If the concept of “Pan-Leftism” isn’t in some way COINTELPRO, I would be very strongly surprised.

Everywhere it’s enforced becomes nothing more than a liberal echo chamber, wherein discussions that inconvenience liberal ideology or biases get shut down. Thus continually drifting the talking point of the group towards the comfort zone of left-liberals.

Who are these left-liberals who benefit so strongly from Pan-Leftism? To put it bluntly, Anarchists, Social-Democrats, Trotskyists, and all other counter-revolutionary lifestylists. These are the groups that dominate discussions in these spheres, these are the people who get the final say on important issues. When Marxists get established in these communities, they get pushed out by the left-liberals. Often on illegitimate grounds, with strawman arguments and vast misunderstandings on Marxist stances.

Supposed “comrades” are, currently, fully backing the western propaganda out of Poland about Russia “”“targetting”“” Poland with a missile. These same supposed “comrades” refuse to acknowledge that backing Ukraine demands the defence of Nazism. They further believe defending Russia, China, the DPRK, or any other enemy of western imperialism means you’re “anti-freedom”, or otherwise against democracy.

When people of differing viewpoints assemble together, the ones with the most to lose from revolutionary speech are the ones who have the loudest voices. This is inherent, aside from having a revolutionary vanguard to purge counter-revolutionaries there is no way around it. When anti-capitalists gather, the ones who benefit the most from the discussion are those who are the most disenfranchised by the capitalist system. Such as minorities, the LGBTQIA+ community, and so-on. “Pan-Leftism” inherently silences these voices, simply because allowing them to speak threatens the privileged straight whites who do not truly want a fair world, but would rather have a world that treats specifically them better. It should be no surprise that when Cuba abolished the nuclear family, these communities hardly even talked about it. And those who did controlled the narrative to either delegitimize the great victory for minority rights, or to delegitimize Cuba as being a communist state. (I.E. saying Cuba is liberalizing). Nor should it be a surprise that these communities often celebrate Rojava, but rarely mentioned the Donbas until the beginning of the war in Ukraine. Further, it shouldn’t be a surprise that talk of the Donbas is mostly oriented towards calling it a “Russian satellite”, rather than a revolutionary struggle against the genocide of their people.

Pan-Leftism, if it can even be called that if they exclude Marxists so easily, is a scourge on the western left that must be opposed where found. There are many roadblocks in the west in the struggle towards revolution, this is one of them. As long as new leftists flock to pan-leftist communities while they’re learning the ropes of revolution, they will be tainted by counter-revolutionary talking points with no means of understanding why these talking points should be avoided.

  • Kultronx@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    There are many contradictions. No one is born a Communist. No one is perfect and all are prone to errors and deviations. One has to look at this dialectically.

    Online “communities” (are they even real communities? I don’t believe they are) are hardly representative of the real world. I don’t spend any time in any of them anymore except maybe this place and another, and the discussion is all among comrades. From what I’ve seen, nothing substantial in real life comes from online discussion alone. People face to face are generally more receptive to ideas and reason, especially when it comes to material conditions that actually matter to them personally. It is not always easy to see the forest for the trees.

    Like you even said, there is a ton of anti-communist propaganda shoved in our faces constantly; if our path is the correct one, it is our duty to patiently demonstrate through actions (almost impossible to do online) rather than words alone.

    Also, the topic of foreign policy is rife with contradictions due to the nature of states and many have not spent years analyzing history, geopolitics, diplomacy and trends like some of us may have. I believe it’s best to keep things on a more local level and concentrate on workers struggles (guided by Marxism).

    As Marxists, we know that the only unchangeable fact is that everything is constantly changing. We have a long intellectual history standing behind us. I hope to guide people to see this in my praxis.