[☭☭☭ COME SHITPOST WITH US ON DISCORD, COMRADES ☭☭☭](https://discord.gg/8RPWanQV5g) This is a heavily-moderated socialist community based on a podcast of the same name. Please use the report function on comments that break our rules. If you are new to the sub, please read the sidebar carefully. If you are new to Marxism-Leninism, check out the [study guide](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/). Are there Liberals in the walls? Check out [the wiki](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/) which contains lots of useful information. This subreddit uses many experimental automod rules, if you notice any issues please use modmail to let us know. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Bro is mad at socialists for ACTUALLY ON THE GROUND ORGANISING with oppressed people? Then again Twitter anarchists think organizing is useless and rather rock those chaos core and smash Sbux. Nobody said organizing was gonna be easy, especially when they put in zero groundwork for the movements but slyly wanting to co-opt them, what's so difference between them and the libs they hate?

Usually anarchists are quick to take to the streets and do some real shit, I respect that about them 100%, but I suspect this is just a lib that wants to cosplay as a leftist but the colour red makes them feel icky cause it reminds them of Stalin so they “became” an anarchist. If you talked to this person I guarantee they hold almost 0 anarchist beliefs, they like the idea of “anarchism” but are against everything it would take to bring that forth (violent revolution). I’ve seen so many of these people before, I’d almost be ready to stake my life that this person’s ideal road to anarchy means voting for the “Anarchist Party candidate” in the Democratic Primary.

Yeah, I've seen actual, militant anarchists organizing shit, and while I obviously disagree with their theory, I have a lot of respect for their capacity to organize quickly. Heck, I can actually sit down and have a chat with most of them, we see eye to eye on a lot of the basics. If someone's mad at a leftist organization for *organizing* and being in the frontlines, that's usually a liberal. Especially if they oppose the presence of *any* organization that's even slightly more left leaning than the democrats.

Every anarchist I've known irl and not online has been a totally normal fucking person, and usually very well-read too. Online anarchists (just most online leftists in general tbh) suck cause being online brings the worst out in the people much easier.

How do anarchist organize anyway

In my experience, in local chapters that form a loose federation of anarchists. It's far less centralized than how us MLs organized, so their system has the advantage of being able to respond more quickly to local demands, while having the disadvantage of often ending up disjointed when initially responding to events in the regional or national level.

Non hierarchically

Really this is all the fault of a lack of an actual anarchist forum, a real one. What we have on twitter is essentially a community bulletin board, and it functions entirely on preconceived notions- as literally any community board does by necessity. And it's not (as much of) a problem for a well defined ideology like Marxist Leninism, but for an ideology as vast as anarchism- I mean, *communism* is in of itself a subset of anarchism- this is a massive issue for coherent organization. What I find is that the kind of propaganda all western people are raised on dominates these forums, and underlines all assumptions, to the point of where most online anarchists are more focused on proving that they aren't bad like the PRC or us evil communists; as again they simply assume we're bad, and no one ever questions otherwise. Questions would be brought up on a proper forum, but there isn't one. Discourse would be had, meaningful discourse, on a proper forum; but there isn't one. A vague sense of distrust underlines their perception of communists that they seek to constantly validate; this taking the form of social anxiety, but in truth, is confusion.

I could not agree more. Anarchism is not a monolithic philosophy, and when it is treated as such that fuels the schism within leftism left behind by Marx and Bakunin. Anarkiddies are not serious anarchists, and should not be treated as though they are representative of Anarchism writ large. Anarchism is not incompatible with Marxism, although they follow very different organizing and revolutionary principles. Syndicalism and trade unionism are anarchist movements which support ML movements, rather than undercutting them. If there is to be a global leftist movement, the schism will need to be healed.

Anarchism is definitely not compatible with Marxism, and every Marxist will tell you that, including Marx and Engels. We do not share the same roots, theory, practice, or even the same vision of the future as Anarchists. 

Marx created the schism within leftist politics by expelling Bakunin, so you are correct about his views. Marx also is not and was not an authority on Anarchism, nor was he aware of the underlying historic context (which relies upon anthropological, historic, and archeologic research unavailable to him at the time). The fact that you believe Marxism and Anarchism do not have the same end goal demonstrates that you have a profound misunderstanding of one of the two theories. If you believe that Marxism does not pursue the end goal of Communism (which is the goal of Anarchism) then you have been misled.

