What is this?
Well I intended it to be some kind of organization but it’s probably going to be more personal blog since I like the credibility of other communist and the ideology(International communism) that I’m working with is not well established.I will try to post a new article every month about the left and politics in general from the perspective of international communist.
About the author.
I’m writing under the pseudonym Sovietfuntime because I really do not feel like releasing too much personal information about myself but it’s bound to come out eventually.
What is International Communism?
It’s a kind of communism that’s broadly anti-Stalinist, anti-nationalist and anti-Trotskyist.Although international communists can be considered pro-national liberation since many of us believe that national liberation was a way of developing capitalism in feudal nations during the 20th century but reject national liberation as a way of establishing the dictatorship of the proletariat.
This is going to be me just responding to some of the arguments made in signalfire’s atrocious attempt to critique the Loren Goldner article on the Chinese Revolution (both of the articles shall be linked at the bottom of the post). Now I’m not going to pretend that this is a full critique of signalfire’s article but I think I respond rather well to the arguments that I chose to respond to.
“What Goldner (following a long the left communist tradition) characterizes as “bourgeois revolutions with red flags” was in fact the core of the real global confrontation between imperialist capital, the proletariat, and semi-proletariat of the periphery over the course of the 20th century.
In the concrete circumstances of the global imperialist social formation (not in the fantastic abstracted mock up of “pure capitalism” which is so dearly beloved by left communists and Trotskyites) it was the wage dependent classes in the imperialist metropole who became integrated and co-opted by capital and a world peasantry in the bloody course of proletarianization through super-exploitation to the point of genocide which became the vanguard of struggle against capital precisely because it was the focal point of the relations of exploitation and not a metropolitan proletariat increasingly bourgeoisieified by super-profits of exterminatory primitive accumulation.a world peasantry in the bloody course of proletarianization through super-exploitation to the point of genocide which became the vanguard of struggle against capital”
I’m not going to deny that the peasantry was oppressed but what did the peasantry accomplish other than establishing capitalist nation states? I have to ask this because these people are going to make a big deal about false the idea that the Chinese Revolution and other revolutions like it were simply bourgeois revolutions with red flags then they should be able to backup such a claim with evidence (that evidence being the establishment of socialism or at least some kind of dictatorship of the proletariat.) But they aren’t. Incidentally it was the German and Russian left communists (including those famed for their “democracy”) who were at the forefront of advocating wholesale repression against the peasants which whatever its other flaws was quite simply untenable as a practical line and reflective of their mechanical and idealist interpretation of Marxism.
1. The Dutch German tendency of left communism did not fetishize democracy. 2. Revolutionary terror is apparently too much for maoists when it comes to silencing dissidents among the peasantry….oh the fuckin irony, You would think that after stopping all over the Tibetan’s peasantry for years on end they wouldn’t have a problem with crushing peasants when it’s convenient for them but no.
“It was precisely Mao who brilliantly applying Marxism to the complexities of a real class structure (not the class binary found in the reproduction schema of Capital’s algebra) united a scientific political line derived from the class experience of the proletariat with the revolutionary energy of peasant and declassed masses experiencing proletarianization thorough the corrosion of the world market.”
Reducing Marxism to populist slogans, opportunism and class collaborationism is very scientific and oh so superior to all that math that Marx had to do in order to create an accurate analysis of capital. I guess if we all just ignore everything that was written in Capital we can be REAL Marxists like Mao.
“Its not entirely remiss to point out here that Trotskyites and left communists have rarely if ever built independent and armed proletarian power-they are much more adept at stringent critique of the tactical compromises of the “Stalinists” who have done so in fact.”
Yeah were all really impressed by you Stalinists getting all those people(even though they weren’t proles) to revolt but what exactly were the result said revolutions… Oh right the establishment of nation states that centralized capital, preserved the value form,exploited the grown proletariat and eventually sold out to foreign capitalists. Bravo you guys are the true revolutionaries.