this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2024
505 points (93.5% liked)

Flippanarchy

214 readers
350 users here now

Flippant Anarchism. A lighter take on social criticism with the aim of agitation.

Post humorous takes on capitalism and the states which prop it up. Memes, shitposting, screenshots of humorous good takes, discussions making fun of some reactionary online, it all works.

This community is anarchist-flavored. Reactionary takes won't be tolerated.

Don't take yourselves too seriously. Serious posts go to [email protected]

Rules


  1. If you post images with text, endeavour to provide the alt-text

  2. If the image is a crosspost from an OP, Provide the source.

  3. Absolutely no right-wing jokes. This includes "Anarcho"-Capitalist concepts.

  4. Absolutely no redfash jokes. This includes anything that props up the capitalist ruling classes pretending to be communists.

  5. No bigotry whatsoever. See instance rules.

  6. This is an anarchist comm. You don't have to be an anarchist to post, but you should at least understand what anarchism actually is. We're not here to educate you.

founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

My point is that the "war" was a side effect of the extraction process. Moreover, using modern terms like Global South and Imperial Core is shorthand to convey the meaning more effectively

But people are utilizing the "short hand" of imperial core to validate conflicts like in Ukraine as anti-imperialism. Which seems to be a byproduct of an extraordinary process.

Finally, it isn't antithetical to Lenin to understand that certain Imperialist powers can be dominant in a given period of time.

Even if there is a dominant power, capitalism demands there still be a competition for extraction to maintain growth among the great powers.

I just don't really see how people are validating the support of the competing great powers, even if it is critical support. It just seems like tailism to me.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Even if there is a dominant power, capitalism demands there still be a competition for extraction to maintain growth among the great powers.

Hence why Imperialism defeats itself.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Hence why Imperialism defeats itself.

Right, I'm not defending imperialism though. It just seems that leftist shouldn't be supporting the most reactionary views of the masses.

Supporting regimes like Russia is dismissing the social struggle of potential revolutionary voices at home and abroad.

"The tendency of tailism can be observed in the dismissive and confrontational attitudes some on the left take to matters of social importance—women’s struggles, LGBT+ issues, racism, etc.—that are adjacent to class struggle. We have surely all heard it said countless times that certain issues are “a distraction from class struggle,” or “not of any concern to the working class.” It surely does not need pointing out that the working class comprises people of all gender backgrounds, sexual orientations, races, and ethnicities, and these struggles are of direct and immediate concern to them and their lives. In fact these struggles are inextricably linked to class struggle and should always be regarded as such.

As communists, we assert that the primary contradiction that shapes and defines the world is that of class struggle: between the bourgeoisie and the working class. However, it does not follow from this that our work or our analysis must disregard all other contradictions and struggles as irrelevant. Quite the contrary: we must seek to unite struggles against all forms of exploitation in the revolutionary fight for communism. This is the very nature of class struggle.

In addition, Lenin critiques the narrow focus of economism, which he describes thus: “The Economists [limit] the tasks of the working class to an economic struggle for higher wages and better working conditions, etc., asserting that the political struggle [is] the business of the liberal bourgeoisie.”[2] He asserts that the fight for revolutionary gains must be waged on a political as well as an economic front. The task of communists is to unite the working class in a revolutionary movement, not to limit our focus to mere economic demands, which are in any case quantitative and not transformative."

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There isn't really a space that anything on the subject of "critical support" can be discussed without breaking rules one way or the other. My only purpose was to elaborate on a few things, I'm uninterested in "debating."

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Fair enough, though I apologize if it seems as if I was confrontational in any way. That wasn't my intent.

If you do have any contemporary readings that go into the subject I would love to give them a read. I'm prob a bit older than most people on this site, and I'm really just interested to see how the divergence between my views as an older leftist and younger leftist have developed over time.

Thanks for your time.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Since you're asking about Marxism, I suggest asking over in a Marxist comm. There are a few on dbzer0, Hexbear, Lemmygrad, Lemmy.ml, etc so you can pick your audience. Just trying to play within the rules of this comm.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Cool, thanks. I'll have to check out dbzer0 and lemmygrad. Still kinda learning about navigating Lemmy all together. Old man brain isn't as spry as it used to be when it comes to social media.

Have a good one!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago