Bukharin Helmy

Abolish The Family. Abolish Religion. Abolish Wage Labour. Abolish Money. Abolish Work. Abolish Commodity Production. Abolish the State. Abolish Class. Abolish Private Property. Abolish the Nation. Abolish Patriarchy. Abolish Gender. Abolish Town and Country.

Lenin spent years attacking Kautsky after 1914, Luxemburg spent years criticizing reformism and opportunism within the SPD, and Bordiga was a harsh critic of parliamentary opportunism in the communist movement. None of these people remotely fit “Kautskyist.” Words have meaning!

“Is this modernizer bothering you, babe?”

“We say that our morality is entirely subordinated to the interests of the proletariat's class struggle. Our morality stems from the interests of the class struggle of the proletariat.” - Vladimir Lenin

So your antisemitic and transphobic crashout 6 months ago was also due to being hacked by a groyper? Also you have admitted to using a VPN, so all you'd need to do is connect to the Netherlands and log in on twitter for it to flag that new login. You ain't fooling anyone 🤣🤣🤣

Communism is not simply a prediction of a future that ‘might’ happen, it is an already existing force which exerts itself through the class struggle, and it has observable effects on the structure of capitalism. Its force is asserted through both the class struggle of the proletariat, and the ways that logic of capitalist progress itself (which should be understood as class struggle against the proletariat) develops the productive forces, narrows the range of responses capital can adopt to displace or delay the catastrophic results of its crisis tendency, and dampen the class antagonisms of the workers. These dimensions of communism should be understood as the distinct but interrelated developments of the class as subject, and the reproduction of the material premises of communism on an ever-expanding scale.

Imperialism does not replace the contradiction between capital and labor as the foundational contradiction of capitalism. It is deeply intertwined with capitalist development itself: global accumulation, land seizure, labor organization, unequal exchange, etc.

Leftwt's understanding of jargon is like Idealist = being naive Dialectical = having nuance Materialist = agreeing with me Moralist = having emotions

Finding out people on booktok skip everything but dialogue makes reading 30+ books a year make a lot more sense.

Potential Party

“Human rights are complete liberal nonsense.” “I know” “…” “…”

The idea that the Communist Left has ever advocated for a “perfect” or “pure” revolution is a fabricated myth. NO left-communist has EVER, in its history of over 100 years, advocated for or expected a “pure” or “perfect” revolution, what the hell does that even mean? The communist left has strongly defended the experience of the October revolution, and not one of us has ever claimed that it was perfect, quite the opposite. We criticize the Bolsheviks, in particular Lenin, for tactical errors which ended up leaving the door open for opportunism, while at the same time we recognize Lenin as the greatest anti opportunist figure of the 20th century. The difference between us and our “critics” is that we are capable of understanding and applying the principle of ruthlessly criticizing all that exists, including our own experiences, and that we also understand that the first premise of human history is production, specifically the productive activity that reproduces its own existence, and that the activity of the communist revolution must be to transform the social relations which govern production. The revolution will not and cannot succeed without this.

The federalist vs unitary government debate ignores the elephant in the room—who're the dominant classes & whose interests does the government serve? If you ignore it, no matter how many times you change the form of govt the results would just be the same.

Invariance is obviously just the correct way to frame marxism bc the content of marxism germinates from the recurrent contradictions of capitalism, which will never change as long as the basic nature of capitalism doesn’t change. Lets recall some old passages from the classics of marxism here. When Marx claims... “We develop new principles for the world out of the world’s own principles. We do not say to the world: Cease your struggles, they are foolish; we will give you the true slogan of struggle. We merely show the world what it is really fighting for, and consciousness is something that it has to acquire, even if it does not want to.” (1843) or “The theoretical conclusions of the Communists are in no way based on ideas or principles that have been invented, or discovered, by this or that would-be universal reformer. They merely express, in general terms, actual relations springing from an existing class struggle, from a historical movement going on under our very eyes.” (1848) he is explicitly anchoring all of the ‘prescriptive’ content of scientific socialism (marxism) to the actual movement of history, or more specifically the logic of capitalism and the class struggles that define it. In these passages, what’s implied is an immanent bond between the marxist descriptions of the living historical process, and the practical principles of communists. What is the actual historical process that Marx is anchoring communist principles to? Obviously communism itself. What is communism? Stripped of any speculation, communism must be primarily understood through the concrete dynamics that define, deny, and continuously regenerate it, i.e. as the internal negation of capitalism. Communism was identified by Marx in the systemic tendency for the proletariat to unify and radicalize its struggles against capital, and the inextinguishable nature of communism in our world is confirmed by the fact that the (dis)organization of the proletariat is both the core premise & core limit point of capitalism. Capitalists need the proletariat to engage in social labor so that it may generate surplus value, the proletariat needs to struggle to survive, and the struggle of the proletariat - when taken to its logical conclusions - yields the abolition of classes. “By demanding the negation of private property, the proletariat merely raises to the rank of a principle of society what society has raised to the rank of its principle, what is already incorporated in it as the negative result of society without its own participation.” (1843) But if we consistently understand communism this way, then the content of communism is ultimately unchanging so long as the basic qualities of capitalism are also unchanging. Capitalism will always be defined by the dispossession of workers, surplus value extraction, commercial competition, etc. If Marx pierced the veil and his model of the CMP successfully reconstructs capitalism in conceptual form, going beyond & explaining its empirical surface, and capitalist development involves the increasing conformity of concrete manifestations of capitalism with the laws rendered in this concept (see e.g. Marx’s claim that advanced capitalisms reveal the future of less advanced form of capitalism) we can confidently say that both capitalism and communist struggles necessarily evolve along a fixed logical axis that is imposed by their determinations, and that each always evolves in relation to the other. Given how consistent all of this clearly is with Marx’s method as he described it, it is almost a triviality to uphold the italian lefts concept of invariance. Insofar as marxism develops, it develops through elaborations which preserve the logical architecture of the system in full, while discerning how historical trends either confirm or refute the theory as a whole.

@malaysia_covid Kill TouchNGo

Some Malaysians will say do research but then when you travel to Singapore all kinds of cards can be used. To Seoul (T Money) or Tokyo (Suica) yes use those but for iphone users can just add the card in apple wallet on top of them having an efficient public transport and system

If you’re a communist anywhere in the world, you have one duty that stands above all others: clarify the nature of existing conflicts and struggles, highlight the universal interests of the working class, and push for the worldwide dictatorship of the proletariat.

yep!

@The_Endie PSM too, if you wanna do a mental gymnastic KMM > PKMM > PKMM brief membership in UMNO (1946-1948?) > PUTERA-AMCJA > P(S)RM > PSM

Parti berasal dari Umno: Onn Jaafar - IMP and Parti Negara Fuad Hassan - PAS Ku Li - Semangat 46 Anwar Ibrahim - PKR Kadir Sheikh Fadzir - IKATAN Muhyiddin Yassin - Bersatu Shafie Apdal - Warisan Tun M - Pejuang (dari Bersatu) Rafizi Ramli - Parti Bersama Malaysia (dari PKR)

ASEAN Resolution to ban all Israelis from SEA