Perhaps I am confused - what is my tendency/ideology?

[CubanDream]

Some people here say I am not a Marxist, or am a Stalinist, b-gois, liberal etc..

So, I need to get to the bottom of this.

My main beliefs:

1. Socialism in one country is fine, with the hope of then spreading it.

2. Financial equality should be an immediate aim

3. Identity politics should be done away with

4. Definitions of P-bgois, liberal, worker etc.. are less important than financial equality

5. Realpolitik is more important than ideology

6. The EU is a neo-lib playground and should be opposed.

7. Bigger does not mean better - even if the world were one country there is no reason to suppose it would be Red - more likely end up as a Conservative neo-lib nightmare.

8. Many 'Marxists' are actually liberals in disguise.

9. Tolerance is a fine thing, but Political Correctness has become an identity in itself, and tends to be the insidious dagger of the liberal capitalist - ie: it dilutes the main thrust of the Revolution, which is of course the destruction of capitalism and the b-gois mindset.

ok, bash away;)

btw:this really is a genuine question that I hope to get to the bottom of, just can't quite work it out- hope the mods will not ban me and will at least allow this thread a few days to get some answers, thanks:)


and difference between a Leninist and ML?

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

You're not a Marxist. That much is true. You dismiss Marxist materialist analysis, Marxist definitions of class, and even Marx's definition of communism. The communists you label as "liberals" are the ones upholding communism instead of the state capitalism you champion. The use of the phrase "Political Correctness" is curious, since that's something the right-wing tosses around against both liberals and revolutionary leftists.

[Hrafn]

Some form of USSR-inspired social democrat, it appears to me.

[CubanDream]

Social democrat? - why do you say that?

[CubanDream]

You're not a Marxist. That much is true. You dismiss Marxist materialist analysis, Marxist definitions of class, and even Marx's definition of communism.

except that Marx' work is over 150yrs old, so it must be 'flexed' somewhat to fit into the modern era. This is esp true when we consider some of his definitions, eg: PB-gois.


The communists you label as "liberals" are the ones upholding communism instead of the state capitalism you champion.And how many 'communist' style victories did they ever attain?

ok, the SU and China were hardly pure communism, but for some of their history they made progress - obviously the post Stalin era was better


The use of the phrase "Political Correctness" is curious, since that's something the right-wing tosses around against both liberals and revolutionary leftists.

Baloney! Everybody and anybody uses the word PC these days - that's not a labeller of any sort

[CubanDream]

You're not a Marxist. That much is true. You dismiss Marxist materialist analysis, Marxist definitions of class, and even Marx's definition of communism. The communists you label as "liberals" are the ones upholding communism instead of the state capitalism you champion. The use of the phrase "Political Correctness" is curious, since that's something the right-wing tosses around against both liberals and revolutionary leftists.

so what do you call someone like me then?

just keep it real.......lol

PB - so if it's bad to be a 'P-bgois' and skilled workers are PB's (IT, engineering work etc..), then what is the solution - who can do it without attracting this label, and I'm talking about the here and now, not a future Utopia

Also, it's the PC issue that seems to be the main crux here, ie: by questioning the mighty liberal dogma itself, I am now supposedly a liberal, like Castro, Che and Mao were Mr PC:rolleyes: (not)

[helot]

Baloney! Everybody and anybody uses the word PC these days - that's not a labeller of any sort


Everyone knows of the term but the only people who use it are the ones annoyed at getting called out for their obvious racism, sexism, homophobia etc. "PC GONE MAD" is the cry of the bigot in the 21st century.

[CubanDream]

no, that's just you making stuff up

[Dennis the 'Bloody Peasant']

no, that's just you making stuff up

Nope, there are plenty of examples in the right-wing press (in the UK at least)

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

except that Marx' work is over 150yrs old, so it must be 'flexed' somewhat to fit into the modern era.
If you understood how materialist analysis worked, you would already know it's adaptable to any historical era. Being a Marxist means using materialist analysis to explain the world now. It's why even some bourgeois economists keep coming back to Marx, even though they don't share his conclusions about abolishing capitalism.


And how many 'communist' style victories did they ever attain?
Since communism hasn't been achieved anywhere, no one can lay any claims there.


ok, the SU and China were hardly pure communism, but for some of their history they made progress - obviously the post Stalin era was better
Communists aren't fighting for "progress" (now there's a liberal term), we're fighting to abolish the capitalist mode of production and all capitalist relations.


