That's what I meant with fucking around with parliament- I don't disagree that they're too committed to the existing state. I have a lot of issues with the organization but it's a product of more than just being ML - there's a lot of historical reasons at play too and I can appreciate why they reluctant to challenge the state directly.
This is the same reason organizations I work in don't cooperate with electorally-oriented groups either.
Dogmatism is a problem in every tendency. Same reason I push back on anarchists (or MLs) trying to start fights over political disagreements from like a hundred years ago. The problem is the capitalists with the boot on all our necks.
Mate, it's not just the party. Half my family are tankies. I have immense and exhaustive experience with ML hypocrisy and their true thoughts about Anarchists. I also have a lot of lived experiences on this. A lot of my best friends as a young adult were in the KNE. I've written for KNE papers. It's part of the reason why it's worthless to ask me to debate my positions. It's when people can't understand that and want to act all sealiony and/or condescending that I turn to ridiculing them.
Y'all can believe what you want about "left-unity". I have had both enough experience and theory to hold my positions on it.
. The problem is the capitalists with the boot on all our necks.
We all know anarchists and MLs agree in theory, but when it comes to praxis, cooperation only works when it's anarchist praxis.
Not trying to sealion - l'm not even trying to debate you at this point.
Most of my family that were 'tankies' have passed and most of the younger ones are completely disengaged politically.
spoiler
Also as a trans person they were way cooler about it than the more 'traditional' ones, one of whom was misgendering me on her deathbed.
I will also say that my lived experience doing years of encampment support in the US, I run into way more MLs (formally or informally) who I have been able to consistently work with towards shared goals. That's why I feel obligated to point out that most of the distinction made online (in particular about hypothetical revolutions) fade away in the real world.
Not trying to sealion - l’m not even trying to debate you at this point.
I didn't accuse you of it. I was speaking rhetorically to explain why I'm been ridiculing hexbears the past few days.
Most of my family that were ‘tankies’ have passed and most of the younger ones are completely disengaged politically.
I don't know if you are talking about family in Greece itself or not but it seems your lived experiences are US-centric. Almost my tankie relatives are very much alive, and the younger gen is pretty into the same theory as well. There's obviously changes in some social standards, but the core is remains surprisingly similar to what I'm used to.
I will also say that my lived experience doing years of encampment support in the US, I run into way more MLs (formally or informally) who I have been able to consistently work with towards shared goals
Well thing is, anarchists in 1917 were probably of the same opinion until things like the Konstadt started happening. We can literally read contemporary anarchists get completely disillusioned with their revolution once the MLs took power. And that's before the bad times even.
I don't know if you are talking about family in Greece itself or not but it seems your lived experiences are US-centric.
Specifically Greek, I have almost no family in the US.
anarchists in 1917 were probably of the same opinion until things like the Konstadt started happening.
I'm a pretty paranoid person, but one of the things I have resigned myself to is that you can't really change the world without exposing yourself to deception (and doing some deception yourself). Historical events are the product of their historical context, I prefer to work with comrades I can find here and now, and let them be the ones to disappoint me.
This is the sad part y'all not getting about the arguments from the anarchists like me. It's not that the MLs are "nyah nyah" deceptive currently. They probably truly believe what they say. But the ML praxis will invariably lead to the same outcomes of hierarchical oppression to any dissent and especially anarchist dissent, "for the good of the revolution". Bakunin predicted this years before Lenin! I'm not going to wait to be surprised pikachu about it.
I'm not going to wait to be surprised pikachu about it.
Thing is you cited the example of a existing ML org not being radical enough and refusing to really challenge power in there here and now as evidence that in the future (if successful) they're gonna be exterminating dissent. That's why you're not really reaching me.
I'm trying to say that the issues I have heard with the KKE is that it wasn't willing to go far enough, and often will still prevent anarchists from being "too disruptive" at their events. I understand why they do, in particular because they may not feel ready for the police response. I see the same thing at protests in the US, it doesn't mean I agree with it, but it's also a far way from being in a position to do a Kronstadt again.
There's a historical background to a lot of this, and a lot of historical violence tend to also be in the broader historical context of things like civil war, which is how a movement will end up in the situation of: "do we forcibly conscript people or do we let the fascists overrun us?"
