Socialist *******?

[Naroc]

Hey there.
I just found the website Socialist*******.com while browsing the web and took a look at it.
I don't know if there's already a thread about it, i'm kind of busy right know and don't had the time to search for it. I want to know: what opinion do have from that forum and the people there? I just read that it is a board for left-wing nationalists. Does that mean they're Stalinists/Maoists?
Some of their opinions and statements seemed quite strange to me.

[Sasha]

they are mostly nazbols and other "red" fascists, hence why we dont allow links to that forum, best to ignore them all together unles your a masochist.

[Naroc]

I just came to the conclusion that they can't have a good reputation here as i saw the censored link :grin:
Thank you

[BIXX]

Out of curiosity, what is that forum's name? I've heard of a bunch of forums that we block here (it sounds like some of them are just due to drama).

[Sinister Intents]

Out of curiosity, what is that forum's name? I've heard of a bunch of forums that we block here (it sounds like some of them are just due to drama).

I think it's socialist-p-h-a-l-a-n-x, and I'm glad those forums get blocked lol.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

"Socialist Failanx", I think, which is all you need to know about it.

[Red Planet]

Socialist Failanx is supposedly a site for left-wing nationalists-more laik crypto-fascists if u ask me, just visit the place and chk out all the reacitonary nonsense haha-- which is a total joke. evry good leftist knows that nations are fake constructs destined to disappear. that's like marxism101 lol workers of the world unite means we don't respect historical ties among different people at all, duh! all nationalism is bourgeois nationalism and must be wiped out immediatly.

It's a damn good thing that site is blocked on here, cause policies like that encourage critical thinking on this one.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

It's a damn good thing that site is blocked on here, cause policies like that encourage critical thinking on this one.

Bollocks. How can one think critically about a subject if one can't even mention it?

Strikes me as kind of like expecting to fight antisemitism by expunging all mention of the Holocaust.

[Brandon's Impotent Rage]

Just tried to look at the 'site' for a few minutes.

The level of obliviousness to the anti-socialist nature of 'nationalism' is absolutely astounding.

My brain kind of hurts now.

[tachosomoza]

A bunch of fascist workerists who think they're socialists.

[Red Planet]

ÑóẊîöʼn [/B]"]Bollocks. How can one think critically about a subject if one can't even mention it?

Strikes me as kind of like expecting to fight antisemitism by expunging all mention of the Holocaust.
Phooey. There's nothing to think about. Either you're pro-fascism or pro-communism. Not like those asshats on the failanx know wtf they're on about. just read their justifications they're not even thought out lol nationalism = reactionary. dats all the thinking one needs on the subject. This is Revleft. We know where we stand that's why our moderators are so disciplind


Just tried to look at the 'site' for a few minutes.

The level of obliviousness to the anti-socialist nature of 'nationalism' is absolutely astounding.

My brain kind of hurts now.

amen my impotent friend. that your brain hurts is no surprise, none at all. why don't you make their brain hurt by going over there and challenging some of their bullshit. it doesn't seem to be happening.

(btw evryone. I just chkd out the site over there and it seems one of their mods posted a reply to this thread. I won't link to it but i thought u shud kno. knthnx much luv one world one rainbow one kite one dragon)

[Skyhilist]

oooooo looks like someone said a bad word!

This is the site, but I don't recommend it since there is a lot of racism: bit.ly/1iITxTZ

It's fucking stupid that its name is blocked though. It just makes it more likely for people to be more susceptible to the sites garbage if we can't show it for what it is on here through firsthand examples.

[Red Planet]

oooooo looks like someone said a bad word!

This is the site, but I don't recommend it since there is a lot of racism: bit.ly/1iITxTZ

It's fucking stupid that its name is blocked though. It just makes it more likely for people to be more susceptible to the sites garbage if we can't show it for what it is on here through firsthand examples.

It'd be great if you could provide examples of the copious amount of racism observed on that forum for all to see, but alas. We don't need to engage them in serious debate, since we know our stuff already.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Phooey. There's nothing to think about. Either you're pro-fascism or pro-communism. Not like those asshats on the failanx know wtf they're on about. just read their justifications they're not even thought out lol nationalism = reactionary. dats all the thinking one needs on the subject. This is Revleft. We know where we stand that's why our moderators are so disciplind

It might be obvious to you or me that third positionism is a load of bunk, but to those new to the left, censoring the URL does nothing to explain or demonstrate why. So what purpose does it actually serve?

[Red Planet]

It might be obvious to you or me that third positionism is a load of bunk, but to those new to the left, censoring the URL does nothing to explain or demonstrate why. So what purpose does it actually serve?

