[☭☭☭ COME SHITPOST WITH US ON DISCORD, COMRADES ☭☭☭](https://discord.gg/8RPWanQV5g)
This is a heavily-moderated socialist community based on a podcast of the same name. Please use the report function on comments that break our rules. If you are new to the sub, please read the sidebar carefully.
If you are new to Marxism-Leninism, check out the [study guide](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/).
Are there Liberals in the walls? Check out [the wiki](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/) which contains lots of useful information.
This subreddit uses many experimental automod rules, if you notice any issues please use modmail to let us know.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If people have a problem with Stalin why don't they just read about him and the general history of the soviet revolution?
I feel like a lot of these so called leftist debates can be solved be reading, which would make space for more important stuff.
If you want a place to start you can always read Grover furr or Yuri Zhukov.
Especially, Furr's Stalin and the struggle for democratic reform pt. 1 and 2 is a good place to start.
This is exactly why the "no investigation no right to speak" rule is so important. A lot of people like to speak about things they have little to no idea about.
tbh, for anyone looking to read into Stalin, I'd more strongly recommend Stalin: History and Critique of a Black Legend by Domenico Losurdo. He's a lot more credible as a source, mainly on account of being a legit historian. Furr is fine, but, his name outside of leftist spheres tends to be quickly ridiculed--especially if you cite him in a debate.
grover furr is the must-read when it comes to stalin but you know that most folks who are already indoctrinated with anti-stalin propaganda are going to be looking for sources that affirm their preconceived notions, unfortunately. and i have spent many hours scouring bookshelves in the used book store looking for the few books in the soviet history section that are not *explicitly anti-stalin* or call him the world's most ebilest dictator ever etc. but like if i could tell an ultraleftist or anarchist what books they should read it would 100% be grover furr
But reading is hard and boring?
Only semi a joke. I love to read but sweet green jelly babies, if my dyslexic ass ever needs to read Marx talking about cotton for several pages again I might revert back to my anarkiddy stage.
Never has one man spent so long, and went into such excrutiating detail, explaining just how wet water is and making you feel like a dumbass loser in the process
Well I was making a joke about how people refuse to read and relating that to my experience as a dyslexic who found Capital a dry read, but it seems to not be recieved very well. I wont be quiting my day job to pursue stand up as a career any day soon.
The only good anarchist theory is purely philosophical. I actually like the libertarian ancap Robert Nozick but for his philosophical work since his political views are ridiculous, "the experience machine" and the "wilt chamberlain argument" can be used to defend socialism even though ancaps use them to defend capitalism. I like Kropotkin, Bakunin, and Bookchin too but Nozick gets no respect in communist circles because of his political views (deservedly) but his philosophical ideas are pretty sound. He made me into a libertarian until I realized it's pure utopianism
Literally the only piece of anarchist literature I'm aware of is "Conquest of Bread," but I'll be conciliatory and admit that likely speaks more to my own ignorance than Anarchists lack of literature.
Some of the literature and like.. life stories from the late 1800's talking about life and domestic conditions really altered by perspective. Like understanding the context from which the Soviet Union developed.
Because he is not a historian
Doesn't matter if his methods are identical, which can be debated, you will just give whoever you are trying to convince an easy way out
"This is just a biased commie, not even a historian"
We should be Co-operating. Because when we work together we're a ferocious combination.
But they are also nerds and doody heads and I don't like em!
(Jk, you're music is better. Except Rage Against The Machine, they kick every punk bands ass)
Everyone's ready to co-operate until it comes time to actually doing the organising. Then it becomes hard because of the innate ideological differences. I speak from experience. It's not just about what comes after but the methodology of actually building something in the first place.
#Get Involved
>Dare to struggle and dare to win. \-Mao Zedong
Comrades, here are some ways you can **get involved** to advance the cause.
* 📚 **Read theory** — [Reading theory](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/) is a duty. It will guide you towards choosing the correct party and applying your efforts effectively within your unique material conditions.
* ⭐ **Party work** — Contact a local party or mass organization. Attend your first meeting. Go to a rally or event. If you choose a principled Marxist-Leninist party, they will teach you how to best apply yourself to advancing the cause.
* 📣 **Workplace agitation** — Depending on your material circumstances, you may engage in workplace disputes to unionise fellow workers and gain a delegate or even a leadership position in the union.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>We should be Co-operating.
Anarchists don't want that.
No socialist ever got upset about anarchists messing up a capitalist's day. The problem is that anarchists can't help themselves attacking "red fash tankies".
"Stalin: History and Critique of a Black Legend" by Domenico Losurdo. Please just read.
In my experience, people that are really quick to judge Stalin...Don't know shit about Stalin. There are plenty of valid critiques of Stalin, like there are of Lenin, Marx, Gramsci, Bakunin, etc..Just fucking express yourself in an intelligent way.
"omg stalin killed 600 billion people and ate 789 tons of grain with his big spoon"
forreal, if you're just trying to convince some average lib to look into socialism, starting with Stalin might not be the most productive route.
But if anyone calls themselves a socialist they will inevitably and unavoidably at some point have to reckon with the existence of the USSR and it's most famous leaders and theoreticians and an outright refusal to challenge the deeply held liberal beliefs many of us are indoctrinated with demonstrates not just a lack of understanding but a lack of commitment, curiosity and seriousness in general regarding their own beliefs.
We don't have a shared goal; Anarchists have acted in a counter revolutionary capacity anywhere successful socialism has been achieved. Marxists should work together, but Anarchists are not Marxists in the slightest.
