Based. :bordiga-despair: First thing you need to know is that "leftcommunism" does not exist as a real movement. You do not want to be like the teenage Stalinist/Maoists/Dengists/Anarchists who LARP as the flagbearers of dead and/or revisionist ideologies. A simple reading of Bordiga's critique of "Actually Existing Socialism" (https://www.marxists.org/archive/bordiga/works/1952/stalin.htm) is enough to understand that "leftcommunism" is just communism, the original invariant critical science of the proletariat. We are not making up new ideas or modifying Marxism.

Also, what do you mean by ML style of organization? Leftcommunists are not opposed to the dictatorship of the proletariat, the leadership of the class party etc. Our criticism of "MLs" is precisely that the USSR(post Lenin), China, Cuba, NK are NOT dictatorships of the proletariat and the ruling party is not a party of the proletariat. This criticism is a minor thing though, we don't live in those countries, nor does there exist any real movements in developed countries that tries to replicate whatever they are doing (thankfully). The criticism is only important to keep in mind in case any real movement starts picking up and opportunists come knocking on the door again, talking about state ownership, disarming the working class, class collaboration, "socialist commodity production", prioritizing the nation over the international, and other such nonsense. This is why its still a LARP to call yourself leftcom, when the "communists" we are opposed to dont really exist politically, and I doubt they will manifest. Opportunism in the West will probably come in the form of Vaushite liberalism, anarchism, social democracy etc, rather than state capitalism.

I have to read Hegel so I dont know how to answer this.

https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/works/hl/ - Read this

Anti-imperialism is false consciousness

Morals are not human desires though, they are societal codification of avoidance of pain, be it emotional or physical.

Avoidance of pain and self preservation is not a human desire?

morals are different, as they are not an explanation of phenomena, but rather production of human empathy,

What evidence is there to prove that morals are a product of human empathy? Is the moral outrage of some Muslims against women not wearing burkas a product of their empathy?

and I doubt they could be shed as easily or that they ever should.

More accurately, your desire is that morality should exist. Communism will abolish moral thinking, religion, economics and all other ideologies.

Moralistic language is the clearest way to signal that a preference is (A) non-negotiable and (B) to intended to be mandatory for everyone.

This is not really clear as you think it is. People do not use morality in this way. Morals are presented as something outside human desires and independent of the real conditions of human existence(their productive relations), as something that comes from God or Reason etc. If discussion involving ethics simply accepted desire as its basis, then it becomes clear that no more discussion is needed and that a real conflict is what is at stake here. But the mysticism of morality is precisely what is used to make this unclear. If we lived in a world where your statement is accepted as what morality actually is, then I wouldn't have the need to make this criticism.

Anyway, I’m not sure why the discussion here is being framed as an issue with veganism.

Most posts were talking about how killing animals is unethical or immoral etc.

This applies equally to all moral claims, including the ones communists make about capitalism.

Communists(or at least Marxists) do not make a single moral claim against capitalism, for the same reason we don't use religious criticism against capitalism.

Should we cease to criticize imperialistic bombings of civilians on the grounds that we are “cloaking our desire in moralism”?

No because our desire is simply that we don't want people to be bombed. There is no need to cloak anything in moralism here.

It seems like humans are just wired to conceptualize things are moral and immortal, thing you are supposed and not supposed to do. As far as I know most (all?) human cultures are like that.

Like all ideologies, morals as well as morality itself is born from the material circumstances of human existence. Morals dont exist as a real material thing outside of human thought. They are simply human desires that are not presented as desires but as some mystical entity that is ordained by God or Reason or some other metaphysical concept.

Is there a point of going again it?

When you know something is false, are you going to keep believing it because everyone else does?

In what way is he a terrible writer?

Removed by mod

Marx is not a terrible writer. He is very precise and has an incredible economy with words. He's also not an economist, he basically said economics is an ideology. In Capital he showed how the categories of political economy like money, profit, wages, value etc all arise from social relations between people, while economics studies these as though they are facts of nature.

I would really suggest putting in the effort to read Marx, it is entirely worthwhile IF you are genuinely interested in communism. It's really not that difficult. It may be boring, but you need to put effort into it and engage with the text.

Removed by mod

Like I said, "leftcoms" are an online thing today. There is no leftcommunist party or movement. We are just communists. Lenin's criticism is of the German leftcommunists in the 1910s who rejected the role of the party, which goes explicitly against what Marx advocated, and against what historical experience has shown to be a necessity.

Criticism of Marxism-Leninism - https://www.marxists.org/archive/bordiga/works/1952/stalin.htm

Removed by mod

You posted a polemic that criticizes the tactics of the Dutch-German leftcommunists. Can you explain how it is relevant here?

Sure, and Marx changed and tweaked some of his views throughout his life

What are those views? I changed my views too. I used to be an anarchist, then an ML.

All I am asking is, what do you believe in as a leftcom, or as someone who “identifies online as a leftcom”?

Do you want me to list out all the talking points on historical materialism, the role of the party, critique of commodity production, criticism of anarchism, criticism of other socialisms, criticism of economics, criticism of morality, criticism of religion, role of the state etc? Here's a reading list - https://www.reddit.com/r/Bruhinternational/comments/m53hon/official_rbruhinternational_reading_list/

Removed by mod

I already gave you the answer about my views. You seem to think I have an "opinion" or some original ideas. I don't.

Why bother reading Marx when you can just ask for people's opinion of Marx on the internet right?

Okay, well marx also developed himself overtime.

There is no shortage of people claiming to "improve" or "revise" or "develop" Marxism. None of them have come up with any critique of Marxism that is valid.

There is a difference between early marx and later Marx.

What is the difference?

How is this too much for me to ask you what you believe in?

You're the guy who made a thread telling people to read theory, now you want me to give you a condensed lecture on Marxism in a shitposting forum?

Removed by mod

lol you made a thread telling people to read theory and you don't even know what the views and aims of non-ML communists are? You know, people like Marx, Engels or Lenin?