/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

If you can handle trots, there's the IMT


>benefits

Being more suspiciois to glowies

What do you want to accomplish? What "benefits" do you seek?

>>1821134
>there's the IMT
On a post about anti-revisionism? Really?
>benefits
>lul glowie
What's the point if you're just gonna pay a membership fee and not even do any praxis? It has to be beneficial to join one, not just because 'you must organize', but because it has to offer a proper structure and planning among its members.

>>1821140
>What do you want to accomplish? What "benefits" do you seek?
See this is what I don't understand, for most people politics has become a sort of a hobby instead of a way of life to struggle for. When you join an org what can you expect? Can they guarantee you won't go homeless? Can they defend your rights as a worker? Do you have to work another job or can working for the party reward you? Most of these parties that exist within liberal democracy right now are subjected to the same issues, because they are not ruling parties.
Will they give me a swag uniform and a flag then let us go on demonstrations and recruit people? Or will they just fucking sit in a lecture room that's been rented in some office building and give a speech once a week to simulate activity? If the latter then why should anyone bother with them?

>>1821152
And don't get me wrong, assemblies are important, but when a party's entire activity for years if not decades consists of fucking lectures and speeches then it's not doing anything different from what we are doing here either.

>>1821130
the benefits are making frens

>>1821130
>parties are revisionist,
Stopped reading right here.

>>1821249
Then why not answer OP to which European communist party is worth joining? You can't because they're all liberal pacifists and not based guerillas

>>1821376
Well I guess antifa would be your best bet for adventurism. Or you could try and revive the RAF or something.

>>1821379
Let's see what Marx and Engels have to say:

<Complete abstention from political action is impossible. The abstentionist press participates in politics every day. It is only a question of how one does it, and of what politics one engages in. For the rest, to us abstention is impossible. The working-class party functions as a political party in most countries by now, and it is not for us to ruin it by preaching abstention. Living experience, the political oppression of the existing governments compels the workers to occupy themselves with politics whether they like it or not, be it for political or for social goals. To preach abstention to them is to throw them into the embrace of bourgeois politics. The morning after the Paris Commune, which has made proletarian political action an order of the day, abstention is entirely out of the question.

<We want the abolition of classes. What is the means of achieving it? The only means is political domination of the proletariat. For all this, now that it is acknowledged by one and all, we are told not to meddle with politics. The abstentionists say they are revolutionaries, even revolutionaries par excellence. Yet revolution is a supreme political act and those who want revolution must also want the means of achieving it, that is, political action, which prepares the ground for revolution and provides the workers with the revolutionary training without which they are sure to become the dupes of the Favres and Pyats the morning after the battle. However, our politics must be working-class politics. The workers' party must never be the tagtail of any bourgeois party; it must be independent and have its goal and its own policy.

<The political freedoms, the right of assembly and association, and the freedom of the press — those are our weapons. Are we to sit back and abstain while somebody tries to rob us of them? It is said that a political act on our part implies that we accept the exiting state of affairs. On the contrary, so long as this state of affairs offers us the means of protesting against it, our use of these means does not signify that we recognise the prevailing order.

<Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, "Apropos Of Working-Class Political Action".

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1871/09/21.htm

<Even where there is no prospect of achieving their election the workers must put up their own candidates to preserve their independence, to gauge their own strength and to bring their revolutionary position and party standpoint to public attention. They must not be led astray by the empty phrases of the democrats, who will maintain that the workers’ candidates will split the democratic party and offer the forces of reaction the chance of victory. All such talk means, in the final analysis, that the proletariat is to be swindled. The progress which the proletarian party will make by operating independently in this way is infinitely more important than the disadvantages resulting from the presence of a few reactionaries in the representative body.

<Karl Marx and Frederick Engels , "Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League"

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/communist-league/1850-ad1.htm

>>1821218
Born from social clubs
Back to social clubs

Getting more familiar with parties, potentially unrevisionistifying them, or getting better at finding the ones that aren't as revisionist.

>>1821677
>potentially unrevisionistifying them
How might one go about doing this?

>>1821152
parties shouldnt be paying its members lmao

>>1821130
>that whatever 'communist' parties have been left have begun (doing dumb shit) in the hopes of gaining relevance once again.
this is 99% of leftoid political parties

>>1821689
That's really the problem with party politics, if you want your party to gain relevance you're gonna have to appeal to the mainstream opinion somewhat, and the mainstream opinion is generally whatever the ruling class believes.