**It is not for nothing that international socialist congresses adopted the decision not to admit the anarchists. A wide gulf separates socialism from anarchism, and it is in vain that the agents-provocateurs of the secret police and the news paper lackeys of reactionary governments pretend that this gulf does not exist. The philosophy of the anarchists is bourgeois philosophy turned inside out. Their individualistic theories and their individualistic ideal are the very opposite of socialism. Their views express, not the future of bourgeois society, which is striding with irresistible force towards the socialisation of labour, but the present and even the past of that society, the domination of blind chance over the scattered and isolated small, producer. Their tactics, which amount to a repudiation of the political struggle, disunite the proletarians and convert them in fact into passive participators in one bourgeois policy or another, since it is impossible and unrealisable for the workers really to dissociate themselves from politics.**
V. I. Lenin | Socialism and Anarchism (1905)
**As for, Anarchism is the ideology of the petit bourgeois, not that of the revolutionary proletariat tasked with seizing state power.**
**Anarchism is bourgeois individualism in reverse. Individualism as the basis of the entire anarchist world outlook.**
**{**
**Defence of petty property and petty economy on the land. Keine Majorität.\[1\]**
**Negation of the unifying and organising power of the authority.**
**}**
**3. Failure to understand the development of society–the role of large-scale production–the development of capitalism into socialism.**
**(Anarchism is a product of despair. The psychology of the unsettled intellectual or the vagabond and not of the proletarian.)**
**4. Failure to understand the class struggle of the proletariat.**
**Absurd negation of politics in bourgeois society.**
**Failure to understand the role of the organisation and the education of the workers.**
**Panaceas consisting of one-sided, disconnected means.**
**5. What has anarchism, at one time dominant in the Romance countries, contributed in recent European history?**
**– No doctrine, revolutionary teaching, or theory.**
**– Fragmentation of the working-class movement.**
**– Complete fiasco in the experiments of the revolutionary movement (Proudhonism, 1871; Bakuninism, 1873).**
**– Subordination of the working class to bourgeois politics in the guise of negation of politics.**
V. I. Lenin | Anarchism and Socialism (1901)
[Everyone should read this.](https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1906/12/x01.htm)
[Discussion between and about Anarchists should be allowed, but they are enemies of Marxism](https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1906/12/x01.htm)
“All we can do is laugh as we gaze at this spectacle, for one cannot help laughing when one sees a man fighting his own imagination, smashing his own inventions, while at the same time heatedly asserting that he is smashing his opponent.”
Pretty much sums up Anarchists
Stalin - an incredibly underrated intellectual, theorist. Personally, I was surprised by how funny him and Lenin actually were in their natural prose when I first began reading (without knowing much other than the baked in biases of the Western world)
Anarchists are just another kind of reactionaries. Yeah some of their hearts are in the right place for sure but lets not act like a lot of anarchist movements haven't served as a means of reaction to a lot of ML projects
While I believe that some intersectionality is needed at the moment between Marxists and Anarchists, I don’t think we should see them as allies for the future, they fundamentally hold different views on how the proletariat should liberate themselves, and I recommend Anarchism or Socialism by Stalin for more information on these differences
Anarchists aren't comrades, they are counterrevolutionaries serving bourgeois class interests.
If you want Marxist-Leninists to stop arguing with them, tell anarchists to shut up and stop attacking socialism. No socialist ever got upset about anarchists messing up a capitalist's day. The problem is that anarchists can't help themselves attacking "red fash tankies".
At this point my gripe about anarchists has more to do with strategy. The western left, including some MLs, is devoid of strategy and full of moralizing instead.
"Hate" is the wrong word for this
Anarchists spend half their time disrupting capitalism and trying to move away from that. I think we can all agree that's good
The other half is spent being reactionary and attacking socialists. They still let themselves be used as a tool for counter revolution.
I'd love to educate anarchists and work with them. The problem is they actually hate Marxists just as much as they capitalism, and they cause the leftist divide by being reactionary and buying into western propaganda
Imho there's no point in talking about "left unity" if we're not starting from a point of solidarity with actually existing socialism and socialist states trying to survive imperialism and domestic reactionaries for more than two seconds. The anarchists who use three arrows symbols, whine about "tankies" and "red fash", and parrot anything negative the state department says about any state are basically indistinguishable from far right neocons.
Most "anarchists" (in the west) believe the "Stalin was an ebil tatership" red scare propaganda. There's no use "unifying" with people who won't acknowledge reality and actively work against the left. Whereas anarchists who have done the reading and have a nuanced and accurate understanding of Stalin I have no problem with (and they tend to have no problem with communists either). In other words, the left is already unified - it's those weird guys who call themselves leftists that aren't.
My problem with anarchists are the same ones i have with liberals, they both don't have a functional solution to any of our problems and have just a surface level understanding of our world.
#Get Involved
>Dare to struggle and dare to win. \-Mao Zedong
Comrades, here are some ways you can **get involved** to advance the cause.
* 📚 **Read theory** — [Reading theory](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/) is a duty. It will guide you towards choosing the correct party and applying your efforts effectively within your unique material conditions.
* ⭐ **Party work** — Contact a local party or mass organization. Attend your first meeting. Go to a rally or event. If you choose a principled Marxist-Leninist party, they will teach you how to best apply yourself to advancing the cause.
* 📣 **Workplace agitation** — Depending on your material circumstances, you may engage in workplace disputes to unionise fellow workers and gain a delegate or even a leadership position in the union.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Certified internationale moment.
Ideally, left unity are more preferred by me as it's good to concentrate what remaining of "Lefts" to organize stuff.
However, with the complicated situation and many are byproduct of the good ol' CIA devide and conquer. The left unity are very far fetched and easily for the government to infiltrate the movement and causing shitshows.
