Do they think modern “social democrats” are still Marxists?
The old SDP by the time they split were opportunists, though admittedly they were of course much less anti-Marx than modern socdems, let alone the modern SDP.
(CPUSA bad lol but…)
History is off. The KPD didn’t betray the SPD, the SPD did when it collaborated with the Freikorps and other monarchist/conservative movements to crush a potential workers’ republic.
Which while betrayal would mean they had the same goals (they simply don’t) in the context of ‘left unity’ it needs to be hammered into every self-professed communist that socdems WILL NEVER fight for the workers FULLY.
They need to be casted off once their usefulness to the workers has been exhausted.
ML’s and (real) anarchists have more in common than either do with socdem entriest dipshits. The SPD rejected both anarchists and the KPD during the second international. The anarchists broadly aligned more with the KPD and both were rebuked and thus it is solely on the SPD that the Nazis won out because the only “left” group to collaborate with the Nazis were the social democrats.
See also the Battle of the Ruhr, were anarchists from the syndicalist FAUD, communists from the KPD and democratic socialists from the USPD fought together and … were murdered by the Freikorps on behalf of the SPD federal government.
It should be noted that when the uprising started as a response to the reactionary Kapp coup, it was a united front project that included support from local SPD chapters. In fact, it was the SPD who had called for a general strike to counter the coup by reactionary generals Kapp and von Lüttwitz, and in the leftist dominated Ruhr Area that escalated to the point were the left and center left forces quickly levied an army of 50,000 fighters that defeated local police and the Freikorps and then occupied the entire Ruhr Area and adjacent parts of the Lower Rhine Valley like Düsseldorf to form a council republic. Not only a fairly large area, but also at the time the heart of Germany’s industrial production forces.
Then, after a general strike forced the Kapp putschists to surrender and return power to the SPD, they immediately sent in the Freikorps to crush the uprising at the Ruhr. Including Freikorps bands that had just participated in the Kapp coup.
There’s a ton of similar examples of betrayal from the SPD in the early years of the Weimar Republic, i just picked this one specifically because you specifically mentioned anarchists.
Damn I really need to read more about this period in Germany. Also apparently so do many of the more sectarian MLs on here and lemmygrad. Anarchists (not the terminal online anti-communist brainwormed ones) are not our enemies. Hell where I am most of the cool on the ground shit is done by anarchists.
If the US death spiral produced another world war and for whatever political reasons, Denmark wound up as part of a military alliance that was trying to slay the Great Satan (even if not truly, like the US did not truly slay the Third Reich in the west), both statements would be true.
I realize you are probably just memeing, I just sometimes get a headache when people play up this of all things as being Stalin’s great ideological inconsistency when it’s literally just basic dialectical thinking.
Lol its just a meme
Coming from the guy who denounces the DotP as “one of the worst political ideas put to paper “ (paraphrased) this is not surprising at all. Fuck Joe Sims and all of the other revisionist opportunists at the top of CPUSA siphoning so much revolutionary energy into impotent chauvinist reformist bullshit.
When you let a reddit liberal run your communist party.
Popular fronts make sense if you are pointing in the same direction. Most modern social democrats are not social democrats in the kautskian sense of trying to do marx by the ballot box.
Most social democrats aren’t even pro-union action. They’re fine with unions but don’t build their power base around unions at all. They’re just pro-welfare liberals. A popular front with social democrats only makes sense if the purpose of the front is purely anti-fascism, but that’s incredibly unlikely these days
Hard to build around unions when:
- there are barely any left
- workers we talk to don’t want to form unions
- the unions that do exist are filled with reactionaries (ex: Teamsters)
We need a different approach under these conditions.
workers we talk to don’t want to form unions
this can be broken through, nearly 3/4 of Americans are in favor of unions (historically high IIRC, link here). public sentiment =/= material action ofc, but it can be the raw material that’s shaped that way with the right interventions. a lot of rebuilding to do & existing unions do need to be steered away from reaction though, no argument from me there.
A very generous reading of social democracy says that they share the goals of workers emancipation with the left, they just have the tactical analysis that these goals are best achieved incrementally through participation in bourgeois parliamentarism. The problem with that reading is that no actual social democrat the imperial core has actually believed it since sometimes during the interwar period.
Actual social democrats think it is their job to defend capitalism to the benefit of a privileged labour aristocracy that certainly does not include workers in the imperial periphery and often exclude large parts of the domestic proletariat (the unemployed, the un-unionised, ethnic minorities etc.)
Actual social democrats are more viciously anti-communist than even most conservatives. Not only do they share the reactionary rage against those seeking to upend the capitalist system, they also feel enraged about someone to the left challenging their perceived birthright to be the sole political voice of the working class.
