Crypto-fascism within the left

[erupt]

Ironically, most of those people claim to be Marxists.

Of course, and they are the quickest to call others catch-words and segregate the Left.

[Thirsty Crow]

How so?

We have the exact same problem in the left movement, maybe not as worse as within the right, but it's there. Our "jews" are the bankers, managers and CEOs. We give them attributes, like greediness, absence of emotions, hideosity and so on. We reduce their materialist class interest to some shitty human nature moralist stuff. We don't use the term jew explicitly, but this false criticism can function as a hotbed for real, primary antisemitism.

Well, I explained the how so part.
A good deal of the anti-neoliberalism radical left, or born again social democracy, uses the distinction between parastic finance capital and productive capital while being neither anti-judaist (as in, prejudice against a religious group) nor anti-semitic in any way.

Reducing class interest and the particular ways financial capital operates to silly stuff like "greed" can't be reduced to any recognizable form or antisemitism whatsoever.

[erupt]

Let me ask this question: as far as users on here and their exposure to anti-semitism, what tendency are these Leftist groups usually, if they're anti-semites, that users have exposure to.

Are they tankies (please, I know all about Stalin's writings about how anti-semitism is bad, etc., so please, no-one post it for my sake), social democrats? I doubt Trotskyist (not because I'm sympathetic in any way, but because, as we all know, Trotsky's patriarchal surname was Bronstein if I'm not mistaken).

Point being is, did the anti-semitism yins (sorry, I'm from around Da 'Burgh) come across come from Stalinist camps who adopted their messiah's outlooks (again, no point in arguing between tendencies as far as proving to me he was a friend of the Jews in the long run), from naive Trotskyists, from social-democrats who adopted the anti-Jewish sect of the neo-conservative or neo-liberal line of mainstream socio-economy/politics, or was it libertarian socialists, anarchists, anarcho-syndicalists, etc., or just moderate Leftists not loyal to any tendency or ideology, in general?

[DOOM]

Let me ask this question: as far as users on here and their exposure to anti-semitism, what tendency are these Leftist groups usually, if they're anti-semites, that users here have exposure to.

Are they tankies (please, I know all about Stalin's writings about how anti-semitism is bad, etc., so please, no-one post it for my sake), social democrats? I doubt Trotskyist (not because I'm sympathetic in any way, but because, as we all know, Trotsky's patriarchal surname was Bronstein if I'm not mistaken).

Point being is, did the anti-semitism yins (sorry, I'm from around Da 'Burgh) come across come from Stalinist camps who adopted their messiah's outlooks (again, no point in arguing between tendencies as far as proving to me he was a friend of the Jews in the long run), from naive Trotskyists, from social-democrats who adopted the anti-Jewish sect of the neo-conservative or neo-liberal line of mainstream socio-economy/politics, or was it libertarian socialists, anarchists, anarcho-syndicalists, etc., or just moderate Leftists not loyal to any tendency or ideology, in general?

Antisemitism manifests itself in the whole (radical) left. But in my opinion, the stalinists, hardcore anti-imperialists and national-liberationists tend to have the most antisemits among them. But don't take this as a fact, it's really just an observation.

[fugazi]

Let me ask this question: as far as users on here and their exposure to anti-semitism, what tendency are these Leftist groups usually, if they're anti-semites, that users have exposure to.

Are they tankies (please, I know all about Stalin's writings about how anti-semitism is bad, etc., so please, no-one post it for my sake), social democrats? I doubt Trotskyist (not because I'm sympathetic in any way, but because, as we all know, Trotsky's patriarchal surname was Bronstein if I'm not mistaken).

Point being is, did the anti-semitism yins (sorry, I'm from around Da 'Burgh) come across come from Stalinist camps who adopted their messiah's outlooks (again, no point in arguing between tendencies as far as proving to me he was a friend of the Jews in the long run), from naive Trotskyists, from social-democrats who adopted the anti-Jewish sect of the neo-conservative or neo-liberal line of mainstream socio-economy/politics, or was it libertarian socialists, anarchists, anarcho-syndicalists, etc., or just moderate Leftists not loyal to any tendency or ideology, in general?

personally, I think that 'Stalinism' can follow the basic logic of anti-Semitism (in its insistence upon the elimination of foreign entities etc. - I know I'm 'asking' but don't want to go into a tendency war about this...)
As far as early revolutionary ideology goes, its pretty rampant throughout.
Chalk it up to l'espirit du temps

In America, its more overt forms stem from the conspiratorial worldview. (although, to me, this seems to waning - granted my social sphere isn't necessarily representative of the general American populace)

as far as anti-Semitism is concerned, tbh, a I think that a lot of it stems from Israel-Palestine (I'm not taking the hardline-Zionist stance here - all criticisms of the state of Israel are necessarily anti-Semitic - just pointing out an issue that everyone likes to dance around...)