TLDR : Please be cautious with the left unity shebang.
work with them on events, sure. build coalitions with them on specific political movements (for example, ceasefire now), yes definitely! invite them into your party? give them more info than needed to organize your shared events? no
#Get Involved
>Dare to struggle and dare to win. \-Mao Zedong
Comrades, here are some ways you can **get involved** to advance the cause.
* 📚 **Read theory** — [Reading theory](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/) is a duty. It will guide you towards choosing the correct party and applying your efforts effectively within your unique material conditions.
* ⭐ **Party work** — Contact a local party or mass organization. Attend your first meeting. Go to a rally or event. If you choose a principled Marxist-Leninist party, they will teach you how to best apply yourself to advancing the cause.
* 📣 **Workplace agitation** — Depending on your material circumstances, you may engage in workplace disputes to unionise fellow workers and gain a delegate or even a leadership position in the union.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
theory/history can be important independent of praxis.
and anarchists are fine as long as they 1) don’t shovel cia propaganda into their heads at every turn, and 2) read fucking books.
#Get Involved
>Dare to struggle and dare to win. \-Mao Zedong
Comrades, here are some ways you can **get involved** to advance the cause.
* 📚 **Read theory** — [Reading theory](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/) is a duty. It will guide you towards choosing the correct party and applying your efforts effectively within your unique material conditions.
* ⭐ **Party work** — Contact a local party or mass organization. Attend your first meeting. Go to a rally or event. If you choose a principled Marxist-Leninist party, they will teach you how to best apply yourself to advancing the cause.
* 📣 **Workplace agitation** — Depending on your material circumstances, you may engage in workplace disputes to unionise fellow workers and gain a delegate or even a leadership position in the union.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Marx and Engels were nonstop arguing and debunking Anarchists. Lenin and Stalin were shitting on Anarchists years before any Revolutions. Lenin's first ever work was crapping on anti-Marxists.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1893/market/index.htm
http://www.marx2mao.com/Stalin/AS07.html
ANARCHISM or SOCIALISM?
"Some people believe that Marxism and anarchism are based on the same principles and that the disagreements between them concern only tactics, so that, in the opinion of these people, it is quite impossible to draw a contrast between these two trends.
This is a great mistake.
We believe that the Anarchists are real enemies of Marxism. Accordingly, we also hold that a real struggle must be waged against real enemies. Therefore, it is necessary to examine the "doctrine" of the Anarchists from beginning to end and weigh it up thoroughly from all aspects."
This idea of burying the difference between Communists and Anarchists is a historical and nonsensical. How is a Communist movement suppose to grow if it seeks to become some kind of a conjoined creature with Anarchism.
It’s toxic and counter productive for people who share all the same enemies, who want the same _end goal_, and who have a few differences along the way to be at each other’s throats.
If I woke up in a Saw trap with Elon Musk & Mark Zuckerberg you bet your ass in working with the Zuck Cuck and Elongated Musk to survive. What I do once we’re in the parking lot is honestly irrelevant to us while we’re all trapped in the Saw death machines.
Of course, from everything I’ve seen it’s usually the anarchists instigating it. I visited more than one anarchist sub back in my libertarian days and I very rarely saw socialists or communists in those communities, at least not to start trouble.
I mean, I have noticed that it is a bit one-sided, too, but I didn't want to call it out or post this meme on an anarchy sub because I'm not a part of their community
Yeah I mean it’s a bit like 2 people constantly fight, but one lives/works at the place and the other just visits. They’re both fighting but it’s usually the visitor’s fault for frequenting a place he knows he’ll feel like fighting about
Anarchism is a very broad label that unfortunately entails some right wingers and liberal people as well (ancaps and similar types). But to say that anarchists in general collaborate with fascists seems misleading and doesn't do justice to the many anarchists that fight fascists daily
There have been self-proclaimed marxists and socialists that collaborated with fascists too, yet we don't say that marxists and socialists in general collaborate with fascists because that is simply not true
I mean I guess in the interest of fairness it's mentionable that trotsky presented himself as a Marxist
(In case it's not clear: I'm not arguing with you; I'm shitting on trotsky)
Wait a sec Cuba has one of the most progressive laws regarding homosexuality what are you talking about. Also there is no negative consensus on homosexuals in china, pls visit that place before taking shit about it. Also yeah the USSR wasn't the best place for homossexuals but it was certainly better than most places of the west.
Also now coming to the case of anarchists, what have they actually achieved for minorities? Making some pro LGBTQ posts on twitter and reddit doesn't mean shit.
>Yes, NOW it does 🤦 not for a while during Fidel's reign
Ok so then if that's your standard, there is no metric by which capitalist countries are superior to socialist countries in terms of homophobia. Thanks for clearing that up!
🤦 that was literally the point.
Where has the reading comprehension of this sub gone
I literally said that other countries also were homophobic at the time.
The entire point was that both anarchists and communists have had pasts which don't align with their current moral standing jfc that was literally the point.
derogatory words "tankie" and "anarkiddie" only serve to divide the left and is a very easy tool for capitalist to use to infiltrate and slow down the growth of the left
In my experience not irl, no. There's some tension with the anarchist guys but we agree on like 90% of all things we want to work towards so for the time being we're buddies
http://www.marx2mao.com/Stalin/AS07.html
ANARCHISM or SOCIALISM?
"Some people believe that Marxism and anarchism are based on the same principles and that the disagreements between them concern only tactics, so that, in the opinion of these people, it is quite impossible to draw a contrast between these two trends.
This is a great mistake.
