• 0 Posts
  • 23 Comments
Joined 5M ago
cake
Cake day: Mar 23, 2022

help-circle
rss

Ok, then i am sorry for calling you out, i misunderstood your point.


of course i am with the dictatorship of the proletariat, more than you think. but what has it got to do with you calling here comrades libs and rightoids? is this how comrades talk to each other, you think? this is not a football stadium in here. It is a communist community and perhaps it is you that dont belong here.


it is not very productive for the conversation to call other comrades with different points of view, libs and rightoids.


it almost sounds like you are afraid of them, it is not a good thing to ban other opinions. we are all communists here and if that is so BS to be heard, comrades will discard it. but pre-banning it is something else.


I am not very familiar with theory behind this topic, because as a westerner never have i heard Communists self-refer to as patriots. However, in WWII my country was liberated by patriots, fighting under the greek flag and the red flag of Communism. It was not the national army that fought against Germans first and British afterwards, but the Peoples’ Army, under the lead of the Communist Party. Not everybody in those militias was a communist, yet he found himself there, instead of the national army. This wasnt by chance of course, unless we consider people stupid. (the mainstream propaganda on that matter is that both armies were recruiting people against their will - what a joke!). A lot of things followed the defeat of People’s Army back then and communists were heavily percecuted for many years afterwards, as well as their ideology. Patriotism was replaced by nationalism and was connected with military parades, fiestas, nationalist speaking and thousands of blue-white flags, until today. Now i understand why. Because the way i see it, indeed you cannot be a communist if you are not patriot first, meaning to care about the real well being of your people and their independence from any external enemy. From all the things that Communists lost in the country, the right to self-refer to as patriots is the most hurting one. We should NEVER again let the enemy take our words and their meaning, to which we give real flesh and blood. Because it is also about that. Thank you for reminding.

" “Declaration of Independence” and the “Constitution”. We must discard bourgeois terminology and bourgeois texts of the bourgeois American Revolution." taken from the comment below.

It is not bourgeois terminology. It is that bourgeois hijacked the meaning of these words, applying to them their own totally distorted reality. But these words came out of the struggle of people who were feeling like that. It is the most serious defeat to give up your own wording. On the contrary, you ought to give them your own meaning. How Communists mean patriotism. Have you noticed how systematically our slogans are stolen and distorted by the bourgeoise? In greece during the 80s the demsoc party was elected using the same slogans as the Communist Party. It is because these words speak to peoples’ hearts and not by mistake. Havent you noticed what happened to words like liberty and democracy? Have you noticed how only the bourgeois coin all the time weird new terms that nobody understands? The fight has always been about this, as well. I believe we should reclaim them back, give them their meaning in action and do not let people forget about it again.



serious argument. comrade dont underestimate the wisdom of memes, sometimes they can be big and complicated truths made simple.


I actually find comrade’s viewpoint extremelly interesting, to say the least. First, he didnt claim that Russia is socialist, he said that Russia is moving towards socialism. Second, i believe we should think a little bit more on what the “dictatorship of the proletariat” is, or could be.

Firstly, DoP requires the existence of a proletariat. This means that a ruling class still exists, otherwise the proletariat wouldnt be called “proletariat” but something else (productive forces maybe?) , in a process of transformation. It also requires a dictatorship and a dictator, who will actually supress and repress somebody, but IN FAVOR of the proletariat. This somebody has to be the totality of the capitalist ruling class? Couldn’t it be a part of it, under certain historical circumstances? (late stage capitalism that we are now eg?) That somebody couldnt be also various more “progressive” minorities that want more freedom? Anarchists and the deeply individualistic ideology they bear is only a small example, and there is experience of that. Putin himself can surely be considered a dictator (at least in terms of western democracy), being in power so many years, yet his peoples seem to love him. Of course a lot probably hate him as well, but we need to see who they are, and that NOT through the western liberal point of view, but through a close, carefull and openminded observation of the Russian society. The fact that he doesnt present himself as a socialist, means nothing, because what matters is what he does for the people of his country, i would say. It is misleading to try to strictly apply terms that were coined in a specific historical context, on a different historical context, because we might miss the substance of the actual happening.

I am not arguing that Russia is going towards socialism, but i believe this particular matter is extremely important, and we should rather open the conversation, instead of close it. Comrade offered a thought out of the box and we should more seriously consider on it.


I actually find comrade’s viewpoint extremelly interesting, to say the least. First, he didnt claim that Russia is socialist, he said that Russia is moving towards socialism. Second, i believe we should think a little bit more on what the “dictatorship of the proletariat” is, or could be.

Firstly, DoP requires the existence of a proletariat. This means that a ruling class still exists, otherwise the proletariat wouldnt be called “proletariat” but something else (productive forces maybe?) , in a process of transformation. It also requires a dictatorship and a dictator, who will actually supress and repress somebody, but IN FAVOR of the proletariat. This somebody has to be the totality of the capitalist ruling class? Couldn’t it be a part of it, under certain historical circumstances? (late stage capitalism that we are now eg?) That somebody couldnt be also various more “progressive” minorities that want more freedom? Anarchists and the deeply individualistic ideology they bear is only a small example, and there is experience of that. Putin himself can surely be considered a dictator (at least in terms of western democracy), being in power so many years, yet his peoples seem to love him. Of course a lot probably hate him as well, but we need to see who they are, and that NOT through the western liberal point of view, but through a close, carefull and openminded observation. The fact that he doesnt present himself as a socialist, means nothing, because what matters is what he does for the people of his country, i would say. It is misleading to try to strictly apply terms that were coined in a specific historical context, on a different historical context, because we might miss the substance of the actual happening.

I am not arguing that Russia is going towards socialism, but i believe this particular matter is extremely important, and we should rather open the conversation, instead of close it. Comrade offered a thought out of the box and we should more seriously consider on it.