Look, comrade, the administration on this site is wonderful. They are clearly wise as hell, and have they not assured that the quality of our membership remain high all these years, especially by the extremely high bar they've set on the level of discourse on this forum? Sure, there's a little paranoia, dogmatism, narrow-mindedness, petty power struggles, general incompetence, and sometimes total fucking stupidity contrary to scientific socialism to be found, but c'mon, will debating opposing views openly really solve anything? Everybody says that they're third positionists, so it must be true. We're not really encouraged to examine their forum for ourselves or link to their content, but that's because the very intelligent people who run this site know failanx's game. They know that openly debating them would only stifle critical thinking, so they shelter us. Speaking for meself, I wouldn't have it any other way.

if you're so keen about flirting with crypto-fascists, by all means, go over to their site and confront them--hell, they'd probably love the activity lol As for me, I agree with our impotent comrade Brandon above. thinking about shit like that just makes my brain hurt :grin:

[#FF0000]

Pretty sure it's actually censored to avoid shit talking threads and inter forum drama. Same reason other sites have their names censored

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Look, comrade, the administration on this site is wonderful. They are clearly wise as hell, and have they not assured that the quality of our membership remain high all these years, especially by the extremely high bar they've set on the level of discourse on this forum?

I hope this is sarcasm!


Sure, there's a little paranoia, dogmatism, narrow-mindedness, petty power struggles, general incompetence, and sometimes total fucking stupidity contrary to scientific socialism to be found, but c'mon, will debating opposing views openly really solve anything?

I'm not saying that we should open up a dialogue. Just saying that petty censorship of URLs does nothing to examine problematic ideologies or educate anyone.


Everybody says that they're third positionists, so it must be true. We're not really encouraged to examine their forum for ourselves or link to their content, but that's because the very intelligent people who run this site know failanx's game. They know that openly debating them would only stifle critical thinking, so they shelter us. Speaking for meself, I wouldn't have it any other way.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.


if you're so keen about flirting with crypto-fascists, by all means, go over to their site and confront them--hell, they'd probably love the activity lol As for me, I agree with our impotent comrade Brandon above. thinking about shit like that just makes my brain hurt :grin:

Talking to fascists directly strikes me as largely pointless. However, just because something is wrong or unpleasant doesn't mean that a thorough dissection can't be useful. Diseases are unpleasant to behold and even worse to suffer from, but by their examination we can find out information valuable in their elimination.


Pretty sure it's actually censored to avoid shit talking threads and inter forum drama. Same reason other sites have their names censored

Doesn't fucking work though, does it?

[#FF0000]

Nah it doesn't work. Plus, we can obviously have a rule against forum invasions without literally banning the names.

Also, yeah, Red Planet is being sarcastic. Apparently he is some kind of nationalist as well - but who seems too frightened to discuss his views openly for some reason.

[Red Planet]

Nah it doesn't work. Plus, we can obviously have a rule against forum invasions without literally banning the names.

Also, yeah, Red Planet is being sarcastic. Apparently he is some kind of nationalist as well - but who seems too frightened to discuss his views openly for some reason.

Lol. Usually I'm the one who's quick to expose the cryptos. But nah, really, my point is that censoring their URLs is okay. It keeps out unwanted views, no? Whatever. Can't ever be too paranoid on here, though, so I rep you for keeping me in check.

ÑóẊîöʼn, I agree with some of what you're saying, but what? This forum has been moderating content, especially opposing views, for as long as I've been aware of it. It seems to be working fine. I don't really get what you're trying to get at.

[Thirsty Crow]

I wonder what's the rationale behind censoring red marx and Rosa's site then.

[#FF0000]

I wonder what's the rationale behind censoring red marx and Rosa's site then.

Probs to keep people from posting a link to the site. Pretty unnecessary imo

[Naroc]

Wow, i didn't expect to start such a huge discussion about link-censorship as i opened this thread.

[Sasha]

I wonder what's the rationale behind censoring red marx and Rosa's site then.

For red Marx its just a legacy of their members coming here and spamming the shit out of our forum to try and get people to switch to their forum, also spamming links to threads there full of lies about members here they had beef with, we applaud more boards than just us out there but this was very disruptive for the atmosphere here.

Rosa's site is blocked because she was banned here for harassing users and then used minions to continue here epic anti-dialects feuds through her minions spamming her site in any thread about (anti-) dialectics, often replying directly on her site to discussion here and demanding replies in turn again. That's not how being banned works.