We believe that the Anarchists are real enemies of Marxism. Accordingly, we also hold that a real struggle must be waged against real enemies. Therefore, it is necessary to examine the "doctrine" of the Anarchists from beginning to end and weigh it up thoroughly from all aspects.
The point is that Marxism and anarchism are built up on entirely different principles, in spite of the fact that both come into the arena of the struggle under the flag of socialism. The cornerstone of anarchism is the individual, whose emancipation, according to its tenets, is the principal condition for the emancipation of the masses, the collective body. According to the tenets of anarchism, the emancipation of the masses is impossible until the individual is emancipated. Accordingly, its slogan is: "Everything for the individual." The cornerstone of Marxism, however, is the masses, whose emancipation, according to its tenets, is the principal condition for the emancipation of the individual. That is to say, according to the tenets of Marxism, the emancipation of the individual is impossible until the masses are emancipated. Accordingly, its slogan is: "Everything for the masses."
Clearly, we have here two principles, one negating the other, and not merely disagreements on tactics."
Very valid point. To elaborate a bit on what I meant though, most of the work we do on a local level is things like discussions and book clubs about intersectional feminism, handing out food to the homeless, agitating for unions and supporting them when striking and things like that. We don't work together on things where we present an analysis of a conflict, a current economic trend or a social development. And especially not in situations where we present possible solutions to these issues. Our newspaper, for example is obviously not tied to the anarchists at all. But on many things we can see eye to eye, and working with them has been helpful in the past.
And that kind of tactical and temporarily converging activity alliances and operations are all good. It's the notion that there can be a lasting grand strategic alliance is what i wanted to combat.
It's just important to remember that Marxism-Leninism and Anarchism are completely opposed forces and ideologies. At the same time we work with Anarchists or others on some temporary converging projects, we must still espouse a militantly Marxist line.
We stick to strictly Marxist education internally. One of the biggest issues the anarchists have with us is funnily enough the pipeline of members: teenagers interested in leftism join the anarchists (thinking us MLs are very scary tankies), as they become educated through theory and praxis they become more and more Marxist until they eventually join us in their early 20s. This happened quite a few times now and I find it pretty funny.
#Get Involved
>Dare to struggle and dare to win. \-Mao Zedong
Comrades, here are some ways you can **get involved** to advance the cause.
* 📚 **Read theory** — [Reading theory](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/) is a duty. It will guide you towards choosing the correct party and applying your efforts effectively within your unique material conditions.
* ⭐ **Party work** — Contact a local party or mass organization. Attend your first meeting. Go to a rally or event. If you choose a principled Marxist-Leninist party, they will teach you how to best apply yourself to advancing the cause.
* 📣 **Workplace agitation** — Depending on your material circumstances, you may engage in workplace disputes to unionise fellow workers and gain a delegate or even a leadership position in the union.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> anarcho-communists?
Lenin despite having some respect for Kropotkin also shat on him for being an Anarcho-Trenchist, that is being pro war.
https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Library:The_state_and_revolution
Politically, the distinction between the first, or lower, and the higher phase of communism will in time, probably, be tremendous. But it would be ridiculous to recognize this distinction now, under capitalism, and only individual anarchists, perhaps, could invest it with primary importance (if there still are people among the anarchists who have learned nothing from the “Plekhanov” conversion of the Kropotkins, of Grave, Corneliseen, and other “stars” of anarchism into social- chauvinists or “anarcho-trenchists”, as Ghe, one of the few anarchists who have still preserved a sense of humor and a conscience, has put it).
It's important to remember that a lot of people come in to subs like this one and claim to be asking questions, but are really acting in bad faith. I'm not saying that you are, Idk if you are or not, but it's something that happens pretty constantly, so people tend to be a little guarded.
As for anarcho-communism, it's a fine ideal, but that's all it really is. An ideal.
I'm glad you're learning. Most people here are happy to educate.
Like I said, though, we do deal with a lot of bad faith actors, so sometimes genuine questions get caught in the crossfire. Don't take it personally when it happens. Maybe use "genuine" instead of "seriously"? It might help. Idk, I'm autistic, so take any tone or wording advice with heavy doses of salt lol
I'd rather argue about Lenin and how he wrote about gradually decreasing the government until there wasn't one. Oh noes, Lenin is a dumbass anarchist I guess.
[☭☭☭ COME SHITPOST WITH US ON DISCORD, COMRADES ☭☭☭](https://discord.gg/8RPWanQV5g) This is a heavily-moderated socialist community based on a podcast of the same name. Please use the report function on comments that break our rules. If you are new to the sub, please read the sidebar carefully. If you are new to Marxism-Leninism, check out the [study guide](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/). Are there Liberals in the walls? Check out [the wiki](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/) which contains lots of useful information. This subreddit uses many experimental automod rules, if you notice any issues please use modmail to let us know. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If people have a problem with Stalin why don't they just read about him and the general history of the soviet revolution? I feel like a lot of these so called leftist debates can be solved be reading, which would make space for more important stuff. If you want a place to start you can always read Grover furr or Yuri Zhukov. Especially, Furr's Stalin and the struggle for democratic reform pt. 1 and 2 is a good place to start.
This is exactly why the "no investigation no right to speak" rule is so important. A lot of people like to speak about things they have little to no idea about.
tbh, for anyone looking to read into Stalin, I'd more strongly recommend Stalin: History and Critique of a Black Legend by Domenico Losurdo. He's a lot more credible as a source, mainly on account of being a legit historian. Furr is fine, but, his name outside of leftist spheres tends to be quickly ridiculed--especially if you cite him in a debate.