The issue for me is in (at least, what I perceive as) a conflation of ideas or mixing up the metaphors i.e. the comparison between the policies of the State of Israel and things that it has nothing to do with like gentrification or the border wall in Arizona.

All of these issues need to be taken on their own terms (in their own historical/ whatever-context)

anti-Semitism aside, as far as 'Red' or 'Social-Fascism' is concerned - I think it stems from a problem of militancy. (I haven't fully developed this idea - when and if I do, I'll try and elaborate more...)

[Dagoth Ur]

Jesus Christ. Stalin was such an enemy of the Jews that he was accused of being in their employ. Lenin was party jewish so it is doubly strange that an anti-semite would spend so much time praising him.

The only thing that could seem like antisemitism is the Doctor's Plot but this is only if you have no understanding of historical context.

[#FF0000]

Jesus Christ. Stalin was such an enemy of the Jews that he was accused of being in their employ. Lenin was party jewish so it is doubly strange that an anti-semite would spend so much time praising him.

None of this necessarily means that the folks in question couldn't have been anti-semitic, tho. Antisemites accuse other antisemites of being secret jews often enough.

The only thing that could seem like antisemitism is the Doctor's Plot but this is only if you have no understanding of historical context.

I'd love to hear this one. (◕‿◕✿)

[Dagoth Ur]

None of this necessarily means that the folks in question couldn't have been anti-semitic, tho. Antisemites accuse other antisemites of being secret jews often enough.

Well that is true but when did Stalin ever accuse someone of being a secret Jew? For an anti-semite it seems strange that he would base his whole worldview off of a jew and a half jew (Marx and Lenin respectively).

I'd love to hear this one. (◕‿◕✿)

Its simple. Jews in Czarist and early Soviet Russia were almost exclusively part of the intelligentsia. As such they made up a overwhelming majority of doctors. This is part of why the Soviets were accused of Judeobolshevism by basically everyone (except America where being antisemitic has never really had much traction).

[erupt]

personally, I think that 'Stalinism' can follow the basic logic of anti-Semitism (in its insistence upon the elimination of foreign entities etc. - I know I'm 'asking' but don't want to go into a tendency war about this...)
As far as early revolutionary ideology goes, its pretty rampant throughout.
Chalk it up to l'espirit du temps

In America, its more overt forms stem from the conspiratorial worldview. (although, to me, this seems to waning - granted my social sphere isn't necessarily representative of the general American populace)

as far as anti-Semitism is concerned, tbh, a I think that a lot of it stems from Israel-Palestine (I'm not taking the hardline-Zionist stance here - all criticisms of the state of Israel are necessarily anti-Semitic - just pointing out an issue that everyone likes to dance around...)

The issue for me is in (at least, what I perceive as) a conflation of ideas or mixing up the metaphors i.e. the comparison between the policies of the State of Israel and things that it has nothing to do with like gentrification or the border wall in Arizona.

All of these issues need to be taken on their own terms (in their own historical/ whatever-context)

anti-Semitism aside, as far as 'Red' or 'Social-Fascism' is concerned - I think it stems from a problem of militancy. (I haven't fully developed this idea - when and if I do, I'll try and elaborate more...)

Stalin is viewed this way for things he's done, like sending these various groups to the labor camps and, in my opinion, nationalism.

In the States, at lot of it most definitely "stems from" the U.S. general international outlook that "the Jews pull the strings", etc., very similar to the era that allowed Hitler to gain a following.

The Israel-Palestine conflict causes resentment to Jews, without a doubt; those aware and opposed to Zionism may resent all Jews for the beliefs and actions of a select group of them. The fact that centuries-old generalizations and stereotypes don't help the situation, either. Also, without a doubt, criticizing Israel is not criticizing Jews in any way -- it's criticizing a state.

I think the comparisons you mentioned (Israel and the fence in Arizona) are mentioned together by some because they are examples of religious bigotry, nationalism, and racism, and the only thing that most Americans that are exposed to when it comes to that are Mexicans, Guatemalans, etc. (if nationalism wasn't mentioned African-American prejudice is extremely prevalent, too). They're generalizing something that should not be generalized in any situation.

And finally, militancy, which we obviously need, is definitely a breeding ground for bigotry, etc. If the Left's militant organizations had more cooperation and coordination, much of this reactionary outlook could be educated, and, therefore, edradicated.

Jesus Christ. Stalin was such an enemy of the Jews that he was accused of being in their employ. Lenin was party jewish so it is doubly strange that an anti-semite would spend so much time praising him.

The only thing that could seem like antisemitism is the Doctor's Plot but this is only if you have no understanding of historical context.