Baloney! Everybody and anybody uses the word PC these days
No, not so much.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

so what do you call someone like me then?
Social democrat might fit. As long as you're not falsely claiming to be something you're not, I don't particularly care.


PB - so if it's bad to be a 'P-bgois'
We assign no moral judgment to objective descriptions of class.


Also, it's the PC issue that seems to be the main crux here, ie: by questioning the mighty liberal dogma itself, I am now supposedly a liberal, like Castro, Che and Mao were Mr PC:rolleyes: (not)
What "liberal dogma" are you questioning by accusing those who want actual communism of being liberals?

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

By "liberal dogma", do you mean support for women's and LGBT liberation? Liberals want equal rights under the capitalist system, revolutionaries want liberation for all as part of the broader class struggle. So, again, we're expressing no "liberal dogma" by voicing the latter.

[tuwix]

Some people here say I am not a Marxist, or am a Stalinist, b-gois, liberal etc..

So, I need to get to the bottom of this.

My main beliefs:

1. Socialism in one country is fine, with the hope of then spreading it.

2. Financial equality should be an immediate aim

3. Identity politics should be done away with

4. Definitions of P-bgois, liberal, worker etc.. are less important than financial equality

5. Realpolitik is more important than ideology

6. The EU is a neo-lib playground and should be opposed.

7. Bigger does not mean better - even if the world were one country there is no reason to suppose it would be Red - more likely end up as a Conservative neo-lib nightmare.

8. Many 'Marxists' are actually liberals in disguise.

9. Tolerance is a fine thing, but Political Correctness has become an identity in itself, and tends to be the insidious dagger of the liberal capitalist - ie: it dilutes the main thrust of the Revolution, which is of course the destruction of capitalism and the b-gois mindset.

ok, bash away;)

btw:this really is a genuine question that I hope to get to the bottom of, just can't quite work it out- hope the mods will not ban me and will at least allow this thread a few days to get some answers, thanks:)


and difference between a Leninist and ML?

You seem to me as utopian Stalinist. Stalinist due to 'socialism in one country'. It's Stalin's idea. But utopian because you believe in 'financial equality'. Material equality is possible, if you abolish money, but 'financial equality' suggests existence of money. And money as measure of inequality makes it impossible.

[BolshevikBabe]

Sort of a populist social democrat, you sound closest to the CPRF in line tbh.

[Left Voice]

Without trying to sound completely patronising, your recent posts suggest that you're still in the process of learning. This is perfectly fine - we all are, most of all myself. But to be honest, that's why I've been taking the time to respond to your posts this week - not because I'm trying to be antagonistic, but because a lot of what you've been posting sounds like you're exploring an awful lot of ideas, still reading through the socialist history and getting to grips with it all.

Much of what you say sounds like pretty regular Marxist-Leninism (meant as no disrespect to MLs, whom I have no issue with). But much of it seems to be mixed with a whole host of 'populist' left wing attitudes, be it an unconditional defense of anti-imperialism, or a dismissal of identity politics. There are ideological bases for much of what you say, but you leave an awful lot of squares that need circling. Nothing wrong there, just a process of learning.

My honest advice is to stop looking for an ideological clique or 'tendency' for now. Invest that time in research, study and reading into communism, without the ideological baggage. That's why my tendency is 'Non-Doctrinaire' - I'm not fence-sitting, I just think it would be detrimental to my study as a communist if I let antagonisms between tendencies get in the way of doing the most broad research possible. I don't discriminate between Leninist, ML, Trotskyist, Left Com, Anarcho-Com or even anarchist when researching because I recognise that I am in a perpetual state of learning, I embrace this and trust in my own ability to form my own informed opinions based on research.

Just do more reading mate, for your own benefit. Look for your own ideological 'niche' in 5 years time, or never at all.

[Tim Cornelis]

Financial equality implies a universal equivalent, commodity production, a wages system. This inadvertently means capitalism under present conditions. It's certainly not socialism. The nation of 'socialism in one country' and then moving on to spreading it also suggests the perpetuation of nation-states, as opposed to the immediate fusion of revolutionary territories as is aligned with communism. Your opposition to 'liberal Marxists' seems to stem from conservatist attitudes, rather than 'authentic Marxism'.

So conservative socialism maybe.

[Sinister Intents]

CubanDream: I have no clue how to label you, you hold onto a Stalinist belief and have socialist views, but I definitely can say you don't seem a Marxist. So I'll go with what someone has already said and concur with labelling you a utopian stalinist and conservative socialist.

