What is sectarianism exactly? I still don't get it. Like disagreements actually exists in the real world. Why do you think people talk about left unity all the time? I would define sectarianism as letting disagreements get in the way of real world action. So sectarianism is a real life problem. In the online world, I don't get what uncriticial left unity, and silence for the sake of unity, would achieve.

Saying that Anarchists have never brought about meaningful change is true and it’s also sectarian. Saying that Maoists are paradoxically obsessed with violence and being the underdog is true and also sectarian.

Why would saying true things be sectarian? If something is true, why shouldnt it be said? Is it that these things hurt their feelings? By this logic, claiming that USSR is socialist is sectarian, because it hurts my feelings, regardless of whether it is true or not.

AOC is a bourgeois politician. There is nothing she can do that is right, unless you are a social democrat who want to improve conditions of the working class so that there is less class conflict. Whatever social democrats can do to improve things, actual communists can do better through independent working class power. Read the section on bourgeois socialism in the Manifesto, that explains why we should be opposed to such movements.

OK can you define sectarian? I'm asking because it can be very easy to have a policy where anything that disagrees with the popular opinion becomes sectarian and banned. You just admitted that China being capitalist is the proper position for Maoists, now you are calling the same position sectarian. I never worded my views in the dishonest way you are portraying like "China fake red fash" etc. I'm having a nuanced discussion.

But opposition to imperialism is something that Iran also does, and Iran bans communist parties and flogs striking workers. It's not enough to simply be opposed to the West. Even Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan was opposed to the Anglos and went to war with them.

China red fash state capitalism” is sectarian.

I didnt say red fash anywhere. That China is state capitalist is also the standard Maoist position. Do you think criticizing literally anything about China is sectarian?

What is sectarian about having views that oppose yours? Sectarianism is when you let your disagreements get in the way of action. Whatever you or I think of China or Vietnam, it has very little relevance in your actual praxis or mine.

No need to be sectarian. We are just having a disagreement of theory. After all, left unity is important, and we all have the same goal.

What is a superprofit? Where is the evidence that first world workers benefit from imperialism?

Let me explain the Marxist thesis here :

1. Workers in first world are more productive, due to advanced machinery, better logistics etc. So they produce more for the same labor-hour.

2. Therefore, they can purchase more for the same hourly wage. For example, a deli worker makes $150 in a day. Now she goes to Alibaba.com and buys a bunch of stuff that costs $150 but actually took 5 worker-days to produce in China. This is the natural end result of difference in labor productivity.

3. This is not exploitation in the Marxist sense. It is undesirable of course, which is why we want to abolish the commodity-form in the first place(or at least us "ultras" want to), but it is not the "fault", to use a crude moral term, of the working class in the wealthy country. They "earned" their ability to have more, by producing more. To deny that in exchange, there is an exchange of equivalents, is to deny one of the most basic Marxist proposition.

The idea that protests are inherently good

Never said this.

proper Socialist government would somehow be immune to discontent are pure idealist nonsense.

What is proper socialist here? You call me idealist, but you have no material analysis of what makes a government "socialist". Is it enough to call itself socialist and have red flags? Is it enough to provide social services to everyone and guarantee employment? Is it that they nationalized everything while maintaining the capitalist mode of production?

I don’t care about whatever ludicrous purist idea of Socialism that has never existed you subscribe to,

Literally a right wing argument. Socialism hasnt existed yet so it is ludicrous.

it’s utterly irrelevant to history

What does this mean lol

and the International Proletarian Movement

Where can I contact this movement, I would like to join it. On a more serious note, there is no international movement.

It seems like you’re trying to position yourself as some Leftcom when you’re very obviously just a RadLib who still believes all the bullshit you were fed as a Liberal.

I used to be an ML actually. I used to believe eveything you believe until like 2 years ago.

What imperialism did Singapore or Taiwan, or even Sri Lanka engage in? Yes, Sri Lanka has similar life expectancy and infant mortality as Cuba despite being even poorer. Being able to provide decent conditions for the working class is not evidence that the government is socialist, at least in the Marxists sense. Also the idea that countries like Sweden or Norway can only provide social services due to imperialism is false. These countries are wealthy because their labor productivity is high AND they have redistributive mechanisms. The US actually has a higher average wage than Norway and Sweden, but also has higher inequality.

Sweden and Norway do engage in imperialism, in the sense of investing in foreign poor countries to exploit low wages. However, this only benefits the capitalist. The decent living conditions of the working class in Scandinavia is the result of high labor productivity of Scandinavian workers. The idea that first world workers enjoy good life because of third world exploitation is not only false but extremely harmful to the workers movement, which requires international solidarity.

First of all, why do you think there was discontent among the working class in Eastern Bloc states? Why is it that a country literally ruled by the working class(allegedly) would have working class people striking in it and getting arrested for it?

The fall of ""communism"" in Poland is not something I lose sleep over, as it was just state capitalism. It has no relation whatsoever to the actual socialist project, and in the future, the same opportunism of "nationalization is socialism bro trust me", will once again come up and will have to be fought against.

I suggest reading Marx. There is no need to excuse the atrocities of "actually existing socialist" states, because they have absolutely nothing to do with what Marx wrote, or the actual needs and desires of revolutionary workers.

Do you think that these countries are socialist because they say so? Not only is capitalism the dominant mode of production in these countries, and not only is there no independent worker movement with any real power, but also the common understanding of socialism in these countries is just state-ownership. Like all the debates in these countries are between nationalization and private ownership.

That's what social democratic states do, they implement social programs to reduce class conflict and encourage class collaboration for a more harmonious society. Abolition of absolute poverty has been achieved by many capitalist states like Sweden or Singapore.

Good point, I will do that

All left communists are white, this is also enough to discredit their arguments.

Very normal politics.

Successful revolution

Successful bourgeois revolution that ended feudalism. Our issue isnt that China isnt communist enough, we are the last to have this position, since we don't believe that a bourgeois state will magically become communist by itself.

It’s still extremely naive to sit within the western Imperial Core and throw shade at actual fucking Communists

How would you say someone is actually communist or not? Is it enough to call oneself a communist?

Leftcoms are usually the ones beiing referred to as ultras and they are not socdems. Ironically it is China stans who are actually socdems since they support socdem govts of China, Vietnam, Bolivia, Venezuela etc. The anarchists who decry china mostly have incoherent political views that are usually socdem economically.