>>1821690
>>serve us and our interests
at least you outed yourself as retarded immediately
the party should serve communism, that is, uniting the scattered worker struggles in the country as one, not treating it as some stupid wage work

>>1821692
thats why a communist party should concern itself with popularity, but solely with >>1821693

>>1821694
shouldnt*

>>1821130
>revisionist
It's important to know that the IMCWP/solidnet is not an International, just a platform for coordination and communication. That means, there is no world congress that votes on lines that should be followed - historical experience shows that this is better anyway. It made sense in the period between 1917 to 1941, because there was pretty much only one task, defending the USSR as the only successful revolution. But why should the conditions the KPD in Germany deals with also apply to the Communist Party of Bolivia? Or India, which was a colony? This type of stuff has lead to the disaster of the Shanghai massacre, where Lenin and Stalin insisted that the CPC should follow the KMT.

Today's world is even more complex to have the "one size fits all" approach. Before you arr accusing a party of being revisionist, you should actually read what they have to say. These are old parties, with a historical and theoretical tradition, and their theorists are not dumb. Sure, there was a period of disillusionment in the 90s where most old European Communist Parties indeed were revisionist, but that is mostly over. Just because they don't constantly quote Stalin/Hoxha/Mao/Trotsky etc. ad verbatim means they are revisionist. That means there can be can't be healthy criticism - for example, I think the strategy of the Communist Party of Spain seems incredibly risky, forming governments with the PSOE and not even demanding republicanism. But if you are looking for LARPers, or dogmatists, or "dogmato-revisionists", the solidnet people are not what you are looking for. Dogmatism is, as I implied, itself a form of revisionism because both Lenin and Mao "revised" Marxist theory.

>disorganized
Depends on the party, most of the guidance and orientation towards Moscow are gone, and Bejing nowadays gives no guidance. This is isn't a money issue by the way - that those parties were funded by the USSR is an anti-communist myth, so it's surprising how many on the left repeat it today. Receiving money from a foreign actor is illegal - don't you think, considering how surveilled those parties were, that they wouldn't have been busted pretty quickly if that was the case? What actually hurt them was the drain of members in the 90s, for example the German Communist Party went from 15.000 members to 5000 members within 5 years. Less members means less fees, less fees means less organizing power, and resorting to more pragmatic measures to ensure survival. However, they are still organized in unions, with exceptions like the KKE that has their own union association. Maoists and anarchists have almost no presence in unions. Trotskyists try to, but then immediately split to form a "revolutionary committee" consisting of the same 10 people you see everytime that starts openly agitating against the union.

>irrelevant
Who isn't besides the SuccDems and the "populist left" movements like SYRIZA and Podemos that are failing at light speed? I guess j could point to the KPRF, as Russia is still Europe but on a completely different trajectory right now.

>engaged in the politics of liberal democracy.
What does that mean, exactly. Participating in elections? That would be the Leninist thing to do. Unless you are outright illegal, or elections in your country are an outright sham, you should do so. And by the way, the Communist Parties of Latin America are far more engaged in liberal politics than the European ones. Just look at the Communist Parties of Chile, Peru or Uruguay.

>Is there no party left unaffected by the likes of eurocommunism and religious liberalism?
I guess this an Eastern European thing but I don't know what you mean by "religious liberalism". The only parties that I would still describe as "Eurocommunist" (which is a bit of a meaningless word outside the context of the Khrushchev and Brezhnev era) is the Communust Party of France and maybe the Communist Party of Austria.

>Solidnet has a lot of parties listed, but which are worth joining?
What kind of question is that? You should obviously join a party in your country unless you are planning to emigrate.

>>1821152
>When you join an org what can you expect? Can they guarantee you won't go homeless? Can they defend your rights as a worker? Do you have to work another job or can working for the party reward you?
Some parties offer full time positions, but they are not social clubs. You are better off staying in contact with your local social services if you threatened by homelessness. And yeah, that most people have a job obviously limits their ability to do party work. And no, it's not a "hobby" because it is actually draining, you are doing work that's almost like a side job, and you receive little for it, no money, the public mostly hates you, but at least you get comradeship. But a party isn't the place to seek out friendship either, or dates for that matter.
>Will they give me a swag uniform and a flag then let us go on demonstrations and recruit people?
They certainly let you go on demonstrations and recruit people, but it is usually discussed and voted upon which demonstrations are worth supporting or can be used as a recruiting ground. Friday for Future is an example to stay the fuck stay from, for example. Most "antifa" stuff is shit too, especially in Germany.

And you won't get a fucking uniform, what the fuck.

>>1821679
Placing Stalin busts all over the party's office, and the more Stalin busts you place, the more anti-revisionist the party becomes.

>>1821218
This, but unironically. Having socialist friends helps staying grounded. They're also usually chill.

>>1821661
Hahaha somos amiguis 💖
That's a nice translation.

There will never be a "benefit" to a socialist party. It's a constant struggle whether it's in power or not since you always need to surpress fascim and defeat opportunists.

