I'm guessing the intention here is that they're fake, marker drawn ones. Still not great, but I'd think the artist who made this would at least understand that much if they understood rules like no phone, no pics, no talking to pigs.
That makes sense. But then again, the mom seems to be proudly showing off some unique tattoos herself, like that Opel gender sign, so it might run in the family.
What's the deal with tattoos? I'm somewhat interested in getting some, but I don't want to get them if they'll make things more risky in the future. Then again, at an action you should be in black pants and long sleeve shirt with gloves and a mask, so maybe it doesn't matter all that much as long as you cover them?
Cover them, and don't get arrested, because if you get arrested, they will strip you naked in order to force you to shower and make note of any tattoos you didn't divulge in booking.
What are the repercussions of them being noted after arrest? Is the main thing that you're at higher risk if the tattoos are easily visible and there's a warrant for your arrest in the future?
Think of it like having your name, address written across your forehead. On its own a tattoo is benign but it's another item that can be used to personally identify you
Hmm, but there are already other things that make me stand out like being tall and masc + long hair. Would tattoos make a meaningful difference at that point?
It's just an added identifier. One extra point to match to you if it were to show up somewhere. This is a big reason to not get face/hand tattoos - they're difficult to hide out in public.
As a tangent this is what has always irritated me with movements like the pro- legalization of weed.
I work 9-5 make good money and have 3 kids. I'm north of 40. I am not the same as the Billy bong pothead everyone sees at every rally because people like me stay the fuck away.
There are many of us that do not want to announce ourselves that are in the system actively working to change it for the better of everyone. Tattoos and a torn jacket do not make a punk.
Maybe if people like you had some balls and weren't judgmental and disparaging to the people out there fighting for change and visibility you'd have some more movement on legalization. Jeez man your comment is kinda fucked.
Exactly, people can see me and have no idea that I’m an anarchist. Like, mad respect to those who have political tattoos, my wife has a subtle one even, but I don’t even have any non political ones. It makes people not notice that the things I’m saying are anarchy.
So you're annoyed with the pro legalization movement because ... You didn't partake...? Or is it because you ... Don't announce your beliefs...? Because people are different from you but believe in the same thing... ? Sibling in this universe what are you talking about.
The commonality of symbol itself isn’t necessarily the point. If you have one that is easily identifiable (such as the anarchy sybmol) and the location is readily apparent, say on your left arm on your elbow, then that’s enough for them to go with to help with ID the person. While there may be plenty of the symbol around, the odds of a person of a certain age/sex/color having that same symbol in the same spot is pretty close to zero.
Late edit: if you want to fool visual identification via tattoos, get fake tattoos that are visible and then remove them.
I'm not sure I really agree with your first point, I think finding a way to find allys in all leftists would be worth it, even if it has a dark history. Things can be better.
But holy shit their reaction was intense. And the idea that their arguments were in defense of left unity was pretty silly... 99% of it was just "anarchists wrong and evil", and there is wild amounts of sectarianism going on just within hexbear that I'm sure lent energy to this.
I respect how you reacted under pressure. I really respect any admin of a website that can show that much restraint when dealing with personal attacks and people you explicitly disagree with.
But yeah the lethality of leftist infighting is maybe a topic that deserves more delicate conversations than memes.
Thanks for your kind words. I will admit I did get snappy towards the end of the day as I was getting tired and they had gone to straight up brigading tactics with half a dozen hexbears shitposting random replies, so there wasn't even any point to reply anymore. It had just become a classic pile on situation because I hurt their feelings.
I’m not sure I really agree with your first point, I think finding a way to find allys in all leftists would be worth it, even if it has a dark history. Things can be better.
I'm not here to stop anyone. MLs can be allies when they act like anarchists, which they tend to do when they're not in power. But you have to be cognizant who you're getting in bed with.
No. I think that the praxis of MLs eventually leads to ice axes in heads "for the good of the revolution". I believe you currently never would imagine you would make such an action. I also believe that your hierarchical states will inevitably lead to it
Uh, sure, and Nazis can be allies if they act like communists. You ever wonder if the reason MLs keep shooting anarchists is because instead of trying to work together the anarchists just insist the MLs become anarchists?
