It seems most cross tendency engagement devolves in to fights between leftcoms/anarchists vs AES supporters or “Dengists” vs Maoists. Anyone can point at each other and say “they started it” and avoid responsibilities. We agree on 90% of stuff but Anarchists decide to randomly call us tankies and we feel the need to defend ourselves or else look like we lost without an argument. Likewise we make memes about Anarkiddies and write texts denouncing them and they feel the same. Among scientific socialists we see China as an ally and an example to learn from while Maoists want to call out “revisionism.” There seems to be a contradiction between the history of different socialist experiments and disagreements not really mattering to our own conditions and those experiments also being vital learning experiences for us.
It’s strange to think about how we pretty much agree with Patsocs on more than almost any other tendency yet they are almost useless because they don’t understand the basic dialectical method and why have our positions beyond aesthetics and thus cannot understand the basic material conditions of this country.
We can keep trying to bring more people into our own sects and hope they do work for our own type of socialism irl, but if we’re so divided how can this happen. Of course we should all just log off and do things irl, but then some will fall into the trap of either larping or just helping their own friends without the wider goal of revolution.
We all need to remember that the feds let us speak because we spend all our time bickering. How can we unify as a revolutionary left? There are projects irl for trying to find unity as scientific socialists like ChunkaLuta, but it would be nice to be able to do the same online. In a way I’m just wishing everyone could just listen to revleft and everything could work out, but what can Lemmygrad and hexbear do for this vision?
I really believe the concept of “left unity” is part of the fed disruption of the left.
Anarchism and Marxism are diametrically opposed. There’s no realistic way to have the two peacefully coexisting, especially in the context of pre-revolution organizing.
The idea that we have to work together, and we have to join the same orgs and play nice with each other is part of the reason we’re always bickering.
The only thing we consistently agree on is the concept of anti-capitalism. Anarchists will gladly back fascist states and projects, liberal politicians and policies, anti-communist rhetoric and theory, etc. They’re not anti-fascist as a whole, they’re not anti-liberal as a whole, and they’re far more sectarian than we are. So how are we supposed to fight against any of those things when our supposed “sister ideology” will willingly work against the movement? We can’t.
The Anarchists will fracture parties, they’ll stall projects, they’ll hijack movements, all the while pretending to be the ones who’re being worked against. There’s no working with people like that, the idea that we have to is rediculous.
Instead, we need unity within Marxism. Namely within serious Marxism, so I’m not talking about leftcoms or patsocs, or any of the various groups that only serve as a means of legitimizing larping. I’m talking about actual Marxist parties and organizations. As long as groups can agree that anti-communist propaganda has no place in serious discussions, and that we have aligning goals, there’s a means of cooperating with them. That’s simply impossible with Anarchists and the soft left, but can be done with people who are serious about Marxist revolution.
In terms of the internet, Lemmygrad and Hexbear are a decent example of Marxist unity. However, cooperation between two Reddit replacements in a sphere of the internet that the average person never goes to doesn’t really do much. We need Marxist groups from across the net to come together, to maximize exposure. And we need to establish a means of communication across all of the platforms. I don’t know how realistic this concept is, but anything short of it leaves us in the situation we’ve been in. Just a bunch of blinded chickens, running around in the hopes of finding a single crumb of grain. Many unconnected parts, attempting to lead society towards a revolution that can’t come, because we’re unable to work together.
TLDR; Anarchists suck, tell your Marxist friends about Lemmygrad & Hexbear.
I’ve met reasonable anarchists, though. I don’t think we should waste our time on those who complain about tankies or any tiny authority, but they aren’t all bad. Anyway, my question wasn’t mostly about that, but with Maoists. We agree with them on pretty much everything except current day China. We are natural allies, yet when I was listening to Politics in Command when they interviewed a Maoist student group it sounded like their main priority was to convince people who found Marxism from Genzedong or Hasan that China was revisionist and they shouldn’t listen to us.
I have Anarchist friends who are surprisingly good about actually understanding propaganda, and simply disagree with philosophical concepts that Marxists uphold, and those Anarchos deserve their place among our ranks. I can respect some Anarchists, but they’re a minute minority in a sea of dogmatic anti-communists.