A united front might have made sense during the 1930’s, some social democrats still possessed some anti-capitalist sentiment, the communists were politically significant enough for the social democrats not to be able to overlook them and the imminent danger of violent death by the hands of fascist murderers was much more apparent (the horrors of modern post-fascism notwithstanding). And even though social democrats had practical and ideological reasons to work with the communists back then, the strategy still failed to materialise.
But a united front today? Are they on glue?
I think the most generous read you can make of this take is that they’re saying that the current situation is on the very cusp of full fledged fascism, just as it was in Germany and they’re suggesting that an alliance of the socdems and communists would’ve prevented it then and could prevent it now.
Revisionism aside, no such alliance is strong enough to prevent it now and no such alliance was plausible or possible back then.
Yeah the problem was that it was the Communists that extended the olive branch and the SPD threw them to the wolves.
Something we are essentially seeing repeat itself. It’s like a conversation I had recently with a guy who is kinda lib but probably a comrade still who said the Nazis might have won if they hadn’t started a war with the USSR first. He’s not wrong but that was inevitably the case because for as much as they hated Jews they also hated Slavs and wanted all that land for Lebensraum. History could not have played out any other way.
Figures like Mamdani think they can appease fascist elements in spite of the fact they will be rejected again and ultimately betrayed for their naivety.
I must clarify I am not trying to start another struggle session about the NYC mayor which is so tiring and I think he is sincere in wanting to improve the material conditions of New Yorkers and I have very limited very critical support for the actual good things he proposes I just don’t see it working.
said the Nazis might have won if they hadn’t started a war with the USSR first
It was actually because they didn’t start a war with the USSR that they lost in my opinion. If they had attacked the USSR when Poland was taken then they could have swiftly taken most of the entire industrial capacity of the country, which was near the border with Poland at the time. The molotov pact threatened France and the UK who both saw the pact as an indicator Hitler would come west ffirst instead of towards the USSR, it is basically what pushed them into fighting the nazis as before that decision they were content with using the nazis as their attack dogs against the USSR.
They would’ve succeeded and then they would’ve had all the power necessary to take the rest of europe afterwards. I’m not even sure if the Manhattan Project would’ve started under those circumstances, so there might not have been an atom bomb to threaten them either.
Sorry kinda high, that was what I meant. If they had gone straight for the east instead of jumping the gun on Poland and then attacking France they probably would have had support from the west, but they really wanted to go after Poland for some reason and that spooked the other western powers.
The other western powers cared about Poland as much as they cared about the previous annexation of Czechia, which is to say they didn’t give a rat’s ass about them. What made the UK abandon appeasement was the attack on France.
I think the left should reconsider buying into the “appeasement” narrative. I think it’s myth-making to ensure they look like the good guys of the war when the reality was they simply wanted to use the nazis against the ussr.
Look at Ukraine Russia today. EU supporting fascists against the Russians provided they aren’t a threat to EU is the same now as it was then, just that Ukraine started out much weaker.
The entire narrative about Ukraine would be different if they had stormed into one of their neighbours. I believe “appeasement” is story telling.
aren’t a threat to EU
The only united front that can be achieved is with the small subset of non-anticommunist anarchists as I mentioned in my other reply just now. The SPD rejected and repudiated both the KPD and the German anarchists and the two factions actually had a short lived alliance before being outnumbered and violently purged by the collaborationist SPD.
That’s gotta be one of the worst pictures of Lenin that exists.
Looks like he’s taking a shit. Which is probably what he would do today after printing out this tweet on toilet paper.
To be fair its from a video
The one where Lenin is speaking from the podium? Picking that one makes it look like larp, they are portraying themselves as Lenin informing other communists. Digital cosplay.
CPUSA just gives me bad vibes. Every time.
Zero understanding of the purpose of welfare as a stymie to aid capitalism in a time of crisis
Making the same fucking mistakes as Rosa Luxemburg. These guys are going to get people killed. Trusting socdems any further than you can throw them is never a smart move. Don’t let the deaths of the Spartakists mean nothing. Learn from Rosa’s mistake and DON’T BLOODY DO IT AGAIN!
deleted by creator
We just need to feed the bears?
Ill bring the salmon!
deleted by creator
We just need to kill the Boers? @[email protected]
Given the number of symbols in each word, I believe you are correct in guessing what this user said and tried to hide. In this case, this is concerning: if such messages are so widespread as to be recognisable even under such abstract signs, the black nationalist dog whistles truly must be generally accepted by the vast majority of internet users, otherwise they would be more hidden. In this case, I am afraid that the South African white genocide will continue uninterrupted and that the South African government will succeed in their designs of creating a new, black, apartheid state.
Not surprising considering CPUSA is a deeply reactionary party so who would have guessed the fake leftists are on the same side as glorified liberals. As an objective fact the social democrats of today are not the social democrats of yesterday, they used to be socialist.
Today it would be more comparable to say that more revolutionary groups should work alongside reformist socialists and democratic Socialists. I absolutely support the idea of a united workers front with them, I draw the line at reactionary thought and supporting capitalism.