I didn't, and I don't think anyone on here, claimed Stalin was anti-Semitic towards ethnic Jews who renounced Judaism and joined the Party. However, how he acted towards whole populations of people is a different story.

[Dagoth Ur]

If you kill jews because you're killing people and some jews are involved there is no possible connection to anti-semitism.

[erupt]

If you kill jews because you're killing people and some jews are involved there is no possible connection to anti-semitism.

Agreed. My thing is, how many Jews that continued practicing their religion were killed, in comparison to how many Jews that became Atheist, joined the Party, and fell-in-line, were killed.

When Stalin persecuted religious institutions altogether, I would bet way less Eastern Orthodox followers were killed/imprisoned (for less time, too,) than Jews in the exact same situation.

[fugazi]

If you kill jews because you're killing people and some jews are involved there is no possible connection to anti-semitism.

to clarify
what I meant by 'the logic of anti-Semitism'
was that given a situation where you have internal problems you blame an external (or externalized) Other. (Poles for instance...)

I wasn't trying to suggest that Stalin was an anti-Semite.

[Dagoth Ur]

Fair enough but that's a pretty broad analogy.

Agreed. My thing is, how many Jews that continued practicing their religion were killed, in comparison to how many Jews that became Atheist, joined the Party, and fell-in-line, were killed.

It stands to reason that most that held on to their faith were also anti-soviet. That said this is all speculation.

When Stalin persecuted religious institutions altogether, I would bet way less Eastern Orthodox followers were killed/imprisoned (for less time, too,) than Jews in the exact same situation.

Depends on the crime and who actually handed down the sentence. I mean it's not like Stalin was setting every punishment in the USSR during his reign. From what I've read about these types of things it was the atheist Jews who were the hardest on the faithful ones. Nothing new there.

[erupt]

It stands to reason that most that held on to their faith were also anti-soviet. That said this is all speculation.


Depends on the crime and who actually handed down the sentence. I mean it's not like Stalin was setting every punishment in the USSR during his reign. From what I've read about these types of things it was the atheist Jews who were the hardest on the faithful ones. Nothing new there.

It's logical, as well, that any anti-Soviet citizens would probably remain faithful to that other institution breathing down their neck...the church/temple/mosque.

As far as Stalin and crime/punishment under him, I know there is plenty of things he never heard of or requested. However, we could say the same exact thing about Hitler.

Also, it's not surprising the Jews that became Atheist were harder on faithful Jews; I think it's probably human nature. What I mean is the Jews that no longer practiced their religion resented the Jews that still practiced their faith since they were probably thinking something like "I gave worship up. I'm trying to work together with the rest of this nation-state. Why aren't my fellow Jews doing the same as I?" Again, no excuse, just an attempt at historical context with a culture I know nothing about.

Not to sound patronizing, but good discussion all around. No tendencies wars, yet, I'm pretty sure!

[bropasaran]

This is really Chomskyite mythology about Leninism. This one dimensional explanation of the degeneration of the Russian revolution is insufficient in explaining it -- the highly complex issue of the Russian revolution vs. this simple (I'd say simplistic) explanation should be an indication for critical reassessment of this critique. Leninism is not contrary to self-emancipation of workers, and Leninism certainly isn't 'authoritarian' in the sense that anarchists use. Bolshevik practice is another issue. Generally, the anarchist critique of Leninism is presuming the practice of the Soviet Union originated from Leninism, sometimes even without consulting Lenin's texts.

No, leninism actually is authoritarian and contrary to self-emancipation of workers. I suggest going through the following essays.

H.3.3 Is Leninism "socialism from below"?

H.3.8 What is wrong with the Leninist theory of the state?

H.5.1 Why are vanguard parties anti-socialist?

H.5.4 Did Lenin abandon vanguardism?

H.5.10 Why does "democratic centralism" produce "bureaucratic centralism"?

H.6.1 Can objective factors explain the failure of the Russian Revolution?

H.6.2 Did Bolshevik ideology influence the outcome of the Russian Revolution?

8. Are Leninists in favour of democracy?

11. Why is McNally's claim that Leninism supports working class self-emancipation wrong?

15. Did Trotsky keep alive Leninism's "democratic essence"?

14. Is the Leninist tradition actually as democratic as the SWP like to claim?

4. What did Trotsky and Lenin think must replace the bourgeois state?

4 Was Lenin's "State and Revolution" applied after October?

12 Was there an alternative to Lenin's "state capitalism" and "war communism"?

20 Can the Red Terror and the Cheka be justified?

23 Was the repression of the socialist opposition justified?

What caused the degeneration of the Russian Revolution?
1 Do anarchists ignore the objective factors facing the Russian revolution?
2 Can "objective factors" really explain the failure of Bolshevism?
3 Can the civil war explain the failure of Bolshevism?
4 Did economic collapse and isolation destroy the revolution?
5 Was the Russian working class atomised or "declassed"?
6 Did the Bolsheviks blame "objective factors" for their actions?

