Yet again another "Label Me" thread

[rocker935]

As much as I hate labels, It will rly be useful to me being able to have one. Well these are my beliefs.

Society That We One Day Need Reach
-Stateless
-Classless
-Libertarian

How To Get There On A Global Scale
-Begin by overthrowing U.S. backed governments in 3rd or 2nd world countries, similar to most of the countries in South America.
-Overthrowing the government by peaceful means it ideal but I'm aware that it is not always realistic.
-Once the countries that empires like the U.S. rely on turn to socialism, the bigger countries will weaken.
-When the larger countries weaken that is when a revolution there is can happen.
-Once most,if not all of the world has become socialist, the government is no longer needed and true communism can be achieved.

Country-By-Country
-Revolutions need to occur when the revolutionaries have the full support of the working class
-Totalitarian dictatorships will never be tolerated
-Keeping as many aspects of libertarianism as possible is ideal.
-In order to get the support of the people you must persuade them, never force them.
-Once a government has been successfully overthrown I believe a social democracy must be put into place (This is my feeling so far, not quite sure on it though. If you have suggestions that aren't totalitarian let me know.)
-Religion and government never should be put together. In other words, religious leaders shouldn't try to take part in government and the government shouldn't tell churches how they should be ran.
-Religion is a tool of capitalism and over time it will disappear, so taking a hostile/violent stance against religion is unnecessary.
-Avoid Stalinism at any cost.
-The people need to be able to trust their government, thats why censorship and biased media can't be tolerated


If you guys need more info let me know.

[More Fire for the People]

Bolshevik-Leninism, Orthodox Marxism, or some other sect I can't think of.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

If you really must be labelled: I think we call socialists like you 'Abstract Propagandists', since you base your ideas on persuading people, rather than on the majority fighting for socialism themselves, and in the event, showing they do not really need smart Alecs like us.

[bezdomni]

"Not an honest search for the truth".

[comandante_p-nut15]

idk exactly what that is classified as but your beliefs are almost identical to mine.
though im not sure that religion is a tool of capitalism.

oh by the way, nice quote.
its one of my favorites.

[manic expression]

I really don't like threads like these. Just read different arguments on this forum and elsewhere, read original works and keep an open mind. Don't be so quick to try and wave a flag; be patient, understand different ideologies and positions and start to make up your mind once you grasp what's being discussed and why. Right now, you're trying to eat a cake without putting it in the oven first.

[INDK]

Some kinda Marxist with Leninist principles, especially on the Trotskyist side of the Leninist spectrum. Kinda... I dunno, there isn't much materialist basis... I dunno. I'd just call you a Communist or Socialist of some type.

[comandante_p-nut15]

i agree with manic but its stil interesting to me to know where i stand.

thanks for the advice manic depression!

[RedAnarchist]

I really don't like threads like these. Just read different arguments on this forum and elsewhere, read original works and keep an open mind. Don't be so quick to try and wave a flag; be patient, understand different ideologies and positions and start to make up your mind once you grasp what's being discussed and why. Right now, you're trying to eat a cake without putting it in the oven first.

I definately agree with this sentiment. There's no point in worrying about what branch of revolutionary leftism you sit on until you know how to climb the tree.

[Luís Henrique]

A communist who doesn't know what kind of communist s/he is, is no communist at all.

Luís Henrique

[Sergei Simonov]

Vulgar idealist.

A revolutionary movement must grow from the material conditions of its place and age. If it exists to reify an ideology (even one its partisans cannot name) it will inevitably become impotent, oppressive, or both.

[RedAnarchist]

A communist who doesn't know what kind of communist s/he is, is no communist at all.

Luís Henrique

Why? We are all aiming for the same goal, so we should not rush into things without first understanding how you personally believe that goal can be achieved.

[Redscare102]

A communist who doesn't know what kind of communist s/he is, is no communist at all.

Luís Henrique

Um... what? Can't people just be "communists", with no labels? There's no need to base your ideas around a leader of the past.

[INDK]

Why? We are all aiming for the same goal, so we should not rush into things without first understanding how you personally believe that goal can be achieved.