I was there, I can form my own opinions, thanks. It was hyperbole, but that was the general level of arguments being made.
If you want left unity, it was a nonsensical way to behave. It was just more sectarianism. It does make sense as a way to behave if you just wanna argue... So thats what I assume the real intent was.
They posted an inflammatory meme meant to stir shit up between folks that share 99% of the same values and should be working together instead of having slapfights on the internet about shit that happened 100 years ago under entirely different material conditions, and for the record I piled on against them too as did some of our other anarchist comrades because it was reddit tier brainrot. If someone post a meme similarly lazily and unfunnily making the same joke about "anarkiddies" we would remove it and chastise the poster.
What do you want me to say? Sorry I'm not as angey as your standards demand? That all that dogpiling and toxic behavior was chill and fine because of a fucky meme? I declare hexbear.net the sovereign leader of all of leftism, I'll say whatever you want, just chill tf out
I'm very chill, I was just pointing out why it seems like we are aggressive.
The removal of downvotes on our end mean people have to actually make the effort to tell you that you are wrong and why, and not just downvote and move on.
Trust me it is a much better system than downvotes, we have had a long time with developing policies to foster productive discussion.
When someone is so aggressively wrong or clearly posting troll bait, then of course they will perceive the pushback as aggressive as well.
I'm very chill, I was just pointing out why it seems like we are aggressive.
I mean i am on hb since the start and criticism of anything ml was always met with aggression, not only if it was inflammatory. That1s why joeysteel was banned for starters.
Why are you seriously posting something from ziq, a person that hates you?
Anyways, why are you taking anything he says seriously?
I just read the first few paragraphs, which include an ahistorical description of the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, ignores the CIA's operations in Afghanistan before 1979 (which they have admitted to themselves) and cites an American professor living in South Korea whose entire job is to write propaganda about North Korea, propaganda which his own peers in the USA and South Korea have criticized and called absurd.
There is little of value here, this is the ramblings of someone that throwing stuff out there hoping it sticks. This is not anarchist theory. The first few paragraphs are less factual than the average descriptions of history that you'd see on liberal/capitalist media or get in a high school history class.
Some important context for why things turned so ugly after two months of peace, and why a false narrative took hold in such a coordinated way afterward, is that the CIA and its cutouts were openly present. For starters, 30 year CIA veteran James Lilley was appointed ambassador to China on April 20th, five days after the start of public gatherings in Tiananmen, which were initially to mourn the April 15 death of Hu Yaobang. Gene Sharp, who literally wrote the manual for how to start nonviolent color revolutions, flew in for 9 days and observed mysterious efforts to drive the protesters to violence — an intelligence asset only partially aware of the project he was involved in. The CIA was embedded with the protesters "for months" according to the Vancouver Sun, steering and equipping them. Voice of America was broadcasting disinformation to PLA military bases claiming some units were loyal to the protesters and were firing on other units, and claiming Deng Xiaoping was near death — literally attempting to whip up a military insurrection. This was a committed US effort to topple the Chinese government, using the momentum of the USSR dissolving and Hu Yaobang’s death.
I mean, people who have never read something in their lives making fun of them based on propaganda from decades ago (Communism bad) and treating them in a very poorly.
I would like to see real discussion instead of offensive memes.
I've only experienced that from them since I've known them. Not one wants a good faith discussion until you grovel to their fundamentalist tripe. Unity to them means blindly following their half-understood theories of centuries-dead men, and anyone who questions a lick of it gets the 4chan swarm treatment.
No, good faith argument is being a debatelord, as was explained to me at length in the last post. People who just happen to see the post and respond are all brigading if they come from an instance that has a cross-post. Them's the rules.
Don't bullshit me that there is a proper way to argue with that fucker, he demonstrated at length that there was not.
You can't use this cop-out like it's a joke whenever it's rhetorically convenient for you, especially when you said in the comments that you completely meant it.