[Sasha]

But I'm sure we could go through the censorship list and remove a bunch of outdated stuff..

[Red Planet]

It IS odd that the entire word p h a l a n x is censored, as though it implies something vile.

Anyway, maybe you guys are right. Allowing links from the SP might not be such a bad idea. Do you really think uncensoring it would provoke flame wars and whatnot?

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

I don't think ancient Greek military formations are that common a topic on RevLeft, and all political groups that have that word in their name are fascist. The thing about posting links to SFail is that anyone who does so would violate the no-platform policy.

So what would most likely happen is that a bunch of closet third-positionists would start spamming the site, get banned, then a bunch of free speech martyrs would try to defend them and cross the line etc. etc.

[BIXX]

I personally think being able to post links to reactionary shit would be beneficial, as we can then discuss/critique/dissect it. I fail to see why it would result in debates directly between the two forums.

Also socialist******* is hilariously stupid. It's much needed comedic relief until you realize they're serious.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

What is there to analyse? I mean, good grief, these people are fascists. We don't give them a platform in order to dissect their "arguments", what would be the point of that? Do we really have to discuss how Jews are not responsible for everything, or what?

[Sinister Intents]

I'm glad they can't get a platform here. The sCumFronters can kiss my fucking ass, same with the morons on *******, which I've trolled both and it's not worth trying to discuss anything with them. I never understood the whole scapegoating the Jews thing... Why do they blame the Jews? I forget...
I'm just gonna start a thread on this

[BIXX]

What is there to analyse? I mean, good grief, these people are fascists. We don't give them a platform in order to dissect their "arguments", what would be the point of that? Do we really have to discuss how Jews are not responsible for everything, or what?


I think it would be more beneficial for new members. That's all. Maybe if we just had a guide or whatever that explained why we are against fascism that'd be fine. The majority of revleft users know that the best way to counteract fascism is education, so people will be less likely to swing that way, and then a brick, to deal with those who have already swung that way.

I feel that having a guide or some discussion about why we are against fascism falls into the education territory.

EDIT: I'm not saying they should be allowed in our forum, that'd suck balls. But we should have some more discussion for the newbies about why we dislike fascism.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

I think it would be more beneficial for new members. That's all. Maybe if we just had a guide or whatever that explained why we are against fascism that'd be fine. The majority of revleft users know that the best way to counteract fascism is education, so people will be less likely to swing that way, and then a brick, to deal with those who have already swung that way.

I feel that having a guide or some discussion about why we are against fascism falls into the education territory.

EDIT: I'm not saying they should be allowed in our forum, that'd suck balls. But we should have some more discussion for the newbies about why we dislike fascism.

That sort of implies that there are many people that are undecided between socialism and fascism, which I find preposterous. "Oh, I don't know if I should fight for the socialisation of the means of production or try to kill the Jews". That's not something that actually happens, in my experience. People that claim they can't make their mind between fascism or some bizarre sort of post-fascist nationalism a la Aflaq or whatever, and socialism, generally think socialism means hanging a picture of Stalin in your bedroom (not hanging the actual comrade Stalin because that would be terrible), wearing a lot of brown and red, and talking about glorious Mother Russia, da.

[DOOM]

"left" nationalists and Strasserists?
Oh lord

[BIXX]

That sort of implies that there are many people that are undecided between socialism and fascism, which I find preposterous. "Oh, I don't know if I should fight for the socialisation of the means of production or try to kill the Jews". That's not something that actually happens, in my experience. People that claim they can't make their mind between fascism or some bizarre sort of post-fascist nationalism a la Aflaq or whatever, and socialism, generally think socialism means hanging a picture of Stalin in your bedroom (not hanging the actual comrade Stalin because that would be terrible), wearing a lot of brown and red, and talking about glorious Mother Russia, da.


Well, there are liberals (which the board here has many of, however they do tend to know why they dislike fascism). And a lot of them see fascism and socialism as the same thing. Can it be said that correcting that would be a bad thing?

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Well, there are liberals. And a lot of them see fascism and socialism as the same thing. Can it be said that correcting that would be a bad thing?

No, I don't think many liberals do see fascism and socialism as the same thing - in any case, the point is to teach these people about socialism. Then they can use their bonces to figure out socialism is not fascism. And in any case, we do allow threads like that in OI - just not as a platform for actual fascists.

Or, I mean, these liberals could be the sort of people who think that fascism and socialism are the same and they're both coming for their fast food cart, in which case, pff, bollocks to that, you'll never be able to convince these people (since their class interest is obviously diametrically opposed to what socialists stand for).

