I was intrigued by the struggle session comment from some months ago that posed the strange idea, paraphrasing that, hexbear’s antisectarian rules imagined some idealized form of the other that agrees with all the opinions of the former. This obviously doesn’t exist IRL which IMO makes it an odd rule for a shitposting website
I would argue that despite appearances successful revolutions actually did embody that: despite sectarian power struggles between different organizations, revolutions were defined by concessions to material reality and the cooperation and compromise needed to actually keep going and survive. "Doctrinally pure" sectarians were wreckers while the surviving party became an impure synthesis of its component members. Like Kropotkin personally argued with Lenin, but ultimately cooperated with him in the limited capacity his age allowed and he was likewise provided for by the Soviet state. In China the CPC relied heavily on peasant anarchists during the revolution whose ideology shaped the party and its policies even as they were subsumed into it.
Obviously there was still sectarian infighting and whatnot, but fundamentally history shows that revolutions have to be a synthesis of their component parts and a compromise between doctrinal purity and material reality. So if a revolution comes to the imperial core it is going to be made up of everyone who is willing to work together, and anyone sticking to ancient party lines and splitting over them at that point will be a wrecker. Hexbear's basically following that ideal, laying out some basic core tenets against bigotry and chauvinism and then saying "don't start petty bullshit with each other over other policy disagreements." Like someone should be dogpiled for doing American imperial apologia, but not for having a different take on what post-revolution logistics and organization should look like for example.
I find it a bit weird, people justify the anti-sectarian rule not applying to Trots cuz they've had bad experiences with Trots. Okay, I'm willing to bet plenty of anarchists have had bad experiences with MLs and MLs with anarchists but I guess we value us getting along enough in this space to feign that it never happens. Trots tho, nah get fucked.
I was intrigued by the struggle session comment from some months ago that posed the strange idea, paraphrasing that, hexbear’s antisectarian rules imagined some idealized form of the other that agrees with all the opinions of the former. This obviously doesn’t exist IRL which IMO makes it an odd rule for a shitposting website
I would argue that despite appearances successful revolutions actually did embody that: despite sectarian power struggles between different organizations, revolutions were defined by concessions to material reality and the cooperation and compromise needed to actually keep going and survive. "Doctrinally pure" sectarians were wreckers while the surviving party became an impure synthesis of its component members. Like Kropotkin personally argued with Lenin, but ultimately cooperated with him in the limited capacity his age allowed and he was likewise provided for by the Soviet state. In China the CPC relied heavily on peasant anarchists during the revolution whose ideology shaped the party and its policies even as they were subsumed into it.
Obviously there was still sectarian infighting and whatnot, but fundamentally history shows that revolutions have to be a synthesis of their component parts and a compromise between doctrinal purity and material reality. So if a revolution comes to the imperial core it is going to be made up of everyone who is willing to work together, and anyone sticking to ancient party lines and splitting over them at that point will be a wrecker. Hexbear's basically following that ideal, laying out some basic core tenets against bigotry and chauvinism and then saying "don't start petty bullshit with each other over other policy disagreements." Like someone should be dogpiled for doing American imperial apologia, but not for having a different take on what post-revolution logistics and organization should look like for example.
I definitely shouldn’t have said “obviously” because clearly I didn’t know anything lol ty
I find it a bit weird, people justify the anti-sectarian rule not applying to Trots cuz they've had bad experiences with Trots. Okay, I'm willing to bet plenty of anarchists have had bad experiences with MLs and MLs with anarchists but I guess we value us getting along enough in this space to feign that it never happens. Trots tho, nah get fucked.