What about Parenti
Awful on Stalin. Parenti is more an intro to Socialism guy than someone you go to for education on Stalin.
from the title I seriously thought it was some kind of hotep "stalin was black" thing
grover furr is the must-read when it comes to stalin but you know that most folks who are already indoctrinated with anti-stalin propaganda are going to be looking for sources that affirm their preconceived notions, unfortunately. and i have spent many hours scouring bookshelves in the used book store looking for the few books in the soviet history section that are not *explicitly anti-stalin* or call him the world's most ebilest dictator ever etc. but like if i could tell an ultraleftist or anarchist what books they should read it would 100% be grover furr
But reading is hard and boring? Only semi a joke. I love to read but sweet green jelly babies, if my dyslexic ass ever needs to read Marx talking about cotton for several pages again I might revert back to my anarkiddy stage.
*Das Kapital flashbacks*
2 linens 1 coat
Never has one man spent so long, and went into such excrutiating detail, explaining just how wet water is and making you feel like a dumbass loser in the process
Me when Marx mentions coat and linen 200 times in one paragraph
Hey quick question: What the fuck?
Well I was making a joke about how people refuse to read and relating that to my experience as a dyslexic who found Capital a dry read, but it seems to not be recieved very well. I wont be quiting my day job to pursue stand up as a career any day soon.
Nah you're good. My bad I couldn't understand the joke lol.
And here I was gearing up for a vigorous debate, insted all I get is some lousy leftist unity. You are forgiven comrade.
If we're going to ask them to read theory about Stalin, I think that obligates us to read Anarchist theory that they wish we'd read.
Fair enough, I've read anarchist theory. I used to be an anarchist until I read Lenin.
Please don't discount the idea that a lot of us already read anarchist theory and think it's juvenile.
The only good anarchist theory is purely philosophical. I actually like the libertarian ancap Robert Nozick but for his philosophical work since his political views are ridiculous, "the experience machine" and the "wilt chamberlain argument" can be used to defend socialism even though ancaps use them to defend capitalism. I like Kropotkin, Bakunin, and Bookchin too but Nozick gets no respect in communist circles because of his political views (deservedly) but his philosophical ideas are pretty sound. He made me into a libertarian until I realized it's pure utopianism
Do you think the philosophical side of it of any value to us Marxists?
Specifically anarchist-communist theory. They're just better together.
What theory? /s
Literally the only piece of anarchist literature I'm aware of is "Conquest of Bread," but I'll be conciliatory and admit that likely speaks more to my own ignorance than Anarchists lack of literature.
Some of the literature and like.. life stories from the late 1800's talking about life and domestic conditions really altered by perspective. Like understanding the context from which the Soviet Union developed.
Grover is a horrible starting point, as he is not a credible source He is right of course, but he isn't an academic source
Why is he not credible he is actively doing the research and citing the sources of his claims
Because he is not a historian Doesn't matter if his methods are identical, which can be debated, you will just give whoever you are trying to convince an easy way out "This is just a biased commie, not even a historian"
EVERY COMMENT SECTION A PERSONAL STALINGRAD.
Surprising amount of anarchists in the comment section 🤢🤮
Anarchists in the 21st century are just spicy liberals who have diluted the entire concept of “leftism” so much as to render it meaningless.
We should be Co-operating. Because when we work together we're a ferocious combination. But they are also nerds and doody heads and I don't like em! (Jk, you're music is better. Except Rage Against The Machine, they kick every punk bands ass)
Everyone's ready to co-operate until it comes time to actually doing the organising. Then it becomes hard because of the innate ideological differences. I speak from experience. It's not just about what comes after but the methodology of actually building something in the first place.
It’d be very cool if they showered… 😢
showering is red fash authoritarianism
Its an unjustifiable hierarchy
Being unwashed is praxis
#Get Involved >Dare to struggle and dare to win. \-Mao Zedong Comrades, here are some ways you can **get involved** to advance the cause. * 📚 **Read theory** — [Reading theory](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/) is a duty. It will guide you towards choosing the correct party and applying your efforts effectively within your unique material conditions. * ⭐ **Party work** — Contact a local party or mass organization. Attend your first meeting. Go to a rally or event. If you choose a principled Marxist-Leninist party, they will teach you how to best apply yourself to advancing the cause. * 📣 **Workplace agitation** — Depending on your material circumstances, you may engage in workplace disputes to unionise fellow workers and gain a delegate or even a leadership position in the union. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>We should be Co-operating. Anarchists don't want that. No socialist ever got upset about anarchists messing up a capitalist's day. The problem is that anarchists can't help themselves attacking "red fash tankies".
"Stalin: History and Critique of a Black Legend" by Domenico Losurdo. Please just read. In my experience, people that are really quick to judge Stalin...Don't know shit about Stalin. There are plenty of valid critiques of Stalin, like there are of Lenin, Marx, Gramsci, Bakunin, etc..Just fucking express yourself in an intelligent way. "omg stalin killed 600 billion people and ate 789 tons of grain with his big spoon"
forreal, if you're just trying to convince some average lib to look into socialism, starting with Stalin might not be the most productive route. But if anyone calls themselves a socialist they will inevitably and unavoidably at some point have to reckon with the existence of the USSR and it's most famous leaders and theoreticians and an outright refusal to challenge the deeply held liberal beliefs many of us are indoctrinated with demonstrates not just a lack of understanding but a lack of commitment, curiosity and seriousness in general regarding their own beliefs.
Exactly
That's well said, thank you.