[Yes, I was baited again despite earlier doing the healthy thing of disengaging, that much is not on you]
Then what the fuck do you say "it's a meme" for? What useful information does that convey? Because clearly you're serious about it and have been told that that response comes off as you saying "it's just a joke bro"
Look mate, "it's a meme" means it's not going to be particularly nuanced in its criticism. It's meant to ellicit cheap laughs through simplifying some parts. Y'all have a brain, you can certainly see which parts are exagerrated for these purposes. Your comrades were certainly capable of starting nuanced discussions about Catalonia based on this understanding.
Honestly, I think you are all playing dumb in order to get some gotchas.
I have no interest in gotchas, what I am seeking is a clear and consistent position. Obviously others who know more about the Spanish Civil War know that it's depiction of Stalin as killing anarchists rather than merely supplying them with 75% of their tanks and no more is a wild misrepresentation, and you still have yet to clarify who the "intellectuals" in Mao's case even refer to.
My further point is that this bizarre blanket characterization of MLs as butchers, including of people that they did nothing but help, is gross historical revisionism pandering to the preconceptions of people who frankly have next to zero historical understanding when it comes to the groups it refers to. It is in fact poor conduct to stand by such a message whether it is "just a meme" or communicated by any other medium, just as I am very careful to limit my accusations of, say, Nestor Makhno only to what the most sympathetic of biographers admit of him (since I personally do not know about the proof of other claims).
Oh, of course you're not. That's why you're derailing threads by accusing everyone of sealioning, because you're not mad at them at all. That's why you posted your shitty wrecker memes in the first place, because you're totally rational and calm.
...you realise we're multiple people, right? Like the usernames tell you who's responding to you. You shouldn't find it confusing unless you're also confused when people on your instance have different views and attitudes.
Like you've literally been told over and over that Hexbear is a left unity instance and has people of a range of socialist ideologies - why would it surprise you that we're not monolithic in our behaviour?
What an impressive turn out. Looks like they're all using the exact same "arguments" (a combination of manipulation techniques and logical fallicies) that they use every single time.
It's worrying how much of a presence these people create in online discourse because they come out in full force, dominating and suppressing anyone or thing that challenges them. There is no healthy debate.
But i suppose it all makes perfect sense; these people glorify the state, single party rule and dictatorship. Their behavior is a logical result of these beliefs
The quality of their arguments doesn't really matter though, nor does it matter whether they're able to convince a majority of people. What matters is that they can reach the few people that will find their overall presentation intriguing enough to merit further investigation, and then pull those people down the rabbit hole. It's the same strategy that fascists use, just red-flavored instead of brown.
It also makes the space overall less appealing to your actual target audience, which is a cardinal sin of online community management.
If the anarchists in the soviet union were allowed power, general plan Ost would have come to fruition. Anarchists have historically not been able to lead mass industrialization in a coordinated way, and have not been able to lead successful military campaigns across territories as large as the USSR. If the soviet leadership didn't protect the revolution from anarchists, part of my family would have died in a death camp instead of being liberated from one by red army soldiers.
But the tankies stabbed the pure hearted anarchists in the back! Okay, maybe the anarchists shouldn't have been idealists who cared more about coops than actually prosecuting a successful socialist transition. Literally read Lenin's interaction with the anarchist prince.
Ah, at least we come to the crux of the disagreement. "Anarchists, babies! MLs, strong!". It always comes down to that, but it's refreshing to see you just straight up say it sometimes, so that people can see it.
Anyway, please take your historic fiction in the appropriate places. I can pull stories out of my ass as well, but that convinces no-one.
PS: I like how you sneaked in that call to emotion at the end. Very manipulative. Love it!
Have you read anything about the failures of coordination among the anarchist militias in Catalonia? Or their failures of economic coordination beyond the local level?
Have you even absorbed the critiques enough that you are in a place to argue against them?
Because this is serious stuff that you should be educated about before you make judgements about it.
I'm very sympathetic to anarcho syndicalism, but it showed its weaknesses in Spain and sectarian anarchists blame it on the USSR instead of learning from it.
PS: I like how you sneaked in that call to emotion at the end. Very manipulative. Love it!