On Maoists, though. Working with them is impossible because they’re purposefully against AES. Which should say quite a bit about what their actual beliefs are. And why the distinction between Maoists (see: larpers) and ML-Mao Zedong Thought (see: actual comrades) is so important.
Maoists don’t actually agree with Mao’s theories, or the history that Mao himself put into motion. They care about the abstract notion that Mao was the last great revolutionary until the founder of Maoism came around (I.E. Abimael Guzmán, aka Comrade Gonzalo). Modern China, to them, stopped being communist shortly after Mao left power. Some argue it was before Deng, and some argue after.
Maoism, in the most blunt terms, is the South American form of Patriotic Socialism. Gonzalo and his goons used the aesthetic of Marxism-Leninism to get into the hearts of workers, then used their power to push reactionary policies. One of which being the murder of natives. This legacy remains, as every Maoist organization is ultimately a proto-fascist one at heart. Like, for instance, the Austin Red Guards. Who operated similarly to a cult, utilizing abusive practices against “unsatisfactory” members. They began as a somewhat based group, hosting events for the LGBTQIA+ community, but evolved into an anti-LGBTQIA+ and anti-BLM movement, that accusedly planned and launched a physical assault on Austin’s PSL wing.
Maoists aren’t our comrades, they’re grifters looking for authority.
This part is an addendum, not to QueerCommie but to anyone who’s read this and thought something along the lines of “I identify myself with Maoism, but I don’t mirror the beliefs described”. You’re likely ML-MZT, and the western left’s love of making things confusing got’cha. It’s not a big deal if this is something you’ve just not realized, but ML-MZT is the actual following of Mao’s writings and the politics of modern China.
I understand this and I’m not trying to appeal to Gonzalists, but how do we find more unity with principled MZT and other relatively principled non-ML tendencies? Not everyone’s going to think China’s socialist and they don’t need to. Is this not more “I’m the most pure leftist unlike you ultras and revisionists?”
All of the principled Marxists are already working with us, though mostly IRL.
Many people here on both LG and HexBear don’t identify their ideology with Lenin’s theories, but they’re already here civilly engaging with us. There is already unity between us, for as far as matters.
What matters more, imo, is educating new leftists on the ideology groups that seek to destabilize the left so they don’t fall into their traps.
So basically we just need to get more non-terminally online people to work with us. Get terminally online people to actually do the work. And get more unity and general strategy among principled real organizations.
more or less yeah, at least in my view.
other views on the topic are valid as hell, but the way I see it the people who’re doing the most to harm the left aren’t people who actually do anything progressive (in terms of progressing movements). Those people are also, without fail, the ones who are the most ready to fight against our unity. Those who want to see a brighter future, and have put in the work to understand theory and the way propaganda works, are already working with us. So it’s less about changing the minds of those already against us, and more about keeping those groups from talking over us.
Sure, we try to out propagandize other tendencies and deviations. I notice another contradiction, though. If we are trying to draw those who aren’t already against us into our ranks then many of those people will be “apolitical” or only mildly interested, considering many with a great interest in politics (in the west) have dived into anti-communist lore. The most politically active may be already against us while those intactive may not “activate.” I guess we shouldn’t be arguing with the most committed online anticoms at the least. Maybe the best target is disaffected liberals irl.
Maoists are really just “red anarchists”, adopting the failed tactics and organizing strategies of anarchists, while basing their entire ideology on opposition to socialist states, also like anarchists.
You have to look past what these groups call themselves, and not judge a book by its cover.
Similarly, patsocs call themselves marxists, while completely whitewashing western colonialism and indigenous genocide.
Marx, Engels and Lenin all stated in different forms, that what we need is unity among Marxists, not with anarchists and the distorters of Marxism (such as maoists).
Also a reminder that anarchism is not a socialist ideology.
Didn’t Maoist Paul try to convince anarchists to become Maoists by saying they’re basically the same and neither support AES?
I believe so, but I don’t watch too much youtube so I’m not sure.