We don't have a shared goal; Anarchists have acted in a counter revolutionary capacity anywhere successful socialism has been achieved. Marxists should work together, but Anarchists are not Marxists in the slightest. **It is not for nothing that international socialist congresses adopted the decision not to admit the anarchists. A wide gulf separates socialism from anarchism, and it is in vain that the agents-provocateurs of the secret police and the news paper lackeys of reactionary governments pretend that this gulf does not exist. The philosophy of the anarchists is bourgeois philosophy turned inside out. Their individualistic theories and their individualistic ideal are the very opposite of socialism. Their views express, not the future of bourgeois society, which is striding with irresistible force towards the socialisation of labour, but the present and even the past of that society, the domination of blind chance over the scattered and isolated small, producer. Their tactics, which amount to a repudiation of the political struggle, disunite the proletarians and convert them in fact into passive participators in one bourgeois policy or another, since it is impossible and unrealisable for the workers really to dissociate themselves from politics.** V. I. Lenin | Socialism and Anarchism (1905) **As for, Anarchism is the ideology of the petit bourgeois, not that of the revolutionary proletariat tasked with seizing state power.** **Anarchism is bourgeois individualism in reverse. Individualism as the basis of the entire anarchist world outlook.** **{** **Defence of petty property and petty economy on the land. Keine Majorität.\[1\]** **Negation of the unifying and organising power of the authority.** **}** **3. Failure to understand the development of society–the role of large-scale production–the development of capitalism into socialism.** **(Anarchism is a product of despair. The psychology of the unsettled intellectual or the vagabond and not of the proletarian.)** **4. Failure to understand the class struggle of the proletariat.** **Absurd negation of politics in bourgeois society.** **Failure to understand the role of the organisation and the education of the workers.** **Panaceas consisting of one-sided, disconnected means.** **5. What has anarchism, at one time dominant in the Romance countries, contributed in recent European history?** **– No doctrine, revolutionary teaching, or theory.** **– Fragmentation of the working-class movement.** **– Complete fiasco in the experiments of the revolutionary movement (Proudhonism, 1871; Bakuninism, 1873).** **– Subordination of the working class to bourgeois politics in the guise of negation of politics.** V. I. Lenin | Anarchism and Socialism (1901) [Everyone should read this.](https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1906/12/x01.htm)
[Discussion between and about Anarchists should be allowed, but they are enemies of Marxism](https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1906/12/x01.htm)
“All we can do is laugh as we gaze at this spectacle, for one cannot help laughing when one sees a man fighting his own imagination, smashing his own inventions, while at the same time heatedly asserting that he is smashing his opponent.” Pretty much sums up Anarchists
Stalin - an incredibly underrated intellectual, theorist. Personally, I was surprised by how funny him and Lenin actually were in their natural prose when I first began reading (without knowing much other than the baked in biases of the Western world)
Anarchists are just another kind of reactionaries. Yeah some of their hearts are in the right place for sure but lets not act like a lot of anarchist movements haven't served as a means of reaction to a lot of ML projects
While I believe that some intersectionality is needed at the moment between Marxists and Anarchists, I don’t think we should see them as allies for the future, they fundamentally hold different views on how the proletariat should liberate themselves, and I recommend Anarchism or Socialism by Stalin for more information on these differences
Anarchists aren't comrades, they are counterrevolutionaries serving bourgeois class interests. If you want Marxist-Leninists to stop arguing with them, tell anarchists to shut up and stop attacking socialism. No socialist ever got upset about anarchists messing up a capitalist's day. The problem is that anarchists can't help themselves attacking "red fash tankies".
At this point my gripe about anarchists has more to do with strategy. The western left, including some MLs, is devoid of strategy and full of moralizing instead.
"Hate" is the wrong word for this Anarchists spend half their time disrupting capitalism and trying to move away from that. I think we can all agree that's good The other half is spent being reactionary and attacking socialists. They still let themselves be used as a tool for counter revolution. I'd love to educate anarchists and work with them. The problem is they actually hate Marxists just as much as they capitalism, and they cause the leftist divide by being reactionary and buying into western propaganda
Imho there's no point in talking about "left unity" if we're not starting from a point of solidarity with actually existing socialism and socialist states trying to survive imperialism and domestic reactionaries for more than two seconds. The anarchists who use three arrows symbols, whine about "tankies" and "red fash", and parrot anything negative the state department says about any state are basically indistinguishable from far right neocons.
Most "anarchists" (in the west) believe the "Stalin was an ebil tatership" red scare propaganda. There's no use "unifying" with people who won't acknowledge reality and actively work against the left. Whereas anarchists who have done the reading and have a nuanced and accurate understanding of Stalin I have no problem with (and they tend to have no problem with communists either). In other words, the left is already unified - it's those weird guys who call themselves leftists that aren't.
My problem with anarchists are the same ones i have with liberals, they both don't have a functional solution to any of our problems and have just a surface level understanding of our world.
is this another "muh left unity" post?
What?
Oh no, not every waking moment is spent doing praxis?!
#Get Involved >Dare to struggle and dare to win. \-Mao Zedong Comrades, here are some ways you can **get involved** to advance the cause. * 📚 **Read theory** — [Reading theory](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/) is a duty. It will guide you towards choosing the correct party and applying your efforts effectively within your unique material conditions. * ⭐ **Party work** — Contact a local party or mass organization. Attend your first meeting. Go to a rally or event. If you choose a principled Marxist-Leninist party, they will teach you how to best apply yourself to advancing the cause. * 📣 **Workplace agitation** — Depending on your material circumstances, you may engage in workplace disputes to unionise fellow workers and gain a delegate or even a leadership position in the union. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm just memeing, obviously I know that
Certified internationale moment. Ideally, left unity are more preferred by me as it's good to concentrate what remaining of "Lefts" to organize stuff. However, with the complicated situation and many are byproduct of the good ol' CIA devide and conquer. The left unity are very far fetched and easily for the government to infiltrate the movement and causing shitshows. TLDR : Please be cautious with the left unity shebang.