It is not socially well adapted to declare "appeal to emotion" when someone is communicating why something is personally important to them. What I'm doing is expressing myself in a normal human way, and you consider that manipulative?
Have you read anything about the failures of coordination among the anarchist militias in Catalonia? Or their failures of economic coordination beyond the local level?
Ah, nice try, but I already told you I'm not going to debate you on the Spanish Civil War. Why don't you go to the places where there's anarchists up for that sort of thing?
What I’m doing is expressing myself in a normal human way, and you consider that manipulative?
You implied that not crushing anarchists would have directly led to a successful genocide. Ye it's pretty manipulative.
Ah, nice try, but I already told you I'm not going to debate you on the Spanish Civil War.
I asked you if you've even read anything about it, not if you want to debate me about it.
You implied that not crushing anarchists would have directly led to a successful genocide. Ye it's pretty manipulative.
It isnt manipulative to point out that my family would have been killed if the anarchists won, it is giving you an explanation for why I have little sympathy for complaints by anarchists repeating the "stabbed in the back" myth instead of actually digging into the history of their project and learning from its failures to do better next time.
I asked you if you’ve even read anything about it, not if you want to debate me about it.
That's how they get you! taps forehead
It isnt manipulative to point out that my family would have been killed if the anarchists won,
lol, yea it is. You don't have any idea what would have happened if the anarchists won. Maybe they Spanish revolution would have worked without the backstab and Hitler would have expended himself. Who the fuck knows. It's pretty manipulative to posit a major historical event going completely differently would have worked out the same way except that it would have led this one really horrible thing which everyone has an emotional reaction to. Cmon...
If the goal is to get you to read yes, that is the secret tankie plot, to make you a better anarchist who is able to grow from previous failures instead of acting like an aggrieved post ww1 german soldier.
It's pretty manipulative to posit a major historical event going completely differently would have worked out the same way except that it would have led this one really horrible thing. Cmon...
Were any anarchists talking about the need for massive industrialization at any cost in the late 1920s early 1930s in the soviet union? No? Then if the anarchists were in charge, yes, the nazis would have won and been able to implement plan ost.
Were any anarchists talking about the need for massive industrialization at any cost in the late 1920s early 1930s in the soviet union? No? Then if the anarchists were in charge, yes, the nazis would have won and been able to implement plan ost.
If your action is to punch left, your output is to move the current situation rightwards.
This goes for both anarchists and lemmygrad types, who equally harm the collective movement by punching left at one another.
If the marxist brigades, (Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine(DFLP), Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command (PFLP-GC)) in Palestine can prioritise the need for cooperation even with hamas in order to put up a resistance against oppression, we can all do the same when we have fewer reasons to fight.
I honestly find this behaviour incredibly disrespectful to the people that are currently dying as they do real resistance. Are you opposed to the Palestinians too then? The leftist brigades of Palestine are all "tankies" and Hamas are considerably worse (but resistance is more important than broaching the issues with them). Do you wage sectarian bullshit against them too from your comfortable room while they fight and die for the cause? Serious question.
You think posting on online forums make a lick of a difference for those who "do real resistance"? You're in the left shitposter heaven and you come here to judge me? Seriously?
The vast majority of the people here found their way into the left through learning in the online posting grounds before eventually joining orgs. Anyone that thinks what we do online doesn't matter is not really thinking straight.
You didn't really answer the question though and it concerns me. Are you opposed to the Palestinian resistance currently fighting for freedom?
This space is not "pretend" while the offline world is "real". The people here are real people (I hope lmao) and the emotions people have here are real.
One day we will all be thrown into our own very real resistance. Are you willing to die for it? I am. I've said many times that I will die in bed an old lady in a currently non-existent socialist state or I will die in the fighting to bring it about.
