this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2022
-1 points (0.0% liked)
GenZedong
4294 readers
169 users here now
This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.
This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.
We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.
Rules:
- No bigotry, anti-communism, pro-imperialism or ultra-leftism (anti-AES)
- We support indigenous liberation as the primary contradiction in settler colonies like the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Israel
- If you post an archived link (excluding archive.org), include the URL of the original article as well
- Unless it's an obvious shitpost, include relevant sources
- For articles behind paywalls, try to include the text in the post
- Mark all posts containing NSFW images as NSFW (including things like Nazi imagery)
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm not saying that patsoc's aren't ML. I'm saying that they aren't going to be the true ML.
Marxism Leninism is internationalist. The only acceptable nationalism is one centered around the working class. The only acceptable history is a history centered around the working class. They don't seem to want to address that history. They are more interested in taking the national myth as is.
If attempting to gain control of the bourgeois apparatus is a mistake. How much greater is the mistake of taking within us their national myth.
The United States is uniquely evil. It's a part of larger context, but it is unique in it's magnitude. It's unique in that there is nothing real beyond it's mythos. Other people existed before capitalism. They existed as an organic people. The United States was manufactured. The real organic people were all killed in a criminal history which is uniquely evil. The absolute whole slaughter genocide, enslavement, and exploitation of the Indians was in uniquely evil. That evil was so great as to change the quality of the West into something truly out of hell.
They say that rather than accepting this and fighting against it in a truly revolutionary act, we should instead whitewash it and attempt to be revolutionary under the superstructure of the bourgeoisie.
How can you be Marxist Leninist while saying that capitalism wasn't so bad? What is the radicalizing motivation? Was love of country the radicalizing motivation behind the Black Panthers?
But even if the "true ml" needs to be international, just wanting an ml goverment first on your home region is good enough, it was what the USSR did, what china is doing now. We cant force the revolution on other countries, its literally and scientifically impossible, an country embrace the revolution when they want and when they need, we can support it when it happens, but the "socialism on one country" view still is correct at the beggining of an socialist country. If we cant succesfully realise an revolution on our own countries, how can we do this on other countries? Thats why pan-movements exist, baathism is pan arabic and socialist, you could argue it is not "true ml" because its mainly focused on arabic liberation, but does it make the movement less socialist? Just having an socialist arabic union would already be great, if all those countries standed up to unite themselves under communism, it would be great. Its not like we could even think of artificially creating revolutions on other countries.
What i am saying here is, maupin and haz are not wrong for wanting mainly an american revolution, because right now its the best they can do, it would not change anything if they openly stated that they want other countries to also have an revolution, it doesnt depend on them. What does matter would be if they would support an revolution on other countries WHEN it happens, and if they support the existing AES countries, then they would support future AES countries.
I feel that we're not having the same conversation. Saying that Marxism-Leninism is internationalist isn't saying it's the same as Trotskyism or Ultra. I'm not saying or hinting at saying that Socialism in one country is illegitimate. I'm not saying we should be Third-Worldist. Though I think naturally socialism is more likely to develop in the colonized world at the periphery of empire, I think that they will have to fight their own revolutions and form their own governments according to their own national will, just as we have to do the same within our own nations. They don't need us, but we do need them to weaken the empire enough for us to stand a chance.
Because there is confusion I'd like to try and clarify what's meant by Internationalism. Internationalism is international proletarian solidarity. Solidarity means that what harms one of us harms us all. At the most local level, it means that if the person I work with is injured or cheated I take it as personally as if it was me who was injured or cheated. At the national level it means that if it happened to someone I never met in another part of the country, I take it as personally as if it was me. Internationally it means that if my country is committing injuries abroad I take it the same as if they were doing it to me. International Solidarity is to view the workers of the world with equal respect.
It seems that you think I meant to say that the problem with patriotic socialism is that they want to focus on American Socialism. Nobody has a problem with Americans focusing on American Socialism. If we could do that, it would be a benefit to us and the entire world. Every Socialist movement in the US took that position. Everybody here wants Americans to focus on American Socialism.
What they don't want us to do is pretend as much while supporting US imperialism. We shouldn't associate ourselves with the empire. We shouldn't protect them by denying their guilt. We shouldn't endow them with benevolence.
If you're a socialist, and you understand what Marxism-Leninsism is then why are you adding to socialism something superfluous? Is Marxism-Leninism not patriotic enough? Do you feel it's missing something that more patriotism would mend? What is the quality of this patriotism? If Marxism-Leninism sees patriotism as national proletarian solidarity specifically opposed the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, your amendment must be trying to add something beyond that.