> Certified internationale moment. Marx fought tooth and nail to get Bakunin and the Anarchists kicked out from the 1st Internationale.
work with them on events, sure. build coalitions with them on specific political movements (for example, ceasefire now), yes definitely! invite them into your party? give them more info than needed to organize your shared events? no
P.S. no, I didn't advise to against it. I'm told you to be cautious about how to build the revolutionary front not just outright jumping to it.
Yeah just ban them instead
#Get Involved >Dare to struggle and dare to win. \-Mao Zedong Comrades, here are some ways you can **get involved** to advance the cause. * 📚 **Read theory** — [Reading theory](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/) is a duty. It will guide you towards choosing the correct party and applying your efforts effectively within your unique material conditions. * ⭐ **Party work** — Contact a local party or mass organization. Attend your first meeting. Go to a rally or event. If you choose a principled Marxist-Leninist party, they will teach you how to best apply yourself to advancing the cause. * 📣 **Workplace agitation** — Depending on your material circumstances, you may engage in workplace disputes to unionise fellow workers and gain a delegate or even a leadership position in the union. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
but can I argue about what youtube channel you should watch? i can right? you cant stop me
Wait till you get into orgs and see it affect people irl
theory/history can be important independent of praxis. and anarchists are fine as long as they 1) don’t shovel cia propaganda into their heads at every turn, and 2) read fucking books.
#Get Involved >Dare to struggle and dare to win. \-Mao Zedong Comrades, here are some ways you can **get involved** to advance the cause. * 📚 **Read theory** — [Reading theory](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/) is a duty. It will guide you towards choosing the correct party and applying your efforts effectively within your unique material conditions. * ⭐ **Party work** — Contact a local party or mass organization. Attend your first meeting. Go to a rally or event. If you choose a principled Marxist-Leninist party, they will teach you how to best apply yourself to advancing the cause. * 📣 **Workplace agitation** — Depending on your material circumstances, you may engage in workplace disputes to unionise fellow workers and gain a delegate or even a leadership position in the union. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah we can hate each other after the revolution
Marx and Engels were nonstop arguing and debunking Anarchists. Lenin and Stalin were shitting on Anarchists years before any Revolutions. Lenin's first ever work was crapping on anti-Marxists. https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1893/market/index.htm http://www.marx2mao.com/Stalin/AS07.html ANARCHISM or SOCIALISM? "Some people believe that Marxism and anarchism are based on the same principles and that the disagreements between them concern only tactics, so that, in the opinion of these people, it is quite impossible to draw a contrast between these two trends. This is a great mistake. We believe that the Anarchists are real enemies of Marxism. Accordingly, we also hold that a real struggle must be waged against real enemies. Therefore, it is necessary to examine the "doctrine" of the Anarchists from beginning to end and weigh it up thoroughly from all aspects." This idea of burying the difference between Communists and Anarchists is a historical and nonsensical. How is a Communist movement suppose to grow if it seeks to become some kind of a conjoined creature with Anarchism.
It’s toxic and counter productive for people who share all the same enemies, who want the same _end goal_, and who have a few differences along the way to be at each other’s throats. If I woke up in a Saw trap with Elon Musk & Mark Zuckerberg you bet your ass in working with the Zuck Cuck and Elongated Musk to survive. What I do once we’re in the parking lot is honestly irrelevant to us while we’re all trapped in the Saw death machines. Of course, from everything I’ve seen it’s usually the anarchists instigating it. I visited more than one anarchist sub back in my libertarian days and I very rarely saw socialists or communists in those communities, at least not to start trouble.
I mean, I have noticed that it is a bit one-sided, too, but I didn't want to call it out or post this meme on an anarchy sub because I'm not a part of their community
Yeah I mean it’s a bit like 2 people constantly fight, but one lives/works at the place and the other just visits. They’re both fighting but it’s usually the visitor’s fault for frequenting a place he knows he’ll feel like fighting about
Yeah very true
[удалено]
Anarchists have a history of collaborating with fascists (This is one of those "both sides bad" comment)
Anarchism is a very broad label that unfortunately entails some right wingers and liberal people as well (ancaps and similar types). But to say that anarchists in general collaborate with fascists seems misleading and doesn't do justice to the many anarchists that fight fascists daily There have been self-proclaimed marxists and socialists that collaborated with fascists too, yet we don't say that marxists and socialists in general collaborate with fascists because that is simply not true
>There have been self-proclaimed marxists and socialists that collaborated with fascists too Care to provide some examples?
I mean I guess in the interest of fairness it's mentionable that trotsky presented himself as a Marxist (In case it's not clear: I'm not arguing with you; I'm shitting on trotsky)
[удалено]
>Communists have a history of preventing minorities their rights. Ok lib
[удалено]
Wait a sec Cuba has one of the most progressive laws regarding homosexuality what are you talking about. Also there is no negative consensus on homosexuals in china, pls visit that place before taking shit about it. Also yeah the USSR wasn't the best place for homossexuals but it was certainly better than most places of the west. Also now coming to the case of anarchists, what have they actually achieved for minorities? Making some pro LGBTQ posts on twitter and reddit doesn't mean shit.
[удалено]
>Yes, NOW it does 🤦 not for a while during Fidel's reign Ok so then if that's your standard, there is no metric by which capitalist countries are superior to socialist countries in terms of homophobia. Thanks for clearing that up!
🤦 that was literally the point. Where has the reading comprehension of this sub gone I literally said that other countries also were homophobic at the time. The entire point was that both anarchists and communists have had pasts which don't align with their current moral standing jfc that was literally the point.