[Thirsty Crow]

Rosa's site is blocked because she was banned here for harassing users and then used minions to continue here epic anti-dialects feuds through her minions spamming her site in any thread about (anti-) dialectics, often replying directly on her site to discussion here and demanding replies in turn again. That's not how being banned works. Minions? You must be kidding.

Am I perhaps counted among them minions? I remember participating in every thread on here about dialectics; the position I defend is the same as hers, giver or take an element.

And I think the best thing to do when cross-debate happens is to issue an infraction and delete the quoted text from her site. Censoring links is a whole other ball game.

[synthesis]

Why not just a word-filter replacing ph*lanx with failanx? I think that would accomplish just as much as censoring it, and I know the board software could do it. Maybe r*dmarx could be sadmarx and... I don't know what Rosa's site would be. (I like most of the people who started r*dmarx, just to clarify.)

We could also register socialistfailanx.com and sadmarx.com and have them redirect here for sort of an Emmanuel Goldstein vibe.

Anyways, I went to that site for the first time and looked through a few threads on the index page - honestly couldn't figure out how their forum works - and I really didn't see anyone say anything that would get anyone banned here. Vigorously disagreed with, perhaps, but not banned or even restricted, AFAIK. But, again, I didn't look too hard.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

I wonder what's the rationale behind censoring red marx and Rosa's site then.

Because why should Anti-Dialectics have a platform?

[BIXX]

Because why should Anti-Dialectics have a platform?


Because maybe dialectics are wrong?

I don't know whether they are or not and I have no opinion on the issue, but that's what I'd think.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Anyways, I went to that site for the first time and looked through a few threads on the index page - honestly couldn't figure out how their forum works - and I really didn't see anyone say anything that would get anyone banned here. Vigorously disagreed with, perhaps, but not banned or even restricted, AFAIK. But, again, I didn't look too hard.

Really? Because, all it took me was one visit to the site (they even mention me by name - how incredibly... irrelevant, I guess) to dig up gems about feminist misandry (and challenges to "manginas", which sounds like a particularly gruesome disease), threads about whether "autonomous nationalists" and Strasserists are their allies ('course they are), a National "Bolshevik" tendency and so on. It reads like what RevLeft might become if some people had their way and we just let anyone post.

[Sasha]

Minions? You must be kidding.

Am I perhaps counted among them minions? I remember participating in every thread on here about dialectics; the position I defend is the same as hers, giver or take an element.

And I think the best thing to do when cross-debate happens is to issue an infraction and delete the quoted text from her site. Censoring links is a whole other ball game.

Minions was obviously a joke, I think s. Artasian or another of rosa bigger fanboys used to say we of the BA had minions going after them...

[Thirsty Crow]

Minions was obviously a joke, I think s. Artasian or another of rosa bigger fanboys used to say we of the BA had minions going after them...
S. Artesian was one of the users who slugged it out with Rosa in the most fierce way in fact. You've got some info wrong.


Because why should Anti-Dialectics have a platform? To shatter a myth and an political and theoretical remnant of centuries of various ruling class ideologies.

[mindsword]

i can understand cencoring some fascist/nazi/racist people, but i dont think cencoring legitimate leftist ideological discussion/theory/ideas is going to do any good whatsoever. who the hell is to determine what a good/bad idea is.

should we start a revleft thought police perhaps? wait i think that has been around for a while.

[Fakeblock]

I think people are taking the censoring a bit too seriously.

[synthesis]

Really? Because, all it took me was one visit to the site (they even mention me by name - how incredibly... irrelevant, I guess) to dig up gems about feminist misandry (and challenges to "manginas", which sounds like a particularly gruesome disease), threads about whether "autonomous nationalists" and Strasserists are their allies ('course they are), a National "Bolshevik" tendency and so on. It reads like what RevLeft might become if some people had their way and we just let anyone post.

Huh. Well, I don't know how much effort went into "digging it up" - I just had a cursory glance at some of the threads on the index page, and most of it seemed on the level of the discussion here. I agree with your last sentence in that the differences mentioned seem to be those of degree rather than category.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Huh. Well, I don't know how much effort went into "digging it up" - I just had a cursory glance at some of the threads on the index page, and most of it seemed on the level of the discussion here.

All I did, really, was click on the link to the forums, and then opened a few random threads with promising titles. I'm hardly Sam Spade.


I agree with your last sentence in that the differences mentioned seem to be those of degree rather than category.