>>1821689
Yeah, name a single example where someone to the left of right-SocDems who hasn't done dumb shit to become relevant again. In the Western World.
>Bernie Sanders
>Corbyn
>Podemos
>SYRIZA
>left-communists
>Trots
>anti-germans
>anarchists
>syndicalists
>the entire left during the pandemic
>Tulsi Gabbard
>communization tendency
>squatters
>punks
>Mao spontex
>DieLinke
FUCKING PLEASE, this isn't a clown show, it's the entire circus. Give me one reason why I should prefer any one of those over the good old Communist Parties.

Only example I can think of is the Party of Labor in Belgium of late, and that's technically an old Communist Party, it's the party of Ludo Martens.

>>1821854
It's natural to feel positively predisposed towards someone who shares your political opinions that you care about. But be a little careful, a party is not a friendship club, sometimes who have to argue over positions with someone you like, and then even force a vote to shut them down. Being friends, like flatmates or something, with other members can also compromise you and can be seen by the others that you are trying to form a "clique".

I also highly advise that you don't join parties for dates. Please fucking don't. It is tempting because someone who is a 6 out of 10 instantly becomes a 9 out of 10 when they also share your edgy political worldview in your eyes.

>>1821847
good nuance comrade

>>1821861
I don't disagree.

I don't know. I'm part of the MLPD here in Germany. They're Marxist-Leninists who disliked the later reforms of the Soviets.

>>1821869
What activities do you do? In what city?

>>1821870
Marching with workers on strikes or going on protests mainly. We also have bi-weekly discussions on various topics around the world. It's Saarland of Germany, not specifically any city.

>>1821869
Do you follow the party line on their view of the GDR?

>>1821686
yes they should. If the work to the party constitutes a full time job then it should be compensated for.

>>1821881
You could sue them if they wouldn't. But most members are not in an employer-employee relationship with their party. Although I wish I were, doing all this shit on the side is fucking exhausting.

>>1821850
>No benefits, it just drains you further
I think this is a problem. Reactoid orgs offer camaraderie too and much more – thanks to bourgeois funding.
Communist orgs need some kind of benefits, to encourage people to join and not burn out. Hoping that people will work more hours out of the goodness of their hearts clearly didn't work, since all parties have stagnated for decades if they didn't decline further. You can claim to work for material interests all you want, but the conditions won't improve until after the revolution, which will take years or decades to prepare. Ergo people are supposed to work to a vague goal in the future that may likely not even bear fruit in their lifetimes. It's then not surprising that our numbers are so few.

This is why, I believe we must first set up dual power structures, which immediately benefit the exploited proles, convincing them of our competence and increasing the likelyhood of them joining. The problem is just, how do we fund this?

Maybe start coops that work through capitalist market logic and competition, but don't have to pay dividends since there are no shareholders, hence the profits can be used to fund the communist party.
I know this would require some ideological compromise, since in said coops workers would be exploited too in order to be competetive in the market, but at least there is a benefit for the movement as a whole, unlike pissing away in parliament for decades never ruling.

Maybe add some less risky illegal activities for additional funding as well.

>>1821895
IMO socialists orgs should have a social branch, a sports branch, etc. It does introduce problems like >>1821861 describes but friendship and common activities bring people together.

I've been thinking that it might be a good idea for socialist orgs in liberal countries should advocate for a reform to liberal electoralism, to become more in line with for example Cuba's electoral system.

It's an easier win that could get people on board, and would essentially give power to the people.

>>1821130
>REVISIONISM, REVISIONISM EVERYWHERE!!
to actually do something you gotta work with the left we have, i know it sounds like defeatism but we do, we need to unite the socialists and the communists, work with them, radicalize them and strike at the perfect opportunity.
the communist party of Europe wont lead a revolution but they are preparing the ground for one… incredibly slowly but at least in some parts of Europe it is happening

>>1821915
>IMO socialists orgs should have a social branch, a sports branch, etc. It does introduce problems like >>1821861 describes but friendship and common activities bring people together.
This is perfectly logical and this kind of thought was the bedrock of successful organizations in the past. Cynicism was injected into the culture somewhere, to the benefit of the capitalist hegemon. I think it was in the Regan and Thatcher era. What you are describing is a society, their whole thing was a rejection of societal bonds and only allowing family bonds.

>>1821964
>you gotta work with the left we have
>muh united left
you have to work the proletariat not with libshits, god damn

>>1821851
Thanks, I can just feel the glorious communist revolution coming soon to theaters.

>>1821915
Again, first of all, WE. NEED. FUNDING. Otherwise, everything else is wishful thinking.

Does anybody have a different suggestion to what I proposed?

