Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Amorphous wrote

Hot take: left unity isn't unattainable or unreasonable at all. There's plenty of value across the spectrum of leftism, and in order to succeed we'll need to employ a variety of tactics regardless. I don't see any reason different groups with different tendencies should consider one another opponents. We're all working to the same goal, sometimes separately as the different methods necessitate.

17

youwillgivemeanegg wrote

I mean, if the right can do it...

(Though I guess the right's supposed ideological rifts are skin deep at best, which makes things easier for them)

10

Amorphous wrote (edited )

Two things come to mind for me. First, I think right-wingers have a lot more infighting than a lot of communists realize. If you hang around in a far-right space long enough you'll inevitably find people bickering about what religions are acceptable and which ones make you a beta-male soyboy cuck, whether it's alright to masturbate, whether the world is controlled by jewish lizardmen or not, whether abortion is okay, whether women are people, what kinds of music you're allowed to listen to, which races need to be slaughtered, or whether any races need to be slaughtered after all, and so on. In no particular order, of course.

I think the only reason they seem to be more unified is that they're more willing to sit around and bicker about it than leftists are. Leftists are perfectly happy to splinter into infinitely-smaller sub-groups in order to avoid seeing the people they don't like, while right-wingers prefer to all sit around on their porches and hurl insults at each other across the road.

The second thing I considered is that our ideological rifts are, ultimately, shallow as well. I consider myself an anarchist but if a group of Marxist-Leninist-Maoists roll up in a van with Stalin's face painted on it and say, "hop in, we fightin the bourgeoisie" then I'm hopping right in and I don't see any reason not to. If everybody felt that way we'd get shit done. Though I'd prefer a revolution which keeps individual liberty close to its heart at all times, I know enough history to be damn sure that I'd rather make sure the next communist revolution succeeds than sit around in the living hell that is the United States and hope that some day a different tendency leads the charge.

13

youwillgivemeanegg wrote

Sure, Obersturmbannführer Von Dunkel, the lvl 88 Odinist Rune Wizard and Warrior_of_Christ98, defender of traditional gender roles and the Constitution are probably not going agree on whether you should say Christmas, Xmas or Midvinterblot, but I'm fairly certain both of them are fully on board with Trump and the GOP, and that the guys at the very top don't mind either as long as they're not being so overtly and visibly crazy that they'll create bad PR

8

AFineWayToDie wrote

I suspect that right has a lot working in its favour, not the least of which is their support from the status quo. But depending on the scale and/or visibility of their organizing, they can also enjoy support from dark money, a willingness to engage in doublethink, and disregard for basic human decency.

I don't think they are so organized as they look; they just appear as such because they have so many means and channels with which to spread their message.

2

flipshod wrote (edited )

That's the answer. They represent the interests of capital, so whatever they think or don't think, they get their electoral marching orders from capital.

A party against capital can't possibly find itself in that same situation.

That's said, I'm one who thinks that the differences amongst us can be easily synthesized. But it's not about what to think but what to do, and regarding that, we're all at a loss.

A revolution depends on the circumstances, and we don't have enough societal-wide misery for it to rise from the bottom, assuming it wouldn't just be a bloodbath.

All we can do is move and organize where we can and be ready for when.

(sorry if I sound defeatist)

7

NeoAnabaptist wrote

it's not about what to think but what to do

This is the real shit right here.

3

youwillgivemeanegg wrote

Honestly, I think the reason the far-right has had so much success is simply because that no matter the individual strain of fascism, insane right-wing nonsense doesn't really affect the bottom line at all, unlike something even as mild as Medicare4All

3

hogposting wrote

Leftists are perfectly happy to splinter into infinitely-smaller sub-groups in order to avoid seeing the people they don't like

Part of this -- possibly most of it -- is undoubtedly driven by law enforcement.

I consider myself an anarchist but if a group of Marxist-Leninist-Maoists roll up in a van with Stalin's face painted on it and say, "hop in, we fightin the bourgeoisie" then I'm hopping right in and I don't see any reason not to.

It's like traveling from New York to somewhere in California. Even if you disagree with some of the stops or turns along the way, and even if I ultimately want to go to Sacramento and you want to go to L.A., I'd be an idiot to turn you down if you have a ride as far as Ohio. We're still going in largely the same direction, and working together to at least get to Ohio moves us substantially closer to the end goal than sitting on our asses in New York and arguing over a map. We can argue over the map on the way to Ohio, too, and maybe by the time we get there the best route forward will be readily apparent anyway.

5

PootrKrobuttkin wrote

idk guys left unity isn't hard, like, here let me try

a decentralized society free of arbitrary hierarchies with as much local level democratic participation and accountability is the ideal and essentially necessary for a society to progress towards communism

but

such a decentralized organization probably can't survive the revolutionary struggle necessary to overcome the power of the bourgeoisie and concentrated capital and at least some "authoritarian" and/or centralized elements are just a physical necessity dictated by the material circumstances at hand

idk yall is this libertarian marxism

5

syster wrote

left unity isn't unattainable or unreasonable at all.

It exist as an abusive power tool to shut down criticism and build a base that works towards hegemonic control. So indeed it is very reasonable. It is done on purpose, but an purpose that I oppose.

We're all working to the same goal, sometimes separately as the different methods necessitate.

See, here comes already the manipulation. Who is we? And if I work towards goals that differ from yours, will I be excluded from your "We". I'm anti-authoritarian, but not for the reason that I have an issue with authoritarians per se, I have an issue if they enforce authority over others even systemically without their consent. It's like, I'm fine with BDSM, as long it's done with consent. If you do your authoritarian thing without bothering others, I'm fine with you.

3

HeavyWings wrote

Inshallah we shall rebuild this community

9

NeoAnabaptist wrote

I loved checking in with gardeners in the old megathreads. Anyone growing any food? How's it going?

5

ziq wrote

I have grapes and nashi pears that just ripened.

3

NeoAnabaptist wrote

Nice! I moved into a new place in March with three grape vines and two cherry trees. Very lucky tbh.

2

Brick wrote

Left vs Right comes from which side of the French king members of the états généraux were sitting before the French revolution - those on the right were monarchist, those on the left were in favour of the republic. In other words, both were in favour of the state. Obviously all this was a long time ago, and most people aren't really aware of it, but that doesn't mean it's not relevant, because the underlying assumption still persists that the whole spectrum of conceivable politics need to be enacted through the state. That's still true, whether it's social-democrats, liberals, leninists, greens, whatever.

I think one of the most important things we need to get across is that worthwhile political changes can only be achieved through direct action outside and against the state, parliamentary democracy and the various structures of class collaboration, and that means questioning the left vs right thing.

3

NeoAnabaptist wrote

Modern left and right mean a lot more than that. If someone says they're a leftist or describes a space as leftist, I have a general sense of what they mean (assuming they aren't lying). If someone describes a space as right-wing, I also have a general sense of what they mean. Most of us here should and would pick the former over the latter.

4

ZestyDwarf wrote

I seriously doubt leftist unity is possible on this platform, megathreads or not..

0