Quantitative differences in degree lead to qualitative differences in category. I mean, if we let every liberal post here, what would happen? This would become a liberal forum. Likewise if we let any racist, homophobe etc. post, this would become a qualitatively different forum. Anyone who doubts that can check out the earliest threads, from the days of Che-Lives (as, indeed, I did some time ago) - the place was unrecognisable back then. I'm not saying RevLeft is all that good - but it does keep a tight focus and most reactionaries are eventually shown the door. This other place you mention - they were explicitly formed in order to include "left nationalists" in "the left". They also keep a focus - somewhat looser than RevLeft but still - but that focus is on nationalism, on chauvinism and the struggle against "cosmopolitanism", meaning any sort of progressive standpoint. I don't see why you're defending them.

[synthesis]

I don't see why you're defending them.

The intent was actually to rag on Revleft, I guess that wasn't coming across.

[Comrade Jaraxxus]

The forum is full of a bunch of wannabe-red-brownshirts hiding behind Communist/Anarchist symbolism and imagery to try to appear more acceptable.

One quick pass through the forum and you can find ex-Stormfront members and people referring to the "14 words" and glorifying David Lane and his white nationalist cronies.

Stay away by any means.

[Sea]

I am / have been called a socialist *******, but the ******* stands for something very different in my case.
Minions was obviously a joke, I think s. Artasian or another of rosa bigger fanboys used to say we of the BA had minions going after them..."I can neither confirm nor deny that we have minions."

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

The intent was actually to rag on Revleft, I guess that wasn't coming across.

Nah, it's just that my sarcasm detector has been on the fritz for the last few days. I blame the weather. Honestly, though, I think RevLeft is close to becoming a liberal forum, not a "red" fascist one. That is, we get a lot of people who are really enthusiastic about elections, working through the bourgeois state, cooperatives, the police, whatever. But not that many Querfront types. It was different, from what I can tell, on the early RevLeft/CheLives, where all you had to do was hate Stalin (just... like... Che... I guess?), and you could post, even if you were a homophobe, thought that forming a business corporation and taking over countries was the way forward for the revolution, were a mutualist, whatever.

[synthesis]

Nah, it's just that my sarcasm detector has been on the fritz for the last few days. I blame the weather. Honestly, though, I think RevLeft is close to becoming a liberal forum, not a "red" fascist one. That is, we get a lot of people who are really enthusiastic about elections, working through the bourgeois state, cooperatives, the police, whatever. But not that many Querfront types. It was different, from what I can tell, on the early RevLeft/CheLives, where all you had to do was hate Stalin (just... like... Che... I guess?), and you could post, even if you were a homophobe, thought that forming a business corporation and taking over countries was the way forward for the revolution, were a mutualist, whatever.

I guess what I don't get is why there's so much vitriol here for "left-wing nationalism," whereas we have tons of supporters for "nationalism of the oppressed." Is there supposed to be a difference?

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

I guess what I don't get is why there's so much vitriol here for "left-wing nationalism," whereas we have tons of supporters for "nationalism of the oppressed." Is there supposed to be a difference?

"Nationalism of the oppressed" can really mean two things - national liberation (i.e. destroying oppression based on language and culture), or actual nationalism by oppressed nations (which would, logically, also include Schlageter and similar people!). Or rather, it means the latter, strictly speaking - but a lot of people use it to refer to the former as well. But I don't see many examples of people actually supporting nationalist movements by oppressed nations - at most, certain dodgy Irish figures get a lot of sympathy, but this is because most people aren't aware of their chauvinist statements.

[Thirsty Crow]

I guess what I don't get is why there's so much vitriol here for "left-wing nationalism," whereas we have tons of supporters for "nationalism of the oppressed." Is there supposed to be a difference?
Cognitive dissonance.

[synthesis]

But I don't see many examples of people actually supporting nationalist movements by oppressed nations - at most, certain dodgy Irish figures get a lot of sympathy, but this is because most people aren't aware of their chauvinist statements.

So you don't see any elements of this from our local "anti-imperialist" demographic?

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

So you don't see any elements of this from our local "anti-imperialist" demographic?

No, I can't say that I do. If anything, it is the anti-anti-imperialists (by which I don't mean you or Links, but people who have backed every one of Obama's foreign ventures) who have had extremely chauvinist outbursts, from dismissing violence against Shi'a as unimportant, to disputing the right of Russians to self-determination (while supporting it in other cases *cough* Israel *cough* the Ukraine) and acting like secession from the bourgeois Ukrainian state is an unparalleled crime. Oh, and there was that fellow who thought that Israel should be praised for not exterminating Palestinians - and he's still around.