To me it seems you need to do a ton of studying, but I was the same way in the beginning

[CubanDream]

ok, thanks for all the replies, back to answer soon:)

[Five Year Plan]

Maybe your best option at this point would be to try to learn as much as you can about different ideas related to the revolutionary left, before pegging yourself to any one particular "ideology." It's certainly true that you have a lot of false assumptions about what Marxism is, but that only proves my point about the importance of you actually developing your political ideas before getting hung up on specific labels.

[CubanDream]

Sort of a populist social democrat, you sound closest to the CPRF in line tbh.

you mean Communist Party of the Russian Federation?, ok - I'll check them out, see what their platform is

[CubanDream]

Without trying to sound completely patronising, your recent posts suggest that you're still in the process of learning. This is perfectly fine - we all are, most of all myself. But to be honest, that's why I've been taking the time to respond to your posts this week - not because I'm trying to be antagonistic, but because a lot of what you've been posting sounds like you're exploring an awful lot of ideas, still reading through the socialist history and getting to grips with it all.



thanks, good post - I'll read up on some more of the key topics

[Gramthusser]

There are a bunch of tests on the internet to help you ascertain what you are, but since I haven't posted 25 times I cannot post links. Google the following phrase:

what kind of socialist are you test

They are all sort of stupid and limited--though sort of interesting in their own way--but some of them want you to sign up for online dating and get you email so I didn't bother to get my results. One site said said I was a Leninist and another said I was an anarchist. Go figure.

[CubanDream]

Sort of a populist social democrat, you sound closest to the CPRF in line tbh.


CPRF - seem to have fairly good views, Communist Party of Russia, so not sure why you are saying Social Democrat.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

CPRF - seem to have fairly good views, Communist Party of Russia, so not sure why you are saying Social Democrat.

Because they're gay-bashing advocates of small enterprise? I mean, yeah, great views.

[CubanDream]

Gay bashing? Why did you make up that red-herring - please read their platform and you'll see that's not true, or perhaps you can come up with an example.

[Sinred]

Some people here say I am not a Marxist, or am a Stalinist, b-gois, liberal etc..

So, I need to get to the bottom of this.

My main beliefs:

1. Socialism in one country is fine, with the hope of then spreading it.

2. Financial equality should be an immediate aim

3. Identity politics should be done away with

4. Definitions of P-bgois, liberal, worker etc.. are less important than financial equality

5. Realpolitik is more important than ideology

6. The EU is a neo-lib playground and should be opposed.

7. Bigger does not mean better - even if the world were one country there is no reason to suppose it would be Red - more likely end up as a Conservative neo-lib nightmare.

8. Many 'Marxists' are actually liberals in disguise.

9. Tolerance is a fine thing, but Political Correctness has become an identity in itself, and tends to be the insidious dagger of the liberal capitalist - ie: it dilutes the main thrust of the Revolution, which is of course the destruction of capitalism and the b-gois mindset.

ok, bash away;)

btw:this really is a genuine question that I hope to get to the bottom of, just can't quite work it out- hope the mods will not ban me and will at least allow this thread a few days to get some answers, thanks:)


and difference between a Leninist and ML?


Sounds you are a Marxist-Leninist with some antipostmodernist focus.




And for you other people: my god. Show some sympathy. Marxism is not something that is understood in one day. It is a process were you slowly learn the importance of dialectical material analyses. Please think about your tone.

“Don't be in a hurry to condemn because he doesn't do what you do or think as you think or as fast. There was a time when you didn't know what you know today.”
― Malcolm X

[Tim Cornelis]

Gay bashing? Why did you make up that red-herring - please read their platform and you'll see that's not true, or perhaps you can come up with an example.


The world communist movement is currently facing a major scandal. The relations between the Russian and the French communist parties have been practically ruined. The reason of the conflict lies in the negative attitude which the leader of the Russian communists, Gennady Zyuganov, expressed against the recent gay pride parade in Moscow.

The outcome of the “free love parade” in Moscow is history now. Young communists and patriots violently attacked the homosexuals and defamed them. Delegates of the French Communist Party, who took part in all events organized by the Moscow gay movement, did not hesitate to express their reaction to that.

The French communists harshly reproached their Russian colleagues of being homophobic and betraying the Marxism-Leninism ideology. The Socialistic Party of France (the country’s second largest party) supported the communists of France too.

