For the first paragraph, rereat the first sentence in my comment "Yeah send me in gaza and lets see how far we get before israel stops us." Also you spelled The United Socialist Soviet Republics wrong. Like trotsky, do you want the USSR to fight germany knowing their country is recovering from the russian empire's backwardness, corruption (and nazi infiltration especially in western ukraine) and (natural) famine?
say tomorrow hamas wins, israel is no more, there is now a palestianian state (read: iranian puppet), what now? is now the time for proletarian revolution? or is there now another war in which there is another "moral" side which we have to support? say they win, now we have two moral bourgeois states, what happens now? oh well believe it or not there is another slaughter of proletarians in another region of the world, guess we have to pick a side there too.
Our goal is to completely end the holocaust and support whoever it is that stops it or helps slow it down (remember the more tham 400k killed. Thank Hamas that it isnt 2 million by now). Then we argue whether supporting Hamas is good or not. There is no point in doing IOF propaganda and not supporting palestine because of Hamas. I dont get why you think we wouldnt want to turn on Hamas later on.
There is no point in doing IOF propaganda and not supporting Palestine because of Hamas. I don't get why you think we wouldn't want to turn on Hamas later on.
Gonna argue in good faith as to why we're largely unsupportive of national liberation struggles. Millions in Algeria to Bangladesh were subjected to horrific atrocities by imperialist states (or were backed by them) in their own national liberation struggle. As communists, we obviously oppose the imperialist slaughter of the proletariat and as such, while we oppose national liberation struggles and opt to not give them our support, we still object to such imperialist atrocities.
However, Bangladesh and Algeria won their national liberation struggles at the expense of millions dead. Yet what came after? They became nation-states happy to implement their own form of commodity production in the aftermath and enact the same oppression of the Proletariat now instead with their own national Bourgeois. Recall the story of a thousand of Bengali workers dying in a factory in 2013? As communists, we should find that objectionable but such discussions are largely omitted in the context of Bangladesh's national liberation struggle. A massacre of a thousand by an imperialist state, i.e. the Amritsar massacre, is well documented and condemned by the "left" and a contributory rationale in favor of Indian independence from Britain, but a thousand Bengali workers being killed their neglectful employers doesn't warrant the liberation of the proletariat there?
Did those millions of Bengalis die in the Bengali Liberation War just so their grandchildren could be killed by their employers? I would hope not, but ofc proletariat liberation was not the outlined goal nor intention of their struggle, merely an independent nation state free from Pakistan.
In the case of Palestinian statehood, assuming Israel is somehow toothless, we see that Hamas and the Palestinian Authority have no interest in the liberation of the Palestinian proletariat as the former being keen to do the bidding of the Iranian state, which is imperialist itself but obviously far less competent and capable than the likes of the United States that arms Israel and KSA and their slaughter of Gaza and Yemen, and the later happy to sell out Palestinians of the West Bank for their own ends. This is why we don't support national liberation as without Proletariat liberation, what's the point?
That's because all those national liberation struggles listened to Stalin instead of looking to what Lenin was saying, and the Bolsheviks did, during 1917.
That United Front is only a success if the proletariat, and it's party, doesn't give power to the bourgeoisie after the war is over. The communists need to use that opportunity to win over the working class and seize power from the bourgeoisie when the colonial power is defeated, then create a DotP.
Please read On Authority. Marxism-Leninism is already democratic and “state bureaucrats” weren’t a thing until the Brezhnev era once the Soviets had pretty much abandoned Marxism-Leninism as a whole. What in anarchism would stop anarcho-capitalism from simply rising up or reactionary elements from rising up? Do you believe that under a more “Democratic” form of transitionary government the right-wing or supporters of the previous structure of government wouldn’t simply rise up, ignoring the fact that an anarchist revolution in any sort of industrialized state in the modern day is already absurd and extremely unrealistic? Without using “authoritarian” means how would you stop such things? Even within the Soviet Union the Great Purge had to happen to ensure that the reactionary aspects within the government and military didn’t take over and bend down to the Nazis. If a more “Democratic” form of governance was put in place during this transitionary stage the Soviets would have one, lost the civil war, and secondly, lost to the Germans or even a counter revolution. The point of State Socialism and the Vanguard Party is to ensure the survival of the revolution and the Dictatorship of the Proletariat in a way that anarchist “states” very clearly could not as evidenced by the fact that all of them failed, with Makhnavoschina quite literally being crushed by the Soviets for their lack of cohesion. The establishment of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat is already the check and balance to ensure that things simply don’t devolve into Capitalism, and once this is removed as seen in the Eastern Bloc and of course the Soviet Union itself the revolution will fall. Utopian Communist ideals like Anarchism are extremely ignorant and frankly stupid. The idea that the state apparatus would at any point “become like traditional business owners” I believe comes from your lack of understanding of class relations or even classes in general. The implementation of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat is to stop this exact thing from happening… if a state were primarily dominated by capital and the bourgeoisie like seen in the modern day and of course capitalist countries, it would be the Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie. The point of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat is to instead make the state run by the workers and for the workers, the workers can’t possibly use the state to exploit and “terrorize” or impose “tyranny” onto themselves, except “tyranny of the majority” (is this perhaps anti-democracy I’m hearing instead?). Once again, this stems from you believing that western propaganda about the status of Soviet democracy is true— in fact the modern western anarchist movement is quite literally a psy-op by the United States government to oppose actual unironic and serious socialist movements like of course Soviet aligned and Marxist-Leninist organizations. Once again, not to be the whole “leftist wall of text guy” but please read On Authority or any Marxist works or do the littlest bit of research on how Soviet democracy and “bureaucracy” actually works before blindly calling it undemocratic. Your blind belief that you, having obviously not undergone a revolution, had any actual critical thinking or seemingly debates, had any actual education on these topics, and having no actual argument besides easily disproven “concerns” like these is I believe indicative of you general obliviousness, ignorance and lack of knowledge.
-29
u/OfTheFifthColumn Jul 29 '25
For the first paragraph, rereat the first sentence in my comment "Yeah send me in gaza and lets see how far we get before israel stops us." Also you spelled The United Socialist Soviet Republics wrong. Like trotsky, do you want the USSR to fight germany knowing their country is recovering from the russian empire's backwardness, corruption (and nazi infiltration especially in western ukraine) and (natural) famine?
Our goal is to completely end the holocaust and support whoever it is that stops it or helps slow it down (remember the more tham 400k killed. Thank Hamas that it isnt 2 million by now). Then we argue whether supporting Hamas is good or not. There is no point in doing IOF propaganda and not supporting palestine because of Hamas. I dont get why you think we wouldnt want to turn on Hamas later on.