You can check out this thread called "Communists" created by Proper Tea is Theft in which this is discussed, and me and Wat Tyler make these points:

We all are looking for a classless, stateless society based on common ownership of the means of production; this is established. However, a unity between types of Marxists, Marxists and Anarchists, Authoritarians and Libertarians, etc. cannot work because this simple reason: revolutionary leftist ideology shares a common goal but there are gigantic differences between ideologies when speaking of means to an end. The ideological rift is simply too large, as much as a unity of revolutionary leftists would be nice. There are all kinds of specifics that have been theorized in many forms. It's really down to what ideology proves to be the people's ideology, and therefore becomes the revolutionary ideology in whatever society.

[More Fire for the People]

Revleft needs to practice not being a dick to new members.

[Pawn Power]

Hopscotch Anthill needs to practice not being a dick.

[Pawn Power]

To clarify, Revleft doesn't make posts users do. So name names Anthill!

[bezdomni]

Revleft needs to practice not being a dick to new members.

No, revleft needs to practice not encouraging meaningless sectarianism and idiocy by telling people what to think.

Ideology shouldn't come as a package. That's why people who are constantly switching from one brand of so-called "Marxism" to another are not true leftists. They aren't honestly searching for the truth, they're looking for something to belong to.

[Comrade Rage]

As much as I hate labels, It will rly be useful to me being able to have one. Well these are my beliefs.

Society That We One Day Need Reach
-Stateless
-Classless
-Libertarian

How To Get There On A Global Scale
-Begin by overthrowing U.S. backed governments in 3rd or 2nd world countries, similar to most of the countries in South America.
-Overthrowing the government by peaceful means it ideal but I'm aware that it is not always realistic.
-Once the countries that empires like the U.S. rely on turn to socialism, the bigger countries will weaken.
-When the larger countries weaken that is when a revolution there is can happen.
-Once most,if not all of the world has become socialist, the government is no longer needed and true communism can be achieved.

Country-By-Country
-Revolutions need to occur when the revolutionaries have the full support of the working class
-Totalitarian dictatorships will never be tolerated
-Keeping as many aspects of libertarianism as possible is ideal.
-In order to get the support of the people you must persuade them, never force them.
-Once a government has been successfully overthrown I believe a social democracy must be put into place (This is my feeling so far, not quite sure on it though. If you have suggestions that aren't totalitarian let me know.)
-Religion and government never should be put together. In other words, religious leaders shouldn't try to take part in government and the government shouldn't tell churches how they should be ran.
-Religion is a tool of capitalism and over time it will disappear, so taking a hostile/violent stance against religion is unnecessary.
-Avoid Stalinism at any cost.
-The people need to be able to trust their government, thats why censorship and biased media can't be tolerated
You sound like a 'Libertarian Communist' or 'Left Communist'.

[rocker935]

Revleft needs to practice not being a dick to new members.

You are right, too many members of revleft are assholes to people like me who are just trying to learn. While I agree with Pawn Power that revleft is a community of individuals, many of the members are assholes.


And since you guys are so damn concerned about me wanting a label, well its just that I'm having trouble understanding the different Sects of communism and if I can put a label on the one i CURRENTLY stand at that would help me understand. I haven't picked one that I'm willing to die for yet, relax. Its just that this seemed like a good way to help me understand the different fucking sects.

O and btw, if you refuse to be kind and help people who are trying to learn, then maybe its a bad idea for you to visit the learning section :).

[Lenin II]

It sounds like you're a libertarian communist with slight Leninist leanings, but it would depend on your perception of certain dead people such as Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky etc. Due to your libertarian leanings it sounds like you're not in favor of aggravation of class struggle or repression of the bourgeosie. It also sounds like you favor Socialism in One Country over Permenant Revolution. If you disaprove of Bolshevik methods, then Comrade Crum is correct in his assessment of you as a Left or Libertarian Communist.

Although I must agree with this statement. There is much learning to be done first.


I really don't like threads like these. Just read different arguments on this forum and elsewhere, read original works and keep an open mind. Don't be so quick to try and wave a flag; be patient, understand different ideologies and positions and start to make up your mind once you grasp what's being discussed and why. Right now, you're trying to eat a cake without putting it in the oven first.

[bezdomni]

well its just that I'm having trouble understanding the different Sects of communism and if I can put a label on the one i CURRENTLY stand at that would help me understand.