How did Bolshevik ideology contribute to the failure of the Revolution?
1 How did the Marxist historical materialism affect Bolshevism?
2 Why did the Marxist theory of the state undermine working class power?
3 How did Engels' essay "On Authority" affect the revolution?
4 What was the Bolshevik vision of democracy?
5 What was the effect of the Bolshevik vision of "socialism"?
6 How did Bolshevik preference for nationalisation affect the revolution?
7 How did Bolshevik preference for centralism affect the revolution?
8 How did the aim for party power undermine the revolution?

Were any of the Bolshevik oppositions a real alternative?
1 Were the "Left Communists" of 1918 an alternative?
2 What were the limitations of the "Workers' Opposition" of 1920?
3 What about Trotsky's "Left Opposition" in the 1920s?
4 What do these oppositions tell us about the essence of Leninism?

.

EDIT: Fixed some links.

And voila, a nice small database of socialist material debunking the myth that leninism has anything to do with the emancipation the working people. If you want to point people to this list, give them this link:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.p...1&postcount=55

[QueerVanguard]

No, leninism actually is authoritarian and contrary to self-emancipation of workers. I suggest going through the following essays.

H.3.3 Is Leninism "socialism from below"?

H.3.8 What is wrong with the Leninist theory of the state?

H.5.1 Why are vanguard parties anti-socialist?

H.5.4 Did Lenin abandon vanguardism?

H.5.10 Why does "democratic centralism" produce "bureaucratic centralism"?

H.6.1 Can objective factors explain the failure of the Russian Revolution?

H.6.2 Did Bolshevik ideology influence the outcome of the Russian Revolution?

8. Are Leninists in favour of democracy?

11. Why is McNally's claim that Leninism supports working class self-emancipation wrong?

15. Did Trotsky keep alive Leninism's "democratic essence"?

14. Is the Leninist tradition actually as democratic as the SWP like to claim?

4. What did Trotsky and Lenin think must replace the bourgeois state?

4 Was Lenin's "State and Revolution" applied after October?

12 Was there an alternative to Lenin's "state capitalism" and "war communism"?

20 Can the Red Terror and the Cheka be justified?

23 Was the repression of the socialist opposition justified?

What caused the degeneration of the Russian Revolution?
1 Do anarchists ignore the objective factors facing the Russian revolution?
2 Can "objective factors" really explain the failure of Bolshevism?
3 Can the civil war explain the failure of Bolshevism?
4 Did economic collapse and isolation destroy the revolution?
5 Was the Russian working class atomised or "declassed"?
6 Did the Bolsheviks blame "objective factors" for their actions?

How did Bolshevik ideology contribute to the failure of the Revolution?
1 How did the Marxist historical materialism affect Bolshevism?
2 Why did the Marxist theory of the state undermine working class power?
3 How did Engels' essay "On Authority" affect the revolution?
4 What was the Bolshevik vision of democracy?
5 What was the effect of the Bolshevik vision of "socialism"?
6 How did Bolshevik preference for nationalisation affect the revolution?
7 How did Bolshevik preference for centralism affect the revolution?
8 How did the aim for party power undermine the revolution?

Were any of the Bolshevik oppositions a real alternative?
1 Were the "Left Communists" of 1918 an alternative?
2 What were the limitations of the "Workers' Opposition" of 1920?
3 What about Trotsky's "Left Opposition" in the 1920s?
4 What do these oppositions tell us about the essence of Leninism?

.

EDIT: Fixed some links.

And voila, a nice small database of socialist material debunking the myth that leninism has anything to do with the emancipation the working people. If you want to point people to this list, give them this link:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.p...1&postcount=55

Quoting some more from your Proudhonist bible?? Cute

[bropasaran]

On a site with a ton of marxists and leninists, you pull out a bible metaphor at an anarchist pointing to rationalist, meticulously argumented, systematized, and referenced essays.

[synthesis]

Why don't you quit spamming the forum with that fucking FAQ?

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

There isn't nessecarily wrong with using these essays for constructing an argument since arguments which have their basis in some form of theoretical and factual authority are more creditable then what you hatched up on the spot for an internet post. However if you really wish to use these essays, cite them in an argument you are making instead of simply saying "here, an essay about something which is parallel to this topic, go read it!" Because while perhaps they have something good in them I don't have the desire to plod through all of those links to find what is relevant to the point you are trying to make

[erupt]

Here goes, an' I'm not blaming either side, but the various types of Marxists and Anarchists are getting on each other, rather than everyone denouncing these practices.\

I'm sure I'll get shit for this, but, this is why RevLeft is useless as far as the information/discussions becoming real-life knowledge used by all Leftists for the benefit of the international proletariat.