist and anarchist parlance", which is directly relevant to the question posed by OP (in what way is it used here at revleft). This definition is entirely sufficient. Or would you argue that commies are wrong in determining that socialdemocrats are reactionaries?
I would say that conservative is a more apt moniker for social democrats seeing as they wish to conserve the status quo. Reactionary means regressive

[Kornilios Sunshine]

I might be wrong but it is someone who realiers things and economy are bad,but thinks nothing can be done for this.

[Manic Impressive]

I might be wrong but it is someone who realiers things and economy are bad,but thinks nothing can be done for this.
no what you are describing is apathy. A reactionary realises that there is a problem but the change that they advocate regresses society to a previous state where they believe things worked better. For instance if someone were to advocate slavery they would be the definition of reactionary. In Marx's time there were people calling for the reintroduction of feudal law. But today the changes they advocate could be much smaller, like "women should stay at home at look after the kids".

[ZeroNowhere]

Nope. In communist and anarchist parlance, a reactionary is anyone who opposes workers' social revolution, on any ground (so, for example, social democrats and fascists are reactionaries irrespective of actual differences between their political positions).
To add to this, the epithet 'reactionary' implies support for a form of society which is in opposition to historical progress and the revolution implied by the current state of human development. As such, support for capitalism is, at present, reactionary, whether or not it involves idealization of any past state as such, precisely because capitalism has developed to the point where it becomes not revolutionary but a fetter in human progress.

While capitalism was still emergent, its advocates did not have an explicitly reactionary position (although their ideologies were often implicitly reactionary, in the sense that capitalism, being a class society, contains its own demise as its own consequence, and hence seeing as it as the final and ideal form of society does always have an implicitly reactionary character; however, nonetheless, they were not reactionary, but revolutionary, in practice and in the pursuance of their own interests.) Such is not, however, the case at present, and has not been the case for quite a while.

Of course, during the progress of capitalism certain necessary advances were opposed by various capitalist ideologists, such as the development of the credit system and so on, something which can also be seen in the opposition to 'big business' and 'corporations' by modern populists, and this generally involved an idealization of an even less developed capitalism, which gave it a reactionary character compared to the progress of capitalism at the time. Such people could be said, if you like, to be 'more reactionary' than people who support capitalism as it is now, and likewise people who support feudalism even more reactionary, and so on.

It's worth noting that calling something 'reactionary' is not equivalent to saying that one doesn't like it, and likewise something is not 'progressive' just because you think it would be nice.

[MustCrushCapitalism]

I've always used it interchangeably with counter-revolutionary, personally.

[Rafiq]

Notice the "in communist and anarchist parlance", which is directly relevant to the question posed by OP (in what way is it used here at revleft). This definition is entirely sufficient. Or would you argue that commies are wrong in determining that socialdemocrats are reactionaries?

Even in a "communist and anarchist parlance" a reactionary is someone who wishes to return to a previous state of affairs, ergo Feudalists and religious extremists who oppose capitalism are reactionary. The same could be said about primitivists.

Please, you are just arguing for the sake of arguing. Communists are not "wrong" in that, you just stated an incomplete definition of what a reactionary is, on a whole scale, within the framework of leftist ideology, or even it's use on this forum.

[tfb]

Are people reactionary for thinking fondly of the Paris Commune and the good ol' days in Catalonia?

[ZeroNowhere]

Are people reactionary for thinking fondly of the Paris Commune and the good ol' days in Catalonia?
I'm fairly sure that both were destroyed by external force and didn't set up an established system of note, rather than establishing social systems which were later superseded through human development.


Please, you are just arguing for the sake of arguing. Communists are not "wrong" in that, you just stated an incomplete definition of what a reactionary is, on a whole scale, within the framework of leftist ideology, or even it's use on this forumI'm fairly sure that their point does differ from yours, so they do have a reason for argument. They're arguing that supporting not only past societies, but also present capitalism and various hypothetical capitalisms, is reactionary.

[Die Rote Fahne]

Social Democrats would be reformists, not reactionaries. They do not seek to go backwards, but to more or less plateau.

Those, as Rafiq said, who wish to return to a previous state (status quo ante). Hitler wished to return the German empire, Mussolini the Roman, the Tea Party wish to go back to the era of the 50's.

[Rafiq]

I'm fairly sure that their point does differ from yours, so they do have a reason for argument. They're arguing that supporting not only past societies, but also present capitalism and various hypothetical capitalisms, is reactionary.



No, those would be conservatives. They would not be reactionary until the proletarians get to power.

[tir1944]

Reactionary is someone who reacts against some social movement.
By "reactionary" we mean those who oppose the working class and its struggle for socialism/communism.
But Hitler and Mussolini for example also used the term...
http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/001055939/The_Awesome_Face_984226865_thumb_1079669678_thumb_ small.jpeg

[Tenka]

No, those would be conservatives. They would not be reactionary until the proletarians get to power.
I've used conservative and reactionary interchangeably for a while now, and I think everyone's definitions thus far in this thread are more or less correct (I don't like to repeat others' points when I can't articulate them as well, but I did thank ZeroNowhere's post which was the best IMO).

[tir1944]

Social Democrats would be reformists, not reactionaries. Counterexample:German SPD in 20s/30s...
:cool:

[thefinalmarch]

ITT: semantics

[Savage]

Please, you are just arguing for the sake of arguing. Communists are not "wrong" in that, you just stated an incomplete definition of what a reactionary is, on a whole scale, within the framework of leftist ideology, or even it's use on this forum.

You seem to be implying that whenever anyone speaks about any sort of concept, that they must list every single way in which that concept has been used in order to present a 'complete' definition.