You shouldn't try to map out every single sect of people who call themselves communist. That's a very liberal approach of Marxist ideology. You shouldn't try to understand every different group calling itself Marxist, you should try to arrive at the truth through study and struggle...not relatively arbitrary titles for different ideological groups. You should look at every individual person's line independently, because I doubt you will find any two communists who agree on every single thing...even if they are both of the same "school".

The trouble with trying to identify yourself with a particular "-ism" is that any "-ism" is very poorly defined. To think that you can fit all people calling themselves "anarchists" or "maoists" or "trotskyists" under the same ideological banner is like thinking you can fit all people calling themselves "communists" under the same banner.

Revleft puts an overemphasis on sectarian "-isms", in my opinion. Leftist identity crises, so to speak, don't really occur that much in real life.

[Luís Henrique]

Why? We are all aiming for the same goal, so we should not rush into things without first understanding how you personally believe that goal can be achieved.

A communist is someone who is actively fighting for that goal. And when you are actively fighting for the goal, you know in what way you are fighting for it, and that defines the kind of communist you are. If, on the other hand, you don't know what kind of communist you are, it means that you are not fighting for the goal, and, as such, you are not a communist at all - you may even want to be one, but you aren't one yet.

Luís Henrique

[Luís Henrique]

Um... what? Can't people just be "communists", with no labels? There's no need to base your ideas around a leader of the past.

I said nothing about leaders of the past. And who wants a label is rocker935, not me.

See my reply to Red_Anarchist.

Luís Henrique

[crimsonzephyr]

To clarify, Revleft doesn't make posts users do. So name names Anthill!

Look at the hypocrisy! Dude, you are being a dick to someone who is just trying to help educate people that are interested in learning. You are disrupting the spread of our ideas here at revleft. Anthill was just stating that we dont need people like you.

rocker's right, why are you here in the learning section if you are not helping in anyway to educate?

[rocker935]

Well I guess my question comes down to how the hell are we ever going to be able to organize a revolution if at this point in history there are so many sects and so many disagreements? It was easier for the Bolsheviks because there was basically only one communist school of thought. Am I right?

[bezdomni]

Well I guess my question comes down to how the hell are we ever going to be able to organize a revolution if at this point in history there are so many sects and so many disagreements? It was easier for the Bolsheviks because there was basically only one communist school of thought. Am I right?

lol, not even close. The bolsheviki formed out of a split in the RSDLP. You can see huge disagreements between Lenin (bolshevik leader) and Martov (menshevik leader) occurring from well before 1903. That's not to mention all of the other fringe-communist tendencies and non-communist political tendencies that existed at the time of the Russian revolution.

In fact, if you read lots of Lenin's works (two tactics of social democracy, what is to be done...etc), they are more or less polemics against other tendencies of the time.

The point isn't to know all of the different groups equally well, but to know which groups are actually putting forward a line consistent with Marxism and can actually lead the masses to revolution.

That is also not to say that various groups can't work together...there is just the small problem of lots of people on the left not wanting to work together. In my experience, this isn't something exclusively attached to ideology either. I have had some really good discussions with very comradely anarchists, and I have had some very hostile, macho anarchists yell at me irrationally.

I suggest you study Marxist works more seriously before you try to really
"define" yourself. It's more important to know what you believe than to know what to call it...but it is most important to avoid dogmatism and have your beliefs rigidly correspond with reality. What we're fundamentally concerned with is the truth and how it pertains to liberation.


To behave like "a blindfolded man catching sparrows", or "a blind man groping for fish", to be crude and careless, to indulge in verbiage, to rest content with a smattering of knowledge - such is the extremely bad style of work that still exists among many comrades in our Party, a style utterly opposed to the fundamental spirit of Marxism-Leninism. Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin have taught us that it is necessary to study conditions conscientiously and to proceed from objective reality and not from subjective wishes; however, many of our comrades act in direct violation of this truth.
-Mao

[crimsonzephyr]

[quote=SovietPants;1052455]The point isn't to know all of the different groups equally well, but to know which groups are actually putting forward a line consistent with Marxism and can actually lead the masses to revolution.

This makes perfect sense. We shouldn't fight between ourselves. as long as our ideas are similar we should follow the ones that will get us to the point of rev the fastest.