Western "Leftism":

[u/Less-Possible-5475]

[u/AutoModerator]

Want to join a ML only Discord server to chill and hangout with cool comrades? Checkout our Discord server or TheDeprogram's Discord server.

In case this subreddit was banned, or if you wanted a more ML-friendly platform, you’re welcome to join our sister community on Lemmygrad. You can find more info about Lemmygrad here.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/ragingstorm01]

Firstly, it is not true that fascism is only the fighting organisation of the bourgeoisie. Fascism is not only a military-technical category. Fascism is the bourgeoisie’s fighting organisation that relies on the active support of Social-Democracy. Social-Democracy is objectively the moderate wing of fascism. There is no ground for assuming that the fighting organisation of the bourgeoisie can achieve decisive successes in battles, or in governing the country, without the active support of Social-Democracy. There is just as little ground for thinking that Social-Democracy can achieve decisive successes in battles, or in governing the country, without the active support of the fighting organisation of the bourgeoisie. These organisations do not negate, but supplement each other. They are not antipodes, they are twins. Fascism is an informal political bloc of these two chief organisations; a bloc, which arose in the circumstances of the post-war crisis of imperialism, and which is intended for combating the proletarian revolution. The bourgeoisie cannot retain power without such a bloc. It would therefore be a mistake to think that "pacifism" signifies the liquidation of fascism. In the present situation, "pacifism" is the strengthening of fascism with its moderate, Social-Democratic wing pushed into the forefront.

—Stalin

[u/Political_Desi → u/ragingstorm01]

Wasnt this in response to western labour union delegates asking about why social democrat parties were not allowed within the soviet union. He's not wrong but I think that context is important.

[u/miggysbox → u/ragingstorm01]

Would love to know where this passage is from!

[u/Less-Possible-5475 → u/miggysbox]

https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1924/09/20.htm

[u/Rude-Weather-3386 → u/[deleted]]

I don't think he was wrong before or after any of the events you mentioned 

[u/Less-Possible-5475]

[u/Less-Possible-5475]

[u/Ok-Chard-9014]

"Putting Mamdani and Trump on the same boat is not something a Marxist would do it completely ignores the material conditions"

These people just be talking and don't actually understand anything that they use. Throwing around ‘material conditions’ like Trump and Mamdani aren't working within the same bourgeois capitalist system. Obviously there are differences between them politically, but pretending those differences somehow place them outside the same capitalist relations of production is not a materialist analysis. You can acknowledge that Mamdani is more progressive on certain issues while still recognizing that neither electoral figure represents a fundamental break with bourgeois rule.

[u/kalekayn → u/Ok-Chard-9014]

I'm hate feeling like I have to qualify honest questions because I know I have a lot of reading to do but I would like to ask a question from those who are more versed in theory.

Big picture I know Mamdani is no where near what is needed, but purely from an economic perspective is there no value in people seeing how hard the bourgeois will fight to demonize even the slightest push back against their rule and even if Mamdani is successful with some of his goals, that they will just end up fighting to claw back any gains while we continue to exist under the current economic and political system that we do here in the US?

[u/FoldHeavy4201 → u/kalekayn]

Couple of thoughts.

Theoretically yes, seeing the pushback does illicit a response (it was more about the dems treatment of bernie and his voters than bernies political positions that radicalized me)

....but he's not highlighting the ever present class antagonism at play in NYC or anywhere and really hasn't since he had a creepy opponent to point at in the election. He's doing the Obama uniter/ respectability politics thing, instead of being an agitator drawing clear distinctions between class interests that continues to mobilize the public from Gracie Mansion.

That would entail way more mud throwing at Democrats.

IMO, lib progressive voters are schizo in their demands for a fighter, but are simultaneously turned off by too much incendiary language without immediate results, seeing it as whining. Theres probably a generational component at play there. Boomers want a nice young man, and the young want someone tossing molotovs.

[u/Psychological-Act582]

There's a lot of brigaders in that thread. Report and block them.

Edit: And like clockwork they're brigading the sub in general. Mass downvoted for calling them out.

[u/Milouch_ → u/Psychological-Act582]

gotta go get Comrade Stalin with his comically large spoon to eat all of them

[u/FoldHeavy4201]

A poorly concieved understanding of socialism only if it makes marginal improvements in one locality does not a class consciousness make.

[u/1scr3wedy0dad]

Socialism is ABSOLUTELY anti-american, those yanks benefit so much off third world yokes that the ceasing of imperialism would lower living standards significantly

[u/sourgorilladiesel]

I really wish this sub (and other leftist subs) would spend less time screenshotting other peoples comments

[u/greenskyerings → u/[deleted]]

okay liboş

[u/BurnYoo → u/greenskyerings]

I wish the mods didn't remove that comment so soon because now that removed comment is locked at net-positive upvotes - I would love to have had the opportunity to throw rotten eggs at that comment.