We post here and have some fun and argue and do all sorts of shit in our off time. But in our on time? A lot of us are genuinely active in political orgs. Here in the UK it might be resisting landlord evictions through Acorn, performing party work or shutting down weapons factories through Palestine Action. Do you think sectarianism would benefit orgs like Palestine Action shutting down zionist weapons factories? Whose principle need is BODIES willing to get on rooftops and smash up these buildings and get arrested? Does reducing the pool of people that would join that org benefit them in any way by being sectarians? Does it matter whether someone on the roof of an israeli weapons factory waves a black flag or a red flag? Of course it doesn't. And the people who try to flare up sectarian bullshit anywhere are rightfully shouted down or expelled because all they are functionally doing by punching left is weakening those orgs and their ability to do praxis.
That doesn't change online. The number of people who actually transfer from the online space to offline organising is directly tied to the sectarian bullshit that occurs. There are dumbass marxists that refuse to take part at certain orgs because of some anarchist sectarian bullshit and there are dumbass anarchists that refuse to take part in some socialist led things because of sectarian bullshit.
If I saw anyone at the march in London this weekend say a single fucking word about sectarian shit I would have punched them in the face.
This shit hurts the left. There is no case for it benefiting the left in any way.
One day we will all be in an existential armed struggle ourselves. Really consider the priorities. There is no benefit to any of this shit, and in fact it risks harming support for Palestine. I assume you're not anti-Palestine, even though you won't state it. If you can support Palestinian resistance despite Hamas, you can support marxist-leninists despite sectarian disagreement, and you already are doing just that by supporting Palestine. Not to mention that almost every single fucking pro Palestine march currently happening is being organised by the "tankies" you're currently railing against.
Oh and just in case - anyone that doesn't support Palestine deserves a brick to the back of the head.
We've spoken about this before, you and me, iirc. So long as y'all keep doing anarchist direct action for mutual aid, we can be allies. Once you start trying to seize hierarchical control like some illuminated vanguard, is where it gets difficult.
This meme is about exactly this difficulty.
Let's be serious for a moment, y'all descended on me shit-posting about well known problems anarchists had with MLs. Y'all don't pretend you don't know what I'm talking about. You had the counter-arguments ready to post. But I'm not here to debate with you and we won't solve these disagreements here. You know what you know, I know what I know. We can agree to disagree.
But then y'all got mad that I didn't debate 12 people at a time, as if I have nothing better to do with my life on the comments of a shitpost. You can't handle one single anarchist making one single meme in an obscure anarchist sub.
This all has nothing about us being able to collaborate on things that matter. When we do those actions, nobody is going to say "Aha, I remember what you wrote in lemmy.dbzer0.com that one time about leftist unity". This is all about 1) the ego of those hexbear tankies who couldn't handle not being debated and 2) The shitposters of hexbear who just came here to have flamewars because the mods of hexbear apparently don't control anything anymore and your "left unity" only goes so much as someone disagreeing with your takes and then they're a "liberal" and therefore fair game.
I am honestly not upset. I'm am however just disappointed at the greater hexbear behaviour..
I think the problem here is that this "shitposting" comes off as... Completely anti collaboration?
That's why it's a problem. Maybe you're in favour of collaboration. But do younger anarchists realise that? Does the general bulk of the numbers realise that? Or is this kind of posting actually working entirely against the left overall because it splits us? Because a significant portion of people genuinely take it to heart and believe it. How many spaces actively purge marxists now because of "aaaaaa tankies"? That's occurring because of this kind of propaganda. Is it helping anyone? Fuck no it's not. Look at every single lemmy community where we've been purged, are they better? They're far right shit holes even if there's a handful of people trying to change that, they're utterly dominated by the worst people.
If the right split like the left does we'd be in power in half of europe.
The right does split like the left. Hell, sometimes they're straight up shooting each other.
Look, everyone has their own experiences. I know plenty of anarchists who won't even go near MLs because of how extremely traitorous they are right now. You don't come where I come from. You don't know my experiences. Some anarchists mistrusts MLs with very good reasons and that's fine. And it's also fine to shitpost about it in an anarchist forum without having half of hexbear come in like a rampage of sealions.
And given how quickly hexbears were to close ranks and piledive me from orbit, and then gaslight me on top, well, let's just say my impression has not improved.
The right does split like the left. Hell, sometimes they're straight up shooting each other.
Extremely rarely, although that is what is occurring in Spain right now.
