Disclaimer: I adore my anarchist comrades and I don’t write for a newspaper, I have in fact never even read one.
I just find it funny how the sectarianism rule isn’t really a thing when it comes to trots.
They’re too busy writing newspapers that no one will read.
That shouldn’t really be an issue though since all the ml’s are busy creating new parties (some guy in the last one thinks we should implement urban farms after the revolution, but my group thinks it’s important to use the implementation of urban farms as a step of taking away power from the landholding class before the inevitable revolution)
And the anarchists are of course busy… Meeting in councils talking about how they should structure a council without a vote? Building parallel power structures (smoke weed with my friends)? Playing in a kindergarten? I dunno what the leftist stereotype of anarchists are.
I dunno what the leftist stereotype of anarchists are.
Nowadays it’s mostly about them suddenly transforming into John Bolton the second foreign policy is brought up
:groundskeeper-Willie: Tankies and trots are natural enemies. Like socdems and trots. Or anarchists and trots. Or MLs and trots. Or trots and other trots.
You know what, I think you are right. I don’t know any Trots personally but there are plenty of them out there IRL that are cool and good (Michael Hudson and China Mieville come to mind). I’ve also read individual Trots as they often have good article and essays. They run the world’s best website, marxists.org; and IIRC they keep International Publishers going.
I feel similar about leftcoms (doubt we have any here, either). Dunk on some takes they might have, maybe allow for ACTUAL, thoughtful critique of positions, too. But no uncharitable generalizations.
I would love the rule to be that there’s no ripping on any genuine leftist movement in general, only ripping on specific takes by individuals.
Yeah this site is kinda weird about trots. I know trots that do way more than anarchists and have better takes and vice versa. Most ML’s I know are armchair socialists but that’s not reason to dunk on every ML.
Some people on here think that there’s some specific tendency that, if they subscribe to, will push the socialism button.
You know what, I think you are right. I don’t know any Trots personally but there are plenty of them out there IRL that are cool and good
Cool and good until you say the word China and then the conversation turns into a complete shitshow.
Also every single article they have ever written has something in it about “stalinists”. It is in fact the only way to tell something was written by a trot compared to any other ideological branch.
it’s kind of hard when i genuinely came across a trotskyist pamphlet this week
They do be writing newspapers. I really don’t get it, they should be influencers (Instagram pages are the modern pamphlet)
One of the things with trots is that they’re a bit too committed to book worship, and don’t translate the fact that influencing via media in the 19th century is not the same thing as influencing via media in the 21st century. You’re absolutely right that the modern newspaper is no longer an actual newspaper.
i think if there was a trot who really complained we’d probably stop, but they simply are not dedicated enough to posting to be on here
I’m part of a smallish local trot organisation whose members are grounded in reality and bring interesting conversations to the table. I don’t really understand why everyone here digs into trots, I assume it’s all part of a years-long inside joke on the site and I interpret it as good faith joshing around.
…That is how I’m supposed to interpret it, right?
It probably depends on the trots you know. I hang out with an ex-Trot org that dropped the Trot label because Trots were generally way too harsh on smaller Marxist revolutions (e.g. Cuba, Vietnam, Laos etc). I also know a lot of SAlt members (both current and former) that I mention elsewhere in the thread. I think trots can vary quite wildly, both individually and as organisations.
I’m generally okay with Trots but my god, the articles they put out can be really grating sometimes. Keep them on track and they can tell you a dozen interesting things about current-day struggles and labour movements. But let them stray a little and they’ll just talk about how workers need to form their own rank-and-file movements free of collaborationist union leadership (which like, sure I guess, but union membership and vibrancy isn’t exactly thriving throughout the world right now and I just don’t think unions can have the same degree of power under financial capitalism that has exported industry to other countries so there’s less means of production to even seize), and how Stalinists are destroying every good thing on the planet, and how China is secretly an even worse imperialist than America. I’ve spent nearly two years reading the stuff they put out and I feel like it would be pretty easy to set up an AI script to just write a solid third of their articles for them, so I hope they’re getting in on that to save themselves some effort on the weekly China Bad article so they can focus on the better stuff that I know they can and do regularly write.
I appreciate that the online versions of most left-wing ideologies tend to spend a lot of time in the past for a variety of reasons - things seemed much more dynamic and changeable back then; the world is very difficult to understand and predict right now in anything but general trajectories; arguing online about past events is easier than going outside and actually doing stuff; most of the OG thinkers that you have to read to understand their works happened to be about a century or so ago and there’s not a ton of big English-language communist works nowadays; etc - but of all the major left ideologies, Trots seem to be the ones who spend the most time in the past, and with ways of organizing and disseminating information that are built on the assumptions of a world that no longer really exists. They’re kind of like the grandpas of the left. I can’t really hate or even really dislike them that much, but you’re not expecting a lot of energy and movement in that sphere compared to say, the still-surviving ML countries, or the vibrant and energetic anarchist sphere.
I don’t directly have a problem with individual SAlt members in Australia, but they have a problem with me since I say too many nice things about the USSR (or even Cuba) so they’ve stopped trying to recruit me or sell me newspapers. That said, I’ve heard pretty sketchy things from ex-SAlt members about the internal social dynamics (which isn’t unique to them, it happens a lot in any closed off org/group with a few older powerful members and a lot of university students).
This an an ANARCHO-STALINIST Lemmy instance. No Trotskyists allowed!
ANARCHO-STALINIST
Unironically the hexbear party line lmao. Drizzle in some weird obscure third name for the nerds out there and you’ve got it.
Nah Mao is too well-known. It’s gotta be some weird french dude from the 15th century.
hits bong yeah dude I’m a Marxist-Leninist-bonapartist, not the napoleon one though, this is another napoleon he’s from vietnam, wrote like three pamphlets about digging ditches and then burned down a local post office, which he thought harbored american GI’s. He did this in the 90’s, the dude was integral to leftist thought in my high school.
That’s kind of where I am these days. MLs had a lot of good ideas but the collapse of nation-states and the neoliberal world order under the weight of global warming will probably create fertile ground for anarchist theory and praxis, and I think we need to find a synthesis stripped of the factionalism of the 20th century to be prepared for what is likely coming.
6 months into a new account:
“Calpurnia, the Ides of Merch have come.”
“Aye, Seizer, but not gone.”
rip in peace
Can’t wait for the next alt