: )) thanks for the link! hehe, now its explained why CIA and other secret services didnt see that coming… aparently they have been extremely busy messing the world.


indeed. we have very little to almost inexistent information about what is going on around the world, all these years. And that information is still filtered through the western media. i will not be surprised if ALL upheaval has been NATO’s making…


i agree full heart. far beyond theories and ideologies, the class instinct is more important. Russia’s operation in Ukraine caused an avallanche of events in the world. The teaming up back to back with China and the helping hand they both offered to their neighbouring countries and other, set a tone in world’s geopolitics talk that has never been heard before. First time in history NATO’s crimes against humanity were talked out loudly, not by the communists, but by whole nations. Truth about NATO’s nature - as an imperialist organization! - but imperialism is communist talking - was exposed in public, almost with communistic terminology, which crept up and ruled the public dialogue on the matter. And it was about time, since all the countries that stood up for Russia have actually felt what imperialism is. Exposing NATO’s criminal nature was a first step to get the modern world’s history streight. And all that wasnt through a hate speech of division, we and the others, which is so closely tied to emprires, but through a public dialogue claiming that with cooperation all countries can manage. People from Africa stood up en masse, winning the social media warfare on our behalf, Jamaica just ousted the royals, and even the ultra right regimes of UAE and Saudi Arabia sat on the same table with Assad. It is like they set a different tone, a different paradigm, even in the context of capitalism. If Russia had been equally imperialist as the US, i dont believe that people would stand up for it. Even the way Russia executes the warfare is so much diffrent than the world has seen from NATO. People of Middle East and Africa know it for years now, we only have fallen for the western russo-sino phobia propaganda which has been going on non stop, at leat since both countries turned to peoples’ republics. The world’s working class’s heart at this moment beats up for Russia, and this is where a communist should find himself. At least for now.


I think we go in circles if we try to reconcile the specific historical choice that Lenin made in WWI regarding a certain situation, with the historical choice that WWIII sets upon us at the moment. (plus we have the WWII in between to draw experience from, trotskyism eg). imo leninist theory does not contradict, since the main contradiction is here, right staring at us, and this principle is not violated, on the contrary. Each decision is judged in the historical context it appears, there is no transcended “right choice”. Lenin indeed is not a dogma, leninism, perhaps.


the cancel culture against Russia that the west promotes, resembles the german nazis when burning books, this is what Russia declared openly, which is 100% based.




it feels to me that the escalation in Ukraine had un urgent character for the US. They have been seeing the economic giant China growing year after year interpenetrating EVERY country with sound investments (ports, airports, hospitals, dams etc) and there is no time… but they not only underestimated Russia and Putin in particular, but the whole situation altogether. It is obvious that the economic agreements between Russia - China, the immediate integration in China’s equivalent of swift and others, that were put in place within a week(!), were being prepared for years, at least since 2014… when i learned about the situation in Donbass i wondered why it took Russia so many years to intervene… only sensible answer that came to mind was that the timing was not correct. Perhaps back then Russia wasnt able to handdle the sanctions so remarkably well. I dont know if US knew about those plans, but even if they knew they couldnt stop them. What amazed me though is how the rest of the major players in geopolitical arena reacted, almost immediately siding with Russia - China. That i wouldnt expect and perhaps neither the US. West appeared quite isolated very soon. When boris johnson went to saudi arabia to ask for oil he got a no. At the same time Bassar al Ashad visited the UAE. And at the moment they are pretty much isolated. Africa, India and others side with the coalition, most recently Turkey. I believe that US were too arrogant to see in time the shifting, typical of a dying empire. A comrade here mentioned in a comment that the US after 3 generations of domination totally lost sight of reality. I would agree. And they are still in denial, its like they believe their own propaganda. President Bassar al Ashad’s speech about the whole empire’s history and how it has alaways been hand to hand with nazism was something else. Speeches like this have never been heard before from presidents. Such public exposure. He also said that they cannot actually quarantee anything to anybody apart from their tight interests, turning the world into a jungle where they only win. And since by now almost half of the world’s countries have at least felt it, they decided to grab the chance. Sound choice. It seems that the other capitalists decided to get rid of their bullying, at least.


whataboutism is a kind of denial to actually hear. whatabouters are deaf and blind. In NYT articles’ comments’ section, where people mostly from Africa, India and other more free countries question openly, simply and reasonably the narrative, that is talk with facts and not theories, whatabouters almost always end up bullying in some way, most often racially. Constant propaganda, misinformation, nebulus sources and phanaticism, thats what is needed to create a nazi. If anyone ever wondered how was it possible for people to fall for - or at least not react to - such atrocities. It seems that there’s a certain point where the individual is just not able to handdle the truth. whataboutism comes at hand first. Though the real nazi - believers are not whatabouters. Real nazi - believers end up - guess where - against communism. Those guys seem like they were “created” to be in nature anti - communists, something like the orcs. It almost seems as if their racism is only an excuse, thats not the main point. it almost freaks me out to think that Nazis were actually “created” through certain propaganda, and for a cause. : //


only europeans cannot see it… because we are already the half-boiled frog. It is not a coincidence that European leftists mostly parrot the “equal distance” from two imperialisms, actually identifying with the liberal narrative of Russia’s invasion being “as bad”. As bad? Well, no. The fact that we are on the defensive and we fail to support the Russia - China (and apparently the rest of the world as well), because we dont want to identify with Putin (who is also a kind of dictator (because he hates communism) - but thats also what libs say!), only reflects that the propaganda is incorporated to the core. It doesnt matter that we talk about imperialism, when we cannot recognize the pure imperialism (almost by definition) against something else and act accordingly. Free NATO hostage countries.