What you're saying you want is fine and good. That's been the standard aim for the last century and a half. What is your patriotism? What is your nationalism? It seems to me, as I've already said the comment you're responding to, that your conception of patriotism is bourgeois patriotism.
Your patriotism is simply this; that the nation is inherently good. While it has made mistakes, so have other nations. Then you follow with the promotion of the standard bourgeois national myth. Sure the United States does bad things, you say, but it's really not that bad. Sure the United States has a questionable history, you say, but so do other countries.
There's a problem here that needs to be addressed if you have the time hear it. You're attempting to compromise socialism in order to make it more acceptable to a larger audience. America has a terrible history of genocide and slavery. The proper way to address the history is to acknowledge them and use them to identify the true nature of the bourgeoisie. The problem with racial identity is that it obscures the bourgeoisie as whiteness. It says to the white man that he should associate himself with the ruling class. When the white man reads history he's taught to associate himself with the master class.
You, as a patriotic socialist, hear that message and rightly think to yourself that you should have no part in the blame. That's true. You shouldn't, but you were never the master class. Your association with it is false. It is of false consciousness. You say to yourself, you don't want to take the blame, but you've already taken the guilt by attempting to erase it. We don't want you to feel guilty about the crimes of the bourgeoisie. We want you to place the guilt where it belongs in order to help identify the true nature of the bourgeoisie as slaving class, as a genocidal class. We don't want you to take on the guilt, but we don't want you to erase theirs. We want you to associate yourself with the slave and with the Indian. That is what Internationalism means.
I am not a "patsoc", i am not even american, you are putting words in my mouth, i hate the US with every single piece of my body, i despise it as an country, i despise its history, i despise everything it stands as an country. BUT i dont want to see it destroyed, even if i hate it, because it would be hypocritical. It would be the same as if Lenin wanted to destroy the Russian empire instead of turning it socialist because it was an imperialist country, this is what anarchists want, we want to fix said country.
What really bothers me is people treating the US as an special country. No its fucking not, please anybody reading this, stop saying its an "uniquely evil country" its not, its just more of the same imperialist bullshit wanting to dominate the world and failing miserably, spain tried it, the UK tried it, germany tried it, italy tried it, france tried it, japan tried it, dozens and dozens of empires tried to dominate everything around them, and they aways failed, with not a single exception. The US is just the most modern empire, nothing more then that, we should treat it on the same way the soviets treated Nazi germany before and after the war, and talking about Nazi germany, we need to remember that on an matter of year the soviets transformed an country that was ruled for 22 years by the most disgusting and cruel regime to ever exist at the time, that passed through the most brutal war in history, on an socialist country.
Why is the US "more evil" then other countries? People that talk about just balkanizing the US dont want to turn it into a socialist country, they just want to destroy it, and thats wrong. And you people are using the example of giving land back to the indians (with i agree with) but you people need to understand: almost the entire native population on the entire continent is dead, the US almost completelly exterminated them, we cant at best create indian republics or an indian federation with the population that still exist, but we literally cant give entire states to make entire countries just for indians, because there is not enough indians to fill an capital of an state of the US. One thing its Israel, an european-american colony that has succeded in stealing of most of the land of the native palestinians, the difference is; the palestinians are still the majority, while the colonizers are the minority, this is what we call an apartheid state. We can still give the land back to the palestinians and kick out the newer colonizers that are only going there because its an apartheid, but we cant kick out the entire american population from every single US state to give it to the indians, because the indians are just an small minority now.
And just to remember, the US is as much of a colony as every other latin american country, i am from brasil, and i can confirm we killed and stole the land of as much indians as the US did, and so did every other latin american country, we are not innocent, so what now? You also wants to balkanize and destroy my country? Cut it into a bunch of states only to give it to an percentage of the population that is barelly more then half a million? Because i dont, i want to create an country that doesnt divide people by race nor class, an just country where every ethniy and culture are worth the same, where all can work together for an better country.
And going back to Maupin, you people are loving to put things into his mouth and put him in the same bag of a bunch of people he doesnt even say he is a part of, but you dont show any proff of him calling himself a "patsocc", you dont show proff of him saying that indians should not get any land back, or that black people dont deserve the same rights as white people, or him saying that he aproves anything the US goverment does, want to know what i see this as? Slandering, the same thing liberals and the elite love to say about every communist or communist leader; that they are rascist, homophobic, evil, dictators, all of the cartoon vilain stuff, without showing any actual proff. I might not agree with everything he says, but what you people are doing with him is low, very fucking low, you are all just repeating a bunch of twitter drama to create conflict where it doesnt exist. And your "response" to me sounds extremelly arrogant, you are asuming i am an patsoc AND an american with no proff whatsowhever, putting words in my mouth, and diffamating an person without showing any proff.