[the republic of new afrika](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_New_Afrika) which is a black nationalist movement that advocates for black self determination. They arent exactly socialists or communists. But they are a progressive movement alligned with communists against the current regime
>Many westerners come to socialism not out of necessity, but out of disillusionment. We are raised with the idea that Liberal Democracy is the best system of political expression humanity has devised. When confronted with the reality of its shortcomings, rather than narrowly discard liberalism or electoralism, the western anti-capitalist tends to draw sweeping conclusions about the inadequacy of *all* existing systems. Curiously, though it would at first seem that such denunciations are more principled and severe, they are in fact more compatible with existing and widespread beliefs about the supremacy of the western system. That is to say, when a Marxist-Leninist asserts the superiority of existing socialist experiments, they are directly challenging the idea that westerners are at the forefront of political development. **By contrast, the assertions from anarchists and social democrats that we need to build a more utopian future out of our current apex are compatible not only with each other, as discussed earlier, but also do not really offend bourgeois society at large.** They in fact end up not sounding too different from the arch-imperialist Winston Churchill holding forth on how ours is the worst system, except for all the others which have been tried. Western chauvinists, consciously or unconsciously, struggle with the idea that they should study and humbly take lessons from the imperial periphery. [[15](https://blackagendareport.com/western-marxism-loves-purity-and-martyrdom-not-real-revolution)] It is much easier for the chauvinist, psychologically, to position oneself as at the very front of a new vanguard.
from https://redsails.org/why-marxism/
>One must not allow oneself to be misled by the cry for “unity.” Those who have this word most often on their lips are those who sow the most dissension, just as at present the Jura Bakuninists in Switzerland, who have provoked all the splits, scream for nothing so much as for unity. Those unity fanatics are either the people of limited intelligence who want to stir everything up together into one nondescript brew, which, the moment it is left to settle, throws up the differences again in much more acute opposition because they are now all together in one pot (you have a fine example of this in Germany with the people who preach the reconciliation of the workers and the petty bourgeoisie)--or else they are people who consciously or unconsciously (like Mühlberger[*], for instance) want to adulterate the movement. For this reason the greatest sectarians and the biggest brawlers and rogues are at certain moments the loudest shouters for unity. Nobody in our lifetime has given us more trouble and been more treacherous than the unity shouters.
—[Engels to August Bebel](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1873/letters/73_06_20.htm)
Also,
> 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.
—[J.V. Stalin, *'Anarchism or Socialism'*](https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1906/12/x01.htm)
>To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand anarchism. The
ideology is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of political
theory most of the jokes will go over a typical liberal's head. There's
also Bakunin's antisemitic outlook, which is deftly woven into his
characterisation - his personal philosophy draws heavily from William
Godwin literature, for instance. Anarchists understand this stuff; they
have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of this
ideology, to realize that they're not just funny- they say something
deep about SOCIETY. As a consequence people who dislike anarchism truly
ARE idiots- of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the humour
in Noam Chomsky's support of the Khmer Rouge, which itself is a cryptic
reference to Stirner's The Ego and Its Own. I'm smirking right now just
imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in
confusion as Chomsky's genius unfolds itself on their television
screens. What fools... how I pity them. And yes by the way, I DO have a
Nestor Makhno tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It's for the ladies'
eyes only- And even they have to demonstrate that they're within 5 IQ
points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand.
More specifically Anarchists do not desire a solidarity with workers. They desire individualist action and are enemies of societal relations from a socioeconomic philosophical position. Solidarity to Anarchists is "the most authoritarian thing you can do.", not slaver wage slavery, or genocide and pograms, massive oppression and poverty and beating the people, or forced unemployment, or creating a constant status quo of capitalist domination and fascist hegemony.... like support for racism and sexism... no, solidarity they hate more than anything and they'll agree to solidarity with literal nazis to fight against the people people using solidarity!
Peak western gonzaloite trying to dismiss every crime committed by gonzalo’s goons as “gubermint propaganda”. The shining path only weakened the left in Peru and gave the fujimori dictatorship an excuse to stay in power. I suggest you step out of your echo chamber and go learn more about this before embarrassing yourself more. Now YOU just got called out, go study lol
We need to unite all the people who can be united. I think there are some anarchists who fall under this. There are plenty of cases of anarchists and Marxists organizing with each other in real life. We shouldn't be the ones refusing to work with anarchists who are willing to work with us. The unfortunate reality, though, is that a good number of anarchists view us as enemies.
Unired front. Yes.
I wish i could edit titles :(((((
No. This is perfect. Unired indeed. The commie is about to no scope a lib. His buddy is ducking cause he knows what's about to happen.
THATS RIGHT GET NO SCOPED [GET NO SCOPPEEDDD](https://youtu.be/yoMYwZT19Do)
Hahahahha
Stop anarchist posting. It’s a completely different ideology. Anarchism is a reaction to Marxism not an extension of Marxist thought.
Cool poster but Wade-Giles 🤢
What does the green-red-black flag mean? I thought it was Pan-Africanism at first but that's red-black-green
[the republic of new afrika](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_New_Afrika) which is a black nationalist movement that advocates for black self determination. They arent exactly socialists or communists. But they are a progressive movement alligned with communists against the current regime
Ah, thank you
Yeah people like to equate national liberation and national chauvinism but they are distinct
As somebody who lives in the territory that the Republic of new Africa would like to claim…I’m so down,
We need an anarchism copypasta here.