My perspective is: Give people their freedom and they will fight tooth and nail to prevent themselves losing it again. We've seen this play out many times in history. However put just yet another red boss on top and you will need that conscription and all the authoritarianism that will come after and will crush any advance towards socialism.
I don't think KKE will ever get into power either. But that irrelevant. My point is that authoritarian praxis will lead to authoritarian outcomes, which will also inadvertently include things like purges of dissidents at the start and lead to a collapse back into capitalism eventually. This is why I don't trust any ML "left unity".
Give people their freedom and they will fight tooth and nail to prevent themselves losing it again
"freedom" is the most meaningless word in politics. People use it to mean both "freedom from" oppression and "freedom to" oppress. Socialists, Communists, and anarchists want freedom from oppression but don't always agree on how to get there. The bourgeoisie want the freedom to oppress the proletariat.
However put just yet another red boss on top
this is such a tired trope. you're worried about the supposed "red boss" while is still in power. "We can't do revolution because meet the new boss same as the old boss!" Give it a rest.
you will need that conscription and all the authoritarianism that will come after and will crush any advance towards socialism.
Authoritarianism is the second most meaningless word in politics. The ruling class always cries about authoritarianism as they are being overthrown by the very same people who they have been exercising authority over. A social class will dictate the conditions of production. Is it going to be the proletariat, or the bourgeoisie? Is it going to be the impoverished majority, or the opulent minority?
They had a good back and forth that got to some of the details of the disagreement and aired em out a bit and you show up afterwards to try and just "YOU'RE WRONG!", Ignoring most of what was said.
Regardless of who is "correct" between ML and anarchists here, why are so many hexbear users just so unpleasant in their attempts to engage on this?
Most of their actual assertions are on the level of religious dogma. They gesture at "lived experience" and then make completely incongruous inferences from it
It still got closer to the actual point of the disagreement than 95% of the other comment threads about this. If that is how you see it then help them deconstruct those incongruous references, at least if you want this to be productive and not just more "fun" arguing.
I thought it was a good exchange overall, situational awareness is an important component of posting. I generally try to keep in mind the audience. Sometimes showing up to be combative when things are otherwise winding down can do more harm than good.
That's what I meant with fucking around with parliament- I don't disagree that they're too committed to the existing state. I have a lot of issues with the organization but it's a product of more than just being ML - there's a lot of historical reasons at play too and I can appreciate why they reluctant to challenge the state directly.
This is the same reason organizations I work in don't cooperate with electorally-oriented groups either.
Dogmatism is a problem in every tendency. Same reason I push back on anarchists (or MLs) trying to start fights over political disagreements from like a hundred years ago. The problem is the capitalists with the boot on all our necks.
Mate, it's not just the party. Half my family are tankies. I have immense and exhaustive experience with ML hypocrisy and their true thoughts about Anarchists. I also have a lot of lived experiences on this. A lot of my best friends as a young adult were in the KNE. I've written for KNE papers. It's part of the reason why it's worthless to ask me to debate my positions. It's when people can't understand that and want to act all sealiony and/or condescending that I turn to ridiculing them.
Y'all can believe what you want about "left-unity". I have had both enough experience and theory to hold my positions on it.
We all know anarchists and MLs agree in theory, but when it comes to praxis, cooperation only works when it's anarchist praxis.
Not trying to sealion - l'm not even trying to debate you at this point.
Most of my family that were 'tankies' have passed and most of the younger ones are completely disengaged politically.
spoiler
Also as a trans person they were way cooler about it than the more 'traditional' ones, one of whom was misgendering me on her deathbed.
I will also say that my lived experience doing years of encampment support in the US, I run into way more MLs (formally or informally) who I have been able to consistently work with towards shared goals. That's why I feel obligated to point out that most of the distinction made online (in particular about hypothetical revolutions) fade away in the real world.
I didn't accuse you of it. I was speaking rhetorically to explain why I'm been ridiculing hexbears the past few days.
I don't know if you are talking about family in Greece itself or not but it seems your lived experiences are US-centric. Almost my tankie relatives are very much alive, and the younger gen is pretty into the same theory as well. There's obviously changes in some social standards, but the core is remains surprisingly similar to what I'm used to.