Look, everyone has their own experiences. I know plenty of anarchists who won't even go near MLs because of how extremely traitorous they are right now. You don't come where I come from. You don't know my experiences. Some anarchists mistrusts MLs with very good reasons and that's fine. And it's also fine to shitpost about it in an anarchist forum without having half of hexbear come in like a rampage of sealions.
The people for left-unity are going to feel attacked by anti-left-unity posting. This is just a fact.
When people feel attacked the result of that shouldn't really be that surprising, should it? Especially when the spread of that rhetoric would actively harm hexbear. People are going to be protective of something they see as integral to the only space on the internet that they feel safe.
When people feel attacked the result of that shouldn’t really be that surprising, should it? Especially when the spread of that rhetoric would actively harm hexbear. People are going to be protective of something they see as integral to the only space on the internet that they feel safe.
Hexbears going over to an anarchist space, and showing their asses to the world as either sealions or toxic trolls is fairly counter-productive.
Or do you think this has been a good showing has had a positive result for hexbear in any sense?
I think everyone looks fucking ridiculous. You, me, everyone. There is never and there has never been a single sectarian argument where everyone involved did not look like a clown.
Which is precisely why people should not even start that shit.
(Some) Anarchist, will continue not believing in Left Unity. Sorry, but I don't ascribe to this ML position on "anti-sectarianism". People are going to continue starting this shit. It's up to hexbear to not make it end up...well, like this.
It's not just an "ML position", in fact it's not an ML position at all and there is no ML party with that position. Your attempts to frame it as one are sus.
People are going to continue starting this shit. It's up to hexbear to not make it end up...well, like this.
You. You're the "people". You are saying "I'm going to do this more".
Really don't be surprised when this completely derails into hostility and destroys any kind of positive relationship you attempted to build. Anyway I'm disengaging now. Please don't call me back in here.
"Anti-sectariansim" is an ML keyword. Anarchists don't talk like that. you may think this is a generic thing, but it's not.
and there is no ML party with that position
They sure talk about it a lot though.
Your attempts to frame it as one are sus.
Ah I see we started poisoning that well already...
You. You’re the “people”. You are saying “I’m going to do this more”.
You realize I just crossposted this meme, yes?
And if you think the Anarchist distrust for MLs is not a common phenomenon, then you've been in that hexbear echo chamber way too long.
Really don’t be surprised when this completely derails into hostility and destroys any kind of positive relationship you attempted to build.
I don't know if you noticed, I haven't tried to build any relationship with MLs. I don't trust them. Even less so since today. Even less since y'all started implying fedjacketing shit. You do your thing, I do mine. I've merely left my door open because I think you peeps have sometimes valid criticisms against libs and it's good to be kept on edge from the left. Don't mistake this with me trying to make alliances with tankies who would put me against the wall first chance they got.
The USSR was the only nation to provide any support to the Republic, and it was the anarchists that fucked up by being unable to organize any kind of national army and just letting the fascists roll up their 'independent' cities one by one. Saying "it was Stalin's fault" is the anarchist stab-in-the-back myth.
Mao
I've never heard of the 'Manchurian communes' and neither has wikipedia (which would never miss the chance to play up a supposed communist atrocity) and ah yes, that famous leftist tendency "intellectuals". Not saying the Cultural Revolution was correct, but you also can't just blame one person for it.
Hungarian Worker's Councils
A fascist counterrevolution, Hungary was an Axis power and it was a mere eleven years after WW2 - for """worker's councils""" they sure lynched a lot of Jewish people! Read this.
Futhermore, did even a single one of these leaders claim to support an abstract "left unity"? Lenin sure didn't:
“Unity is a great thing and a great slogan. But what the workers’ cause needs is the unity of Marxists, not unity between Marxists, and opponents and distorters of Marxism.”
Nor did all the millions and millions of workers who supported each of these leaders. How unfathomably arrogant to think that the millions of committed revolutionaries that worked tirelessly to build socialism in these places were too fucking stupid to see they were working for the 'wrong' ideology, that they should have rejected their leadership organization and just slotted in your preferred coterie of "libertarian socialists & anarchists" and that would have simply solved all their murderous authoritarian ways. A nice horizontal, non-hierarchical, non-coercive network of free-organizing collectives would definitely have stood up in the face of the Wehrmacht, wouldn't it!
