So I'm a Marxist-Leninist.

[Zanzibar]

Who hates me?

oh yeah, check out www.speak.cc some time, there's a a forum for anarcho sydicalists but no anarcho-syndicalists on the site. Just social democrats and marxists.

At anyrate I used to be a anarcho-syndicalist, and in fact I admire the libretarian nature of the movement. I know many people in my situation who think anarcho-syndicalists and marxists should work together. That doesn't seem likely to happen though.

Anyway, cheers

[lucky_charms]

You must enter a message when posting.

[Guest]

marxist-leninist and anarchists usually are not fond of each other. council communists (anti-bolsheviks) and anarcho-syndcalists are actually very similar though. though i am a trot who isnt fond of lenin for what he has done, basically the fucking up of what could have been the beginning oof the end of capitalism, i have great respect for anarchists for i tend to have a very anarchist philosophy though i dont agree with certain aspects of anarchism.

[|Y|]

wtf, which guest are you? guest # 2302893?

[PatheticKammy]

edit

[Zanzibar]

If I may ask, what made you switch from being a syndicalist to a Marxist-Leninist? Plus, if you'd like, I'll challenge you to a debate, hopefully set you straight.

Anarchism is opportunist at best. While I admire it's libretarian ideas it is impractical. The very idea of spontaneous revolution is absurd. I am a firm believer that theory must come before revolution, or the revolution is bound to fail. Just as the Paris Commune failed. Thus I have serious issues with Bakunin and other anarchists.

The idea of federation also seems appealing, but is highly ineffective. I believe state power must be siezed in order to destroy class antagonisms, and be used as an instrument of the revolution. Additionaly central planing and democratic centralism are also neccessary to ensure the survival of the revolution.

I used to look at spain as a glorious example, but now I don't really. It's all well and good to say the syndicalists took power, but the capitalists in the region had already fled before that.

[Morpheus]

The Russian Revolution Proves Leninism is Bullshit

[Guest]

The Russian Revolution Proves Leninism is Bullshit

Thats pretty lame

[Morpheus]

You have a refutation of the text at the link?

[Mind_Cemetary]

Who hates me?

I don't hate you, just your ideology.

The very idea of spontaneous revolution is absurd.

Since when have anarchists advocated "spontaneous revolution"?

I am a firm believer that theory must come before revolution, or the revolution is bound to fail.

Thank you for stating the obvious.

Thus I have serious issues with Bakunin and other anarchists.

You have a problem with anarchists due to opinions that we don't even hold?

I believe state power must be siezed in order to destroy class antagonisms, and be used as an instrument of the revolution.

The state, by definition, is counter-revolutionary. It is a means by which a minority class asserts its dominance over a majority class.

[Oi! Boy]

The state, by definition, is counter-revolutionary. It is a means by which a minority class asserts its dominance over a majority class.

Bakunin once said something very similar too the above qoute. "Then there will be no government, no state, but if there is a state in existance there will also be governors and slaves." Taken from Statism and Anarchy.

Marx also happened to have responded. "This merely means disapperead, there will no longer be any state in the present political sense of the word..." In more notes he goes on to say, "Asinine! This is democratic verbiage, political drivel! An election is a political form, both in the smallest Russian commune and in the Artel. The character of the election does not depend on this description, (Bakunin's) but on the economic basis, the economic interrelations of the electors, and as soon as the functions have ceased to be political, then there exists (1) no governmental function; (2) the distributions of general functions has become a business matter which does not afford room for domination; (3) the election has none of its present political character."

I used to look at spain as a glorious example, but now I don't really. It's all well and good to say the syndicalists took power, but the capitalists in the region had already fled before that.

Zanzibar, i do believe the CNT and others during the civial war did in fact plan years in advance. Me thinks it was someone like Chomsly in not him.

[MolokoSleaze]

come on, now criticisms on how the state will always be evil, now matter who runs it, nothing on how the economic situation matters nothing, the state is still gonna be evil?

im bored at school and looking for something to do. plus, this debate sounds fun and educational, something the los angeles unified school district has been able to do since i learned how to write and read.

[Guest]

motherfucking fagot anrchist motherfuckin ho's

[Guest]

espcially morpheus, what a motherfucking bitch...talks about marxism as if he knows all. what a bitch, he hasnt half of the slightest fucking clue as to what marxism is...fuck thay motherfucking fagot, thats right fucking fagot. you have no idea what marxism is or what it pertains too. asshole. the idea that marx is total complete bullshit is complete bullshit itself. the fact that you reason marx is total bullshit is total bullshit itself is complete bullshit. marx studied captalism for years and you discount his say is compelte bullshit. what a fucking fagot








fagot

[Guest]

let me guess, yuou discount his say because hes a communist. and you know that authoruty is soooo god damn bad. fuck anytype of authority or any experince any typr of field. and youll say that he is bullshit buit you have never....NEVER backed it up in any post...fucking moron!!!!!! (that i have seen[posts], and i have seen a few, even for a moronic marxist who doesnt know up from down)