Well thing is, anarchists in 1917 were probably of the same opinion until things like the Konstadt started happening. We can literally read contemporary anarchists get completely disillusioned with their revolution once the MLs took power. And that's before the bad times even.
Specifically Greek, I have almost no family in the US.
I'm a pretty paranoid person, but one of the things I have resigned myself to is that you can't really change the world without exposing yourself to deception (and doing some deception yourself). Historical events are the product of their historical context, I prefer to work with comrades I can find here and now, and let them be the ones to disappoint me.
This is the sad part y'all not getting about the arguments from the anarchists like me. It's not that the MLs are "nyah nyah" deceptive currently. They probably truly believe what they say. But the ML praxis will invariably lead to the same outcomes of hierarchical oppression to any dissent and especially anarchist dissent, "for the good of the revolution". Bakunin predicted this years before Lenin! I'm not going to wait to be surprised pikachu about it.
Thing is you cited the example of a existing ML org not being radical enough and refusing to really challenge power in there here and now as evidence that in the future (if successful) they're gonna be exterminating dissent. That's why you're not really reaching me.
I'm not sure I follow.
I'm trying to say that the issues I have heard with the KKE is that it wasn't willing to go far enough, and often will still prevent anarchists from being "too disruptive" at their events. I understand why they do, in particular because they may not feel ready for the police response. I see the same thing at protests in the US, it doesn't mean I agree with it, but it's also a far way from being in a position to do a Kronstadt again.
There's a historical background to a lot of this, and a lot of historical violence tend to also be in the broader historical context of things like civil war, which is how a movement will end up in the situation of: "do we forcibly conscript people or do we let the fascists overrun us?"
My perspective is: Give people their freedom and they will fight tooth and nail to prevent themselves losing it again. We've seen this play out many times in history. However put just yet another red boss on top and you will need that conscription and all the authoritarianism that will come after and will crush any advance towards socialism.
I don't think KKE will ever get into power either. But that irrelevant. My point is that authoritarian praxis will lead to authoritarian outcomes, which will also inadvertently include things like purges of dissidents at the start and lead to a collapse back into capitalism eventually. This is why I don't trust any ML "left unity".
"freedom" is the most meaningless word in politics. People use it to mean both "freedom from" oppression and "freedom to" oppress. Socialists, Communists, and anarchists want freedom from oppression but don't always agree on how to get there. The bourgeoisie want the freedom to oppress the proletariat.
this is such a tired trope. you're worried about the supposed "red boss" while
is still in power. "We can't do revolution because meet the new boss same as the old boss!" Give it a rest.
Authoritarianism is the second most meaningless word in politics. The ruling class always cries about authoritarianism as they are being overthrown by the very same people who they have been exercising authority over. A social class will dictate the conditions of production. Is it going to be the proletariat, or the bourgeoisie? Is it going to be the impoverished majority, or the opulent minority?
They had a good back and forth that got to some of the details of the disagreement and aired em out a bit and you show up afterwards to try and just "YOU'RE WRONG!", Ignoring most of what was said.
Regardless of who is "correct" between ML and anarchists here, why are so many hexbear users just so unpleasant in their attempts to engage on this?
They've dehumanized me as a "wrecker" so it gives them the moral justification to engage in bad faith and "bully" me.
Eve fartlow-level self victimization
"the liberal had it coming, comrade chekist"
Dude you're still fucking going with this shit? Give it a rest, take the L, move on with your goddamn week, holy fuck.
Why would I stop? I want to make a collection of Ls!
Most of their actual assertions are on the level of religious dogma. They gesture at "lived experience" and then make completely incongruous inferences from it
It still got closer to the actual point of the disagreement than 95% of the other comment threads about this. If that is how you see it then help them deconstruct those incongruous references, at least if you want this to be productive and not just more "fun" arguing.
I think establishing definitions instead of using buzzwords is Good, Actually
Uhh ok. I don't disagree with this?
The other person was trying to establish definitions to buzzwords
Oh you just thought I was taking a stance I'm not taking in this.
Relax, PLEASE.
I thought it was a good exchange overall, situational awareness is an important component of posting. I generally try to keep in mind the audience. Sometimes showing up to be combative when things are otherwise winding down can do more harm than good.