>>1821851
It is not enough, they should also have the real flag of the USSR waving outdoors and absolutely no religious symbolism as in the case of the Ultra-Left renegades of Communist Refoundation Party whom by allowing that vile reactionary christian iconography >>1821130 to be displayed outside their entrance in order to attract christian moralists and revisionists subsequently adopt liberal moralism. An anti-revisionist party cannot be endorsing of reaction and must be prepared to burn churches and shoot priests. All members must have a comprehending and understanding of materialism. Historical materialism cannot be used as an excuse to open up the party to the bourgeoisie.

>>1822123
you dont need much funding to have a sport branch, just collective bargaining can get you access to facilities for cheaper individual cost (or free even if its a public facility)
you can also do shit like legal advice from skilled members to other members, sharing of tools among members, helping each other on guarding children, shit like that
funds help ofc, but there are definitely still things you can do with no or minimal money

problems with coops is the same as any small business, they often fail, you have to compete with the big porkies and have incentive to exploit people which can quickly cause tensions if its linked to a supposedly pro worker org

>>1822194
>implying leftists want to get into sports
Russia, Ukraine, Bulgaria, Serbia and other countries already have had sport clubs for the peoples' armies during Marxism-Leninism, they're called CSKA(s) or Central Sport Clubs of the Army. Most of them now are massively supported and appropriated on by neo-nazi football ultras hooligans despite the fucking clubs being founded on Leninist principles.
(Pics related)

>>1822481
And inb4
>Serbia doesn't have CSKA
Crvena Zvezda (Red Star) is their equilivent. Although they like to write about how they 'r not nazis, just ultranationalists'

Big majority of criticism of "revisionism" against a lot of European parties is bullshit and not true. It's just weirdos that are angry that the cpb realises there's a road to take before actually having a revolution that'll succeed

>>1821847
/Thread honestly

>>1822194
Best I can do is organize a LAN party for 20~ people. I have the contacts and the knowledge to set up the machinery, but I would still need the electricity and the physical space to set it up

Friendly reminder, that there is no such thing as "revisionism". Even Deng said, that there is nothing wrong with eurocommunism.

>>1824054
im gonna be real revisionism exists and it's a good thing, communism needs to adapt and we cant rely on past strategies if they just dont work anymore. capitalist adapt to technology and society why cant we? because Marx sad waa waa? we need to use every mean necessary from parliaments to instagram to achieve our goal
revisionism helps us renovate what dosent work anymore and is therefore le good

>>1824070
Communist parties adapting to the material circumstances of their region ≠ Capitulating to liberal democracy

>>1824054
>>1824070
>>1824380
>adapting to the material circumstances of their region ≠ Capitulating to liberal democracy
rofl you cant say this disingenuous shit and then be indistinguishable from socdems

Eurocommunism is really really cringe. It's nationalism and racism + a worse version of socdem. Watered down in economic sphere, and bigoted and reactionary in the social sphere. How could any supposed "leftist" support something like this without being a third positionist or a fascist

>>1824054
>>1824070
you dont know what revisionism means
i suggest shutting your peeholes as you are talking nonsense things you have no idea about

>>1824494
>it's bigoted nationalist and reactionary
based alert…

>>1824566
he did the exact opposite he tried to unify the proletariat the most he could

>>1824569
oh so italy is a dotp? good to know

>>1824589
wow that's entirely what i meant!! you got the point of my message!! thanks you for being so insightful and understandingt!!!

Are there any serious leftcom orgs / parties in the World?

>>1829201
you should join your local communist party, orgs that work locally are always the best because they are the ones more in touch with the actual state of things and are the ones who can help/get helped by workers

>>1829201
The whole idea of a ‘leftcom’ movement is insane ideology-shopping. Calling oneself a 'leftcom' (a historically fixed and now obsolete term) in the modern day is embarrassingly larpy, fit for online no-life petit-bourgeois thinking they're Lenin 2.0.

>>1829204
I have two choices:
A party that is allied with far-right parties.
A party that is socdems in disguise.
Both of which claim to be Marxist-Leninists.
>>1829218
Where will you hide when the Bordigist revolution comes?

>>1829233
the first one sounds like the better choice tbh

>>1829233
the second one is better

>>1829233
>I have two choices:
>A party that is allied with far-right parties.
>A party that is socdems in disguise.
Skill issue, just organize bro.

>>1829234
Can't I just shit myself and yell 'authoritarian' to get in a social club without the bureaucracy?

>>1829233
>Where will you hide when the Bordigist revolution comes?
My armchair, you fool!

>>1829241
even if you organize in a group that dosent completely incorporate your ideas you can influence it by joining it
being vocal about your opinion your ideas and your methods in it so they may be agreed upon
maybe you yourself realise that all along real militancy was something else and the people inside the org made you realise that
point is join even if you dont fully agree, do it just for the expirience of, it is worth it

>>1821895
>Reactoid orgs offer camaraderie too and much more – thanks to bourgeois funding.
I honestly can't think of any 'orgs" besides maybe ultras and military veteran groups.