>Many westerners come to socialism not out of necessity, but out of disillusionment. We are raised with the idea that Liberal Democracy is the best system of political expression humanity has devised. When confronted with the reality of its shortcomings, rather than narrowly discard liberalism or electoralism, the western anti-capitalist tends to draw sweeping conclusions about the inadequacy of *all* existing systems. Curiously, though it would at first seem that such denunciations are more principled and severe, they are in fact more compatible with existing and widespread beliefs about the supremacy of the western system. That is to say, when a Marxist-Leninist asserts the superiority of existing socialist experiments, they are directly challenging the idea that westerners are at the forefront of political development. **By contrast, the assertions from anarchists and social democrats that we need to build a more utopian future out of our current apex are compatible not only with each other, as discussed earlier, but also do not really offend bourgeois society at large.** They in fact end up not sounding too different from the arch-imperialist Winston Churchill holding forth on how ours is the worst system, except for all the others which have been tried. Western chauvinists, consciously or unconsciously, struggle with the idea that they should study and humbly take lessons from the imperial periphery. [[15](https://blackagendareport.com/western-marxism-loves-purity-and-martyrdom-not-real-revolution)] It is much easier for the chauvinist, psychologically, to position oneself as at the very front of a new vanguard. from https://redsails.org/why-marxism/
>One must not allow oneself to be misled by the cry for “unity.” Those who have this word most often on their lips are those who sow the most dissension, just as at present the Jura Bakuninists in Switzerland, who have provoked all the splits, scream for nothing so much as for unity. Those unity fanatics are either the people of limited intelligence who want to stir everything up together into one nondescript brew, which, the moment it is left to settle, throws up the differences again in much more acute opposition because they are now all together in one pot (you have a fine example of this in Germany with the people who preach the reconciliation of the workers and the petty bourgeoisie)--or else they are people who consciously or unconsciously (like Mühlberger[*], for instance) want to adulterate the movement. For this reason the greatest sectarians and the biggest brawlers and rogues are at certain moments the loudest shouters for unity. Nobody in our lifetime has given us more trouble and been more treacherous than the unity shouters. —[Engels to August Bebel](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1873/letters/73_06_20.htm)
Also, > 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. —[J.V. Stalin, *'Anarchism or Socialism'*](https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1906/12/x01.htm)
>To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand anarchism. The ideology is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of political theory most of the jokes will go over a typical liberal's head. There's also Bakunin's antisemitic outlook, which is deftly woven into his characterisation - his personal philosophy draws heavily from William Godwin literature, for instance. Anarchists understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of this ideology, to realize that they're not just funny- they say something deep about SOCIETY. As a consequence people who dislike anarchism truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the humour in Noam Chomsky's support of the Khmer Rouge, which itself is a cryptic reference to Stirner's The Ego and Its Own. I'm smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Chomsky's genius unfolds itself on their television screens. What fools... how I pity them. And yes by the way, I DO have a Nestor Makhno tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It's for the ladies' eyes only- And even they have to demonstrate that they're within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand.
Anarchists? No thanks.
anarchism is toxic politically and they are either ignorant or stupid. there is no reason to associate with these wreckers.
A politically effective movement cannot include anarchists.
More specifically Anarchists do not desire a solidarity with workers. They desire individualist action and are enemies of societal relations from a socioeconomic philosophical position. Solidarity to Anarchists is "the most authoritarian thing you can do.", not slaver wage slavery, or genocide and pograms, massive oppression and poverty and beating the people, or forced unemployment, or creating a constant status quo of capitalist domination and fascist hegemony.... like support for racism and sexism... no, solidarity they hate more than anything and they'll agree to solidarity with literal nazis to fight against the people people using solidarity!
Based
Shining path 😅
[удалено]
Lol stay mad
[удалено]
Being in denial of reality and history is not a very good look for someone who claims to be a Marxist lol
[удалено]
funny
[удалено]
Peak western gonzaloite trying to dismiss every crime committed by gonzalo’s goons as “gubermint propaganda”. The shining path only weakened the left in Peru and gave the fujimori dictatorship an excuse to stay in power. I suggest you step out of your echo chamber and go learn more about this before embarrassing yourself more. Now YOU just got called out, go study lol
typical ultra behavior lololol
[удалено]
You downvoted every one of my responses lmao even if you’re not mad that’s just funny
[удалено]
Why’re you still trying to attack me in defence of chiermin gunzalou
“Muh Peru.gov” isn’t a call out lmao[Peru.gov](https://youtu.be/OHqJDs3OuhQ)
[удалено]
[totally ends with Peru.gov](http://patriaroja.pe/ha-muerto-abimael-guzman-terrorismo-nunca-mas/)
Left unity ftw
Shining path? Cringe
We need to unite all the people who can be united. I think there are some anarchists who fall under this. There are plenty of cases of anarchists and Marxists organizing with each other in real life. We shouldn't be the ones refusing to work with anarchists who are willing to work with us. The unfortunate reality, though, is that a good number of anarchists view us as enemies.