The rad libs are not OK. https://newpol.org/issue_post/internationalism-anti-imperialism-and-the-origins-of-campism/

It is like Gaza changes nothing for these 'radical leftists'.

  • Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml
    ·
    19 hours ago

    We socialists are humanists. We believe in and support the fight for humanistic values

    No. Or maybe you are. That doesn't mean that communists or marxists are. We are materialist and the whole "psudeo left" or "betrayal of leftist values" narrative of the radlibs melts away because we aren't even claiming to be the same ideology/philosophy as them!

    We want a world free from oppression and exploitation, one in which all human beings can have a voice and a vote [lol] about their future. We see civil rights and civil liberties—freedom of religion, assembly, speech, and press, freedom from racial and gender oppression—as essential to the fight for socialism and to the creation of a genuine socialist society.

    The radlib description of a future socialist society is just the same as present day liberal society. There is no philosophical maturation from the thinking of liberalism. There is no new evolved system/method based in scientific principles that these "socialists" have created. Just a wishlist. Truly, what a future.

    Furthermore, legally speaking, most of these liberal rights can be found in most of the liberal societies. So why is this radlib so dissatisfied at all?

    The alternative to monarchy and bourgeois republics, the critics argued, was the creation of democratic republics where citizens had the right to elect representatives to a parliament, which necessarily entailed the right to advocate for political parties and candidates, accompanied by civil rights: free speech, free press, freedom of assembly.

    So the modern liberal republics are democratic and unbourgeois then? Is that the situation that decades of liberalism have led us to? Or are all of the liberal republics reverting to fascism yet again?

    Marx and Engels supported the Chartists’ fight for democracy, seeing the struggle for democracy as the beginning of the fight for socialism. If workers had the right to vote, they would vote for socialists and socialist policies. Marx’s writings on the Paris Commune of 1871 also made it clear that for him democracy was central to the struggle for socialism.

    I have seen people argue that marx would advocate for voting for kamala harris. I have never seen people pretend as if marx wasn't a militant revolution and somehow thought you could vote in socialism.

    Yet the revolutionary socialists of the 1910s and 1920s did not then contemplate supporting Germany or Japan against the United States, nor would they entertain the idea of backing England and France against Germany.

    And we are about the enter the part where the author compares China and Russia to imperial japan/Germany.

    Fucking every single time.

    • Sleepless One@lemmy.ml
      ·
      10 hours ago

      I have never seen people pretend as if marx wasn’t a militant revolution and somehow thought you could vote in socialism.

      I present to you: Ubisoft Marx.

      Show

    • KobaCumTribute [she/her]
      ·
      16 hours ago

      The radlib description of a future socialist society is just the same as present day liberal society. There is no philosophical maturation from the thinking of liberalism. There is no new evolved system/method based in scientific principles that these "socialists" have created. Just a wishlist. Truly, what a future.

      Furthermore, legally speaking, most of these liberal rights can be found in most of the liberal societies. So why is this radlib so dissatisfied at all?

      It's pure liberal idealism intersecting with the material reality that liberal systems don't actually live up to their propaganda, in someone who also uncritically accepts liberal propaganda as true. So you get this contradictory "the American Empire is the true successor of Karl Marx's legacy with all these slow incremental reforms that just like happen because of vibes or something idk why things happen or what material causes are, all I know is it can be better if we all do the magic vooooting ritual with more purity and faith in the system in our hearts!" gibberish right alongside aggressive contempt for the empire's victims and for any socialist project that just did good things and made things better for its people because they didn't follow the American-prescribed system of letting America say whether they could or not.

    • Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Yeah the rest if the article just appears to be some "ussr was the bad guys in ww2" and "stalin scary 😨 " shit. I don't care enough to read further.

      • culpritus [any]
        ·
        17 hours ago

        I saw some contextphobic whataboutism about Uyghurs when I skimmed it, hence this slop post. marx-joker

        spoiler

        Yet these same anti-imperialists object when internationalists come to the defense of the Uyghur people of Xinjiang Province, because both the Trump and Biden administrations have said they support the Uyghurs.

        The truth is that socialist internationalists who support the Uyghurs do so despite the fact that the U.S. government says it supports them. We do so for our own reasons and while continuing to oppose U.S. imperialism. We do so because the Uyghurs, like the Poles and the Irish in Marx’s time, have a right to self-determination, and shouldn’t be politically, economically, and culturally subjected to China’s authoritarian state and its Han nationalism