Now, ironically the "tankie" instances in this federation actually have rules about sectarianism so I wouldn't post this on there, but I have no qualms saying it here (you can feel free to ban me though, if you want to indulge in the ultimate irony). So I can say that I am sectarian, because revolution is a problem that has a correct answer - there's the answer that saved hundreds of millions of lives from fascism, and then there's the 'answer' that lets online """leftists""" living eighty years after the fact feel smugly superior to the people who actually fought and bled for a better world. Further reading on this matter:
Edit: I was kinda pissed off when I wrote this so my dismissals of those points were definitely sloppy - though in hindsight with this guy "more nuance" would probably have been a waste - but I absolutely can't tolerate such ignorant attacks against the projects that actually came the closest to human emancipation anywhere in history. Regardless, I don't want any anarchist comrades to feel like I'm attacking them, and although I obviously believe MLism (and the collected work of its offshoot branches) is the best basis for the theory and practice of revolution, the good work of anarchist groups that were able to keep fighting in the imperial core when Marxist groups were stamped out can't be ignored. If you punched a fascist then you're a comrade of mine.
I'm assuming.you're just ignorant of Makhno, and not intentionally spouting century old propaganda but here. From the article "Makhno's anarchism, however, was not confined to verbal propaganda, important though this was to win new adherents. On the contrary, Makhno was a man of action who, even while occupied with military campaigns, sought to put his anarchist theories into practice. His first act on entering a town -- after throwing open the prisons -- was to dispel any impression that he had come to introduce a new form of political rule. Announcements were posted informing the inhabitants that they were now free to organize their lives as they saw fit, that his Insurgent Army would not "dictate to them or order them to do anything." Free speech, press, and assembly were proclaimed, although Makhno would not countenance organizations that sought to impose political authority, and he accordingly dissolved the Bolshevik revolutionary committees, instructing their members to "take up some honest trade.'" Does that sound like a bandit king?
The USSR absolutely betrayed the Spanish Anarchists, this isn't controversial at all. Here's a well sourced thread from someone who wrote a research paper on the topic breaking it down.
I don't know enough about Hungary to have an opinion on the matter and can't be bothered to do all the reading for it right now. Based on your characterizations of previous libertarian left movements I'm going to assume you're full of shit though.
Hard agree on "left unity". Authoritarians and libertarians shouldn't waste their time on trying to get along, it's counter productive.
Further reading/listening for anyone interested:
The State is Counter Revolutionary is a theory and history series covering the Russian and Chinese revolutions. The Maoist one may be of particular interest to you.
Imagine stanning a guy who armed and trained pogromists on an oopsie, and then in exile didn't have the spine to support a much better anarchist seeking to kill a notorious leader of pogroms. Makhnovists are people who look at Trotsky and say "we need someone even less dignified, someone who accomplished still less and was spiteful and shit-flinging to even more people" and old Nestor comes to their rescue. Go follow his example and publish a newspaper that no one reads except to disparage it while alienating every leftist in your life even despite having the common enemy of the boogeyman tankies, and then die alone.
So correcting a patently false characterization = stanning makhno? K lol. Are you trying to out trivia me or something? Keep spouting whatever little bits and pieces of history you've managed to warp to fit your own preconceptions and leave the real conversation for people who don't need to have their politics spoonfed to them from a bunch of state capitalist dictators that have been dead for decades
Oh look, a leftist "enlightened centrist". Please, provide us your grand left unifying theory that will bring about peace and prosperity for two mutually exclusive schools of thought. Authoritarians and libertarians got lumped together a long time ago and it's been made abundantly clear that that was a mistake. We should stop trying to force it. It's counterproductive
Who said I was pro-left unity? Im a Marxist Leninist. Did the name not say "stalinism" loudly enough?
although ill take a real anarchist to work side by side with over your illiterate ass any day. Your ilk are charlatans and failures, always have been, always will be. Stop wasting our time with your illiteracy.