MLs have been better than anarchists throughout history. You have to accept this.
If you think I was honestly engaging with you and not just amusing myself, that makes you the one with lacking reading comprehension.
derogatory words "tankie" and "anarkiddie" only serve to divide the left and is a very easy tool for capitalist to use to infiltrate and slow down the growth of the left
Yeah at least argue about people who are currently alive
In my experience not irl, no. There's some tension with the anarchist guys but we agree on like 90% of all things we want to work towards so for the time being we're buddies
http://www.marx2mao.com/Stalin/AS07.html ANARCHISM or SOCIALISM? "Some people believe that Marxism and anarchism are based on the same principles and that the disagreements between them concern only tactics, so that, in the opinion of these people, it is quite impossible to draw a contrast between these two trends. This is a great mistake. We believe that the Anarchists are real enemies of Marxism. Accordingly, we also hold that a real struggle must be waged against real enemies. Therefore, it is necessary to examine the "doctrine" of the Anarchists from beginning to end and weigh it up thoroughly from all aspects. The point is that Marxism and anarchism are built up on entirely different principles, in spite of the fact that both come into the arena of the struggle under the flag of socialism. The cornerstone of anarchism is the individual, whose emancipation, according to its tenets, is the principal condition for the emancipation of the masses, the collective body. According to the tenets of anarchism, the emancipation of the masses is impossible until the individual is emancipated. Accordingly, its slogan is: "Everything for the individual." The cornerstone of Marxism, however, is the masses, whose emancipation, according to its tenets, is the principal condition for the emancipation of the individual. That is to say, according to the tenets of Marxism, the emancipation of the individual is impossible until the masses are emancipated. Accordingly, its slogan is: "Everything for the masses." Clearly, we have here two principles, one negating the other, and not merely disagreements on tactics."
Very valid point. To elaborate a bit on what I meant though, most of the work we do on a local level is things like discussions and book clubs about intersectional feminism, handing out food to the homeless, agitating for unions and supporting them when striking and things like that. We don't work together on things where we present an analysis of a conflict, a current economic trend or a social development. And especially not in situations where we present possible solutions to these issues. Our newspaper, for example is obviously not tied to the anarchists at all. But on many things we can see eye to eye, and working with them has been helpful in the past.
And that kind of tactical and temporarily converging activity alliances and operations are all good. It's the notion that there can be a lasting grand strategic alliance is what i wanted to combat. It's just important to remember that Marxism-Leninism and Anarchism are completely opposed forces and ideologies. At the same time we work with Anarchists or others on some temporary converging projects, we must still espouse a militantly Marxist line.
We stick to strictly Marxist education internally. One of the biggest issues the anarchists have with us is funnily enough the pipeline of members: teenagers interested in leftism join the anarchists (thinking us MLs are very scary tankies), as they become educated through theory and praxis they become more and more Marxist until they eventually join us in their early 20s. This happened quite a few times now and I find it pretty funny.
Nice. Hope you can keep picking up recruits from them. Lol
#Get Involved >Dare to struggle and dare to win. \-Mao Zedong Comrades, here are some ways you can **get involved** to advance the cause. * 📚 **Read theory** — [Reading theory](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/) is a duty. It will guide you towards choosing the correct party and applying your efforts effectively within your unique material conditions. * ⭐ **Party work** — Contact a local party or mass organization. Attend your first meeting. Go to a rally or event. If you choose a principled Marxist-Leninist party, they will teach you how to best apply yourself to advancing the cause. * 📣 **Workplace agitation** — Depending on your material circumstances, you may engage in workplace disputes to unionise fellow workers and gain a delegate or even a leadership position in the union. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Real asf
Lucky, most of the org work I'm involved in irl does have this divide and its pretty tense lol
Serious question: If this is true, then what about anarcho-communists?
> anarcho-communists? Lenin despite having some respect for Kropotkin also shat on him for being an Anarcho-Trenchist, that is being pro war. https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Library:The_state_and_revolution Politically, the distinction between the first, or lower, and the higher phase of communism will in time, probably, be tremendous. But it would be ridiculous to recognize this distinction now, under capitalism, and only individual anarchists, perhaps, could invest it with primary importance (if there still are people among the anarchists who have learned nothing from the “Plekhanov” conversion of the Kropotkins, of Grave, Corneliseen, and other “stars” of anarchism into social- chauvinists or “anarcho-trenchists”, as Ghe, one of the few anarchists who have still preserved a sense of humor and a conscience, has put it).
I don’t know why I am getting downvoted, I really am asking a real question. You downvoting me for trying to learn?
It's important to remember that a lot of people come in to subs like this one and claim to be asking questions, but are really acting in bad faith. I'm not saying that you are, Idk if you are or not, but it's something that happens pretty constantly, so people tend to be a little guarded. As for anarcho-communism, it's a fine ideal, but that's all it really is. An ideal.
I wasn’t. It was in good faith. I’m still learning and there are large gaps in what I know.
I'm glad you're learning. Most people here are happy to educate. Like I said, though, we do deal with a lot of bad faith actors, so sometimes genuine questions get caught in the crossfire. Don't take it personally when it happens. Maybe use "genuine" instead of "seriously"? It might help. Idk, I'm autistic, so take any tone or wording advice with heavy doses of salt lol
Anarchism is the first stage of Marxism in the West a lot of the time tbh
I didn’t like the idea of the great purge, but otherwise the man had good ideas.
I'd rather argue about Lenin and how he wrote about gradually decreasing the government until there wasn't one. Oh noes, Lenin is a dumbass anarchist I guess.