deleted by creator
deleted by creator
He condemned Hamas and Oct 7th when it happened lol. For me the dividing line would be recognizing the Al Aqsa Flood as genuine expression of colonized people under military dictatorship fighting for liberation, rather than an act of “terrorism” against “innocent civillians” (which is what Lula characterised it as in his condemnation).
Though it’s a different context, I think in State and Revolution, Lenin says something similar, that the real mark of a revolutionary (or something along those lines) is not just in recognizing the class struggle, but embracing the dictatorship of the proletariat.
I don’t have books that disprove your idea besides general Marxist and Maoist works, but approaching from a Maoist perspective, I would critique the first part of your thoughts because I think it falls way to deeply into great man theory.
If the communist movement faltered because of the death of people like Fred Hampton, then the movement was weak to begin with and probably would have faltered anyway had those people stayed alive/true to the cause. Successful communist movements do not rely on strong role models, as you put it. You can have all the strong role models you want but it really means nothing if: a) the internal strength of the vanguard party is weak, b) the relationship between the vanguard party and the oppressed masses is weak, c) the unity of the united front is weak, d) the conditions necessary for revolution simply aren’t present (crises, specifically)
and in a formal sense, by pushing parents and teachers that would pass those revolutionary behaviors and lifestyles down to their students to the periphery of livelihood and often killing them through social murder.
Don’t know what you mean by this, you could either elaborate using more accessible/clear language, or I can accept it if the question isn’t meant for me lol.
It helps, but does not determine the success of communist movements, nor should it be the primary factor in appraising whether a communist movement is near success. What should be analyzed, discussed, and improved, is the internal strength of the vanguard and its relationship to the masses. Because that is really what will determine whether a revolution happens, whether a party/movement can weather the storm of fascism, etc. Not the internal strength of BRICS…
The masses are the drivers of history, not the polarity of the world. Your faith should be in the masses, instead of Russia, BRICS, and geopolitics.
Federating was a mistake lmaooo
Given this place is so heavily ML, how do you tolerate sticking around here? I’m just curious because pretty much everything political that’s posted here would contradict your worldview
First time I’ve seen a leftcom on this site lol.
Kind of interesting that the name works though, considering that the jacobins were bourgeois liberal revolutionaries.