Unlike for the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, the struggle for social justice implies the protection of class interests, as well as people’s rights and freedoms, including the right to choose a sexual orientation.

http://english.pravda.ru/russia/politics/09-06-2006/81793-communist_party-0/

[Per Levy]

Gay bashing? Why did you make up that red-herring - please read their platform and you'll see that's not true, or perhaps you can come up with an example.

how does a saying go? actions speak louder than words.

the cprf is the loyal opposition to putins united russia, they are homophobes, chauvinists, social conservatives and are nostalgic about the "glorious" soviet unions past that never existed like that in the first place.

[Per Levy]

And for you other people: my god. Show some sympathy. Marxism is not something that is understood in one day. It is a process were you slowly learn the importance of dialectical material analyses. Please think about your tone.

well if cubandream wasnt so atagonzing and sounding like what conservatives think a commuist would be like the responses probally wouldnt be so "hostile". like labeling anarchists, left-coms and trots as liberals who use "political correctness" as their main weapon(for whatever). haveing no idea what communism is. going on about anti-white racism and also changing topics all the time to avoid actual discussions. cubandream is reaping what they sowed.

[Sinred]

well if cubandream wasnt so atagonzing and sounding like what conservatives think a commuist would be like the responses probally wouldnt be so "hostile". like labeling anarchists, left-coms and trots as liberals who use "political correctness" as their main weapon(for whatever). haveing no idea what communism is. going on about anti-white racism and also changing topics all the time to avoid actual discussions. cubandream is reaping what they sowed.


Oh, And you were ofcourse a fullblooded socialist the day you decided to call yourself that?

[exeexe]

A confused nazi (i dont mean it as bad as it sounds)

1. Socialism in one country is fine, with the hope of then spreading it.
Remember the socialist worker party taking over in Germany 1933ish? Then spreading it in 1939?

2. Financial equality should be an immediate aim
Nationalizing the means of production and put it in under control of some national authority

3. Identity politics should be done away with
If someone identify themselves as *standing out of the crowd* they should be obliterated and thats how you get rid of identify politics.

4. Definitions of P-bgois, liberal, worker etc.. are less important than financial equality
Remove all class theory and pump up nationalism

5. Realpolitik is more important than ideology
So there will never be a social revolution huh? We just need a strong leader

6. The EU is a neo-lib playground and should be opposed.
Maybe you are saying this because the EU is taking power away from the national states.

7. Bigger does not mean better - even if the world were one country there is no reason to suppose it would be Red - more likely end up as a Conservative neo-lib nightmare.
eeeh ok?

8. Many 'Marxists' are actually liberals in disguise.
What?

9. Tolerance is a fine thing, but Political Correctness has become an identity in itself, and tends to be the insidious dagger of the liberal capitalist - ie: it dilutes the main thrust of the Revolution, which is of course the destruction of capitalism and the b-gois mindset.
You want to get rid of capitalism but getting rid of anti racial laws is more important?

So why did i say that being a confused nazi wasnt as bad as it sounded? Because i dont think you want to be where i think you are.

[Sasha]

Brezhnevite

[CubanDream]

6. The EU is a neo-lib playground and should be opposed.
Maybe you are saying this because the EU is taking power away from the national states.
7. Bigger does not mean better - even if the world were one country there is no reason to suppose it would be Red - more likely end up as a Conservative neo-lib nightmare.
eeeh ok?

What's to stop the EU itself becoming a nationalist nation state, of a conservative nature? The US is big, and also Conservative.

Size doe not necessarily lead on to socialism.

And the EU just gobbles up socialists - look how they destroyed Solidarity in Poland via the IMF.

[Left Voice]

But then, nation states themselves are also inherently bourgeois and reactionary.

[CubanDream]

What's to stop a One World Government not being borgois and reactionary itself though?

And really, how much in common do the steel workers in the UK, have with the rubber tappers of a remote Indonesian island?

[#FF0000]

Oh, And you were ofcourse a fullblooded socialist the day you decided to call yourself that?

Ignorance is one thing. Aggressive and hostile ignorance is another. That's the problem.

[#FF0000]

And really, how much in common do the steel workers in the UK, have with the rubber tappers of a remote Indonesian island?

Their class interests are exactly the same.

[CubanDream]

Ignorance is one thing. Aggressive and hostile ignorance is another. That's the problem.

Talking to yourself is not a good sign.

[CubanDream]

Their class interests are exactly the same.

Theoretically speaking perhaps, but not in reality.

[#FF0000]

Theoretically speaking perhaps, but not in reality.

How are their class interests different?