Attached: 1 image
Bluesky suspending antifascist researchers for sharing publicly available information about literal nazis.
Should be no surprise considering bsky constantly protects nazis, the far right, and all flavors of bigotry at the expense of Palestinians and trans women.
Fortunately, their information already spread so far and wide that at least half of the Blood Tribe nazis lost their jobs following the mass doxx. Chris Pohlhaus, leader of BT, estimated financial losses at over $2 million lol. Happy holidays!
See, here’s the problem with that. Marx’s Address to the Communist League clearly is in agreement with my particular political programme. Which, no shit it should, I cribbed it from him.
There are, in particular, two passages that are extremely important to note and apply to the American context.
“The relationship of the revolutionary workers’ party to the petty-bourgeois democrats is this: it cooperates with them against the party which they aim to overthrow; it opposes them wherever they wish to secure their own position.”
This is most likely the passage that you are misinterpreting. To cooperate against the party they wish to overthrow does not apply to the national Democratic party because the national Democratic party does not wish to overthrow the Republican party. They wish to consolidate the gains of the Republican party for big capital. They say this repeatedly. To paraphrase, “America needs a strong Republican party.” - Nancy Pelosi.
If anything, this address would have us helping the Republicans, as they are the party that is most represented by the American petite-bourgious.This is, of course, a gross misapplication of theory because both parties are inevitably primarily representatives of big capital. We are not in a German 1850’s situation where there is a party that wishes to overthrow the Kaiser, and establish a republic, we are in a situation in which the liberal republic has already been established and centralized.
To whit,
“But they themselves must contribute most to their final victory, by informing themselves of their own class interests, by taking up their independent political position as soon as possible, by not allowing themselves to be misled by the hypocritical phrases of the democratic petty bourgeoisie into doubting for one minute the necessity of an independently organized party of the proletariat.”
This is the penultimate point of the piece and where we reside, which is pretty damn clear, and exactly what I was advocating for in the previous post. I advise you to actually read what you claim to have read in the historical context that it exists in, in order to not misapply it to our historical political situation.
But you can do whatever you want, it is unlikely that you are actually a member of any party I am a part of.
The Democratic Party is not a person. Please set aside the Great Man Theory of history, which I see you have reskinned into your Great Egregore Theory. The Democratic Party is an organisation, which is subject to material pressures. We, the workers, ultimately create all material pressures. The Democratic Party responds to the balance of workers and bourgeois. When the workers are unprincipled, and vulnerable to propaganda, money begins to speak louder, and the politicians listen. When the workers are strong, united, and active in each and every avenue of politics, money is silenced, and the overton window shifts left.
Your primitive notions of good and evil individuals cannot be applied to national policy. You must switch to a dialectical determinist model, so you can truly understand what is going on. You can already see how dialectical determinism has begun to change New York for the better - the people are tired of fascism, they want change, and change follows. Tell them change is impossible, and you will make it so.
See, here’s the problem with that. Marx’s Address to the Communist League clearly is in agreement with my particular political programme. Which, no shit it should, I cribbed it from him.
There are, in particular, two passages that are extremely important to note and apply to the American context.
“The relationship of the revolutionary workers’ party to the petty-bourgeois democrats is this: it cooperates with them against the party which they aim to overthrow; it opposes them wherever they wish to secure their own position.”
This is most likely the passage that you are misinterpreting. To cooperate against the party they wish to overthrow does not apply to the national Democratic party because the national Democratic party does not wish to overthrow the Republican party. They wish to consolidate the gains of the Republican party for big capital. They say this repeatedly. To paraphrase, “America needs a strong Republican party.” - Nancy Pelosi.
If anything, this address would have us helping the Republicans, as they are the party that is most represented by the American petite-bourgious.This is, of course, a gross misapplication of theory because both parties are inevitably primarily representatives of big capital. We are not in a German 1850’s situation where there is a party that wishes to overthrow the Kaiser, and establish a republic, we are in a situation in which the liberal republic has already been established and centralized.
To whit,
“But they themselves must contribute most to their final victory, by informing themselves of their own class interests, by taking up their independent political position as soon as possible, by not allowing themselves to be misled by the hypocritical phrases of the democratic petty bourgeoisie into doubting for one minute the necessity of an independently organized party of the proletariat.”
This is the penultimate point of the piece and where we reside, which is pretty damn clear, and exactly what I was advocating for in the previous post. I advise you to actually read what you claim to have read in the historical context that it exists in, in order to not misapply it to our historical political situation.
But you can do whatever you want, it is unlikely that you are actually a member of any party I am a part of.
Hivemind fallacy.
The Democratic Party is not a person. Please set aside the Great Man Theory of history, which I see you have reskinned into your Great Egregore Theory. The Democratic Party is an organisation, which is subject to material pressures. We, the workers, ultimately create all material pressures. The Democratic Party responds to the balance of workers and bourgeois. When the workers are unprincipled, and vulnerable to propaganda, money begins to speak louder, and the politicians listen. When the workers are strong, united, and active in each and every avenue of politics, money is silenced, and the overton window shifts left.
Your primitive notions of good and evil individuals cannot be applied to national policy. You must switch to a dialectical determinist model, so you can truly understand what is going on. You can already see how dialectical determinism has begun to change New York for the better - the people are tired of fascism, they want change, and change follows. Tell them change is impossible, and you will make it so.