Revleft Refugee

Adolescent fools that call for armed insurrection and post-revolutionary show trials without discernment of current circumstance and without anyone mature enough or grounded enough to challenge their puerile and dangerous fantasies.

Childish idiots who presume to call themselves Marxists without understanding anything about Marxism or having put it the necessary years of study and experience to adopt that honorable title.

Individuals who, out of ignorance or malice, slander and defame the memory of Karl Marx and other great revolutionaries who gave their lives fighting to educate, raise our proletarian class consciousness and teach us about the necessity for our own emancipation.

Ultra-radical posers who rarely hesitated to indiscriminately express bigoted sentiments against religion without regard for the long and honorable history of leftist radicalism among people of faith.

Dogmatists and partyless sectarians who sneer at the ecumenical basis of genuine proletarian communism.

Half-baked, incompetent moderators who share those vices and encourage suspicious newcomers to initiate sterile and superstitious arguments about ghosts and UFO's.

Suspicious newcomers who pair up to congratulate each other for their worthless contributions and impolitic assertions.

Almost every time I raised a reasoned objection against these crypto-reactionaries who adorn the profiles with heroic-looking avatars and ridiculous, egocentric eponyms I was assailed with accusations of trolling, of trying to derail the discussion, of being a pro-capitalist liberal, etc. and was frequently threatened with 'restriction' or banning.

All of that leads me to believe that Revleft is a nest of agent provocateurs and, yes, "fanboys" who are easy pickings to be sheared like dumb, docile sheep.

Wheew! Got that out of my system!

It's my opinion that Stalinism, like right-wing conservatism, is a sign of abject political immaturity.

The most immediate--and perhaps superficial--explanation I can offer for the popularity of Stalin worship among many Revleft loonies is the appeal of Stalinist iconography; a grotesque combination of neoclassicism and Medieval Russian Orthodox art rendered in cartoon format.

The author makes only a passing reference to De Leon (hardly an analysis!). He states this in regard to De Leon:

While agree with his inference that De Leon contributed significantly to the discussion of syndicalism, I disagree with his characterization of De Leon.

De Leon was a disciplinarian and was quite willing to reach out to anyone as long a certain fundamental principles of political economy and sociology were not compromised.

No doubt his uncompromising attitude regarding Marxian economics, the class struggle and organizational discipline earned him the reproach of many.

Elsewhere in this forum I contributed my 2 cents worth to a discussion about council communism and syndicalism.

Cheers and Warm Fraternal Embrace!

I suppose it depends on how you define the terms or if you consider them synonymous. I don't.

I define "authoritarian" as someone who believes in the arbitrary, non-consensual imposition of rule, whereas a "disciplinarian" is someone who maintains that genuine discipline, collective & individual, is self-imposed, voluntary and democratic.

You will never find real De Leonists talking about "leaders" or wishing to inflict "leaders" upon its adherents. In fact, if you study De Leonist literature carefully (especially the SLP's) you will never find it referring to its elected officials as leaders. We believe the concept of leadership to be obsolete, bourgeois and antagonistic to the true cause of socialism.

Believe me, I've lived long enough and seen enough to state with absolute certainty that De Leonism is the most misunderstood doctrine among the present-day radicals of the world. To the detriment of the cause of socialism it has been unjustly maligned and belittled since De Leon's day.

A fraternal embrace.

Thanks.

BTW, I'm not a member of the SLP or of any other political party. Not because I wouldn't want to but because there is no SLP to join or any other that comes even close to it.

But I'm always hopeful that the events of Chicago 1905 will be repeated and that one great union will be reborn and that it, in turn, will set afoot a new party of labor that will shake capitalist rule to its very foundation.

If history indeed repeats itself for the capitalist, it must surely repeat itself for us.

A fraternal embrace.

Yeah, I can think of one recent instance where I was edified by one contribution: Someone posted a video of a French professor explaining the meaning and merits of demarchy. I think I learned from that video what I should have known years ago in college, when a very enlightened political philosophy teacher tried to get me to read an extra-curricular book about demarchy.

Demarchy is a valuable concept that I now realize should probably be a part of our future industrial republic of labor.

A fraternal embrace

Apt metaphor!

I doubt my rant describes you in any significant way. Or maybe, to be fair, it describes you, me and just about anyone else at certain points in our lives.

I wrote it without malice.

A fraternal embrace.

How so?

I think I understand the visualization you describe. I concede that the vagueness of the phrase I used easily lends itself to that.

If you had to, what formal name would you give to a classless society that describes your own vision of socialism?

I was looking for another answer, something like the "republic of emancipated labor" or some other such bombast.