So you're a Marist lenninist who's against left unity and thinks that people who are either only pro authoritarian or pro libertarian are fucking idiots? Do I need to spell that out more or are you aware of how stupid you sound right now? Are you sure I'm the illiterate one in this exchange?
bitch I actually read theory, i don't ascribe to "authoritarian" or "libertarian" as political movements. Its not a word used by any Marxist movement nor theorist that has actually accomplished something besides never getting past local party level.
you don't even understand the world well enough to be mad at me properly. Do I have to spell it out for you or do you want to continue to roll in the mud with your ignorant pig friends?
Stay mad. Your politics are shit and no amount of theory is going to change the oppressive nature of the world you want to create. Dress up the attrocities your ideology represents in all the $5 words you want. It won't change the fact that at the end of the day you'll be another reactionary supporting a new generation of bourgeois pigs ruining life for the rest of us. I read state and revolution too, it was mid. Find a different Russian dipshit to base your life around, there's better ones out there.
Classic imperialist shite of "spreading freedom" no better than any other imperialist. DOobetter.
The USSR was the only nation to provide any support to the Republic, and it was the anarchists that fucked up by being unable to organize any kind of national army and just letting the fascists roll up their ‘independent’ cities one by one. Saying “it was Stalin’s fault” is the anarchist stab-in-the-back myth.
You can lie to yourselves all you want. Anarchists remember the backstabbing very well and the real reason why they couldn;t fight back efficiently. I'm not here to discuss with tankies though. Plenty has been written about this stalinist revisionism already.
A fascist counterrevolution, Hungary was an Axis power and it was a mere eleven years after WW2 - for “”“worker’s councils”“” they sure lynched a lot of Jewish people! Read this.
Ah yes, everything USSR wanted to conquer or quiesce is "counterevolution". Kronstadt too. Same exact bullshit every imperialist nation cooked up to invade and take over. Y'all ain't foolin' anyone you know.
So I can say that I am sectarian, because revolution is a problem that has a correct answer - there’s the answer that saved hundreds of millions of lives from fascism,
Lol, where? Show me one ML nation which is not totalitarian right now, or didn't fall back into capitalism and fascism as soon as it inevitably collapsed from the mortally defective ideology of leninism.
You can lie to yourselves all you want. Anarchists remember the backstabbing very well and the real reason why they couldn;t fight back efficiently. I'm not here to discuss with tankies though. Plenty has been written about this stalinist revisionism already.
So out of the 420-428 tanks deployed by the Republicans, more than 75% came from the Soviet Union. This is not "backstabbing." If the Republicans didn't want the Soviet Union to "interfere" with their civil war, they could have fun with their 89 tanks versus the Francoists' 280 tanks. Yes, when you accept material aid from another country, that country has a say in the trajectory of your political project. That's literally how all aid works. The Soviet Union was not a charity. If the Republicans did not want the Soviet Union to interfere with their political project, they could've just rejected the material aid. But to accept the substantial material aid and then cry about Soviet interference is called being ungracious. It's called biting the hand that feeds you.
Lol the soviets are not a charity. Omg the fact that you post that imperialist drivel unironically is just the cherry on top. I don't have to add anything here.
I haven't even gone over how some of the colonized Moroccans sided with the Francoists while none of them sided with the Republicans. You would think that the side with the socialists and anarchists would be on board with decolonization, but I guess it's horizontally organized society for white people, brutal colonial regime for brown people. The white people can own the means of production while the brown people can labor with them.
this is a ridiculous mischaracterization, the Moroccans didn't 'side' with Franco, the only Moroccans left with guns were the comprador regiments after 7 years of slaughtering the independence movement. it was still militarized and patrolled by those fuckers. You wanna talk about Popular Fronts being pro-colonial, look at France's not supporting decolonization, the Spanish one had no grasp or opportunity. if they'd somehow dropped some rifles into Morocco, if the people had the spirit to rise up at all the French would've bombed them to keep it from getting into their bit of Morocco
Anarchism
Active