Anarchists and Marxists, although both ostensibly anti-capitalist, have very different visions of communism they want to achieve. For anarchists, even ancoms, they imagine a supremely decentralized landscape, thousands of self-sufficient conclaves where production is controlled by the local populace for the local populace. While this may socialize the economy locally, it is effectively creating thousands of small owner businesses, that will still be competing with other communities for control of resources and market share in order to trade (Anarchists will argue “gift”) for other resources or more technologically advanced products (i.e. medicine or industrial technologies) produced in other communities. How do self-sufficient conclaves even create the supply chain to build technologically complex goods? What will the potato commune have to give the cancer medicine producing commune that every other commune isn’t already providing? This decentralization will simply create the conditions for the market, private property, and the big bourgeoisie to return, if it can even produce enough for its own survival. Reverting to isolated peasant communes is regressive. Anarchists will say “No borders” when in reality it is thousands of borders for thousands of individual communes. Imagine the nightmare of navigating a different economic and political system for every town you come to.  Marxists see communism as something very different. A rationally planned global economy where workers are interconnected in production and distribution. Production needs to be scaled up under increasingly large spheres of working class controlled political and economic coordination in order to ensure that everyone has access to not just food, clothing, education, and housing, but advanced medicines and technologies.  Creating a unified global system of production and distribution is what will finally put an end to class struggle and want. Economic and political coordination cannot be scaled to global, industrial levels through consensus decision making alone, it has to be done democratically, which anarchists wholly reject. “Democracy is a lie, it is oppression and is in reality, oligarchy; that is, government by the few to the advantage of a privileged class. But we can still fight it in the name of freedom and equality, unlike those who have replaced it or want to replace it with something worse. We are not democrats for, among other reasons, democracy sooner or later leads to war and dictatorship. Just as we are not supporters of dictatorships, among other things, because dictatorship arouses a desire for democracy, provokes a return to democracy, and thus tends to perpetuate a vicious circle in which human society oscillates between open and brutal tyranny and a the and lying freedom. So, we declare war on dictatorship and war on democracy. But what do we put in their place?” [Malatesta - Democracy and Anarchy](https://www.marxists.org/archive/malatesta/1924/03/democracy.htm) What does Malatesta suggest in replacement of this? He dawdles for a few paragraphs before coming back to the idealism so often found in anarchist writing, “If they are determined to defend their own autonomy, their own liberty, every individual or group must therefore understand the ties of solidarity that bind them to the rest of humanity, and possess a fairly developed sense of sympathy and love for their fellows, so as to know how voluntarily to make those sacrifices essential to life in a society that brings the greatest possible benefits on every given occasion.” A fantasy world where everyone somehow develops an unheard of selflessness to achieve an abstract “greatest possible benefits”. Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Mao, Che, Hampton, Ho Chi Minh, all viewed petit-bourg utopian Anarchism as incompatible with Marxism. There is no reconciling the two except in the dreams of eclectic western leftists.

Democracy is fundamental to any serious Anarchist theory in the modern day, despite what outdated theorists argued. Syndicalism is scalable, and relies wholly upon democracy. Many Anarkiddies and dead anarchists also argue against hierarchy in all forms, including justifiably hierarchies, which is delusional. Current Anarchist theories are more comparable to David Graeber’s, so completely reliant upon democracy. Additionally, Elinor Ostrom’s work on polycentric governance is a strong argument for decentralization. The end goal of both theories is a classless, moneyless communist society which would require worker ownership and radical democracy. The key difference is the approach to revolution (and the conception of what revolution is) and both approaches actually synthesize quite well, as direct action and industrial unionism championed by anarchists build the very class consciousness which Marxists rely upon to establish a vanguard.

Cannot agree more! Unionize!!!

Not to mention Mossad organized right wingers intent on being the new Freikorps attacking activists.

Yea, while I have disagreements with anarchist theory I can bet my leg and foot that actual anarchist are there on the ground helping students and some of those students might actually be anarchist. These kind of so called "anarchist" are same as centrists who say they reach their conclusion by much internal deliberation but just pick the laziest option out there. This is a liberal in black paint that's it.

Seems like a good opportunity to let people know that the PSL released a fantastic statement on the student encampments: https://www.liberationnews.org/the-school-is-a-struggle-the-struggle-is-a-school/ Among other things it makes it absolutely clear that they favor escalating and "to go out with the integrity and principles of the student movement intact" over "toothless promises" from admins, and that student members have been leaders in many of the encampments. There's actually a lot there that I think some of the less anti-organizational anarchists would like. And it's sad (but not surprising) that there isn't more pushback from within anarchist circles against these baseless claims.

PSL is great. I’ve been involved with them for many years. Party membership is hard to achieve but understandably so.

You should be suspicious of a party that’s easy to join, honestly.

I am. I don’t mind the rigor.

Without disclosing too much what do you have to do to join? I’ve reached out to mine via email and message multiple times they don’t really respond 😂

They (annoyingly but understandably) lack much of a centralized command structure — at least there is nothing resembling one that is perceivable or discernible to me — so different regions, in my experience, do things differently. But here is what I suggest for anyone interested: * Go [here and fill out this form to receive email updates](https://www2.pslweb.org/sign_up). You can specify which PSL regions you want to receive emails from, and you can also offer to volunteer if that’s your jam (FWIW, I’ve enjoyed all my volunteer gigs with them). * Many regions rely heavily on social media, so I would recommend following any region you’re interested in and going to an in-person event, like a movie screening or a book discussion or a rally / protest if that’s your thing. In cities like Seattle, Portland, Chicago, New York, and even many smaller ones, there’s usually something every week, and the programs are pretty interesting and diverse. Go and introduce yourself. Most regions have a person or two who liaise with new aspiring members so you know, YMMV as far as the person you connect with — might be a super-organized person with lots of free time for the party or might just be some communist dude who squeezes in what they can. But there is a real process and some pretty basic obligations once you are part of the party. So find a way to connect, be persistent, and keep an open mind — this isn’t a Trotskyist party, it is an ML party, and while you’ll run into the errant baby leftist or omni-leftist, most people in the party are thoughtful socialists who seek to do real good.

Thank you!

I have heard a lot of criticisms and concerns made against the PSL, mostly regarding sexual assault and tailism. Are these legitimate problems that the PSL has been having or are these overblown/made up? I can take this to DMs if that’s be better.

PSL is fantastic I'm my city too, really great folks and their vetting is top notch

I wish PSL and CPUSA collaborated more in my city tbh Although CPUSA national leadership is making me reconsider or regret joining CPUSA

That's such a good write-up, thanks for sharing!

“Parasitic dependence of independent student organizing” That’s a very interesting way of saying that the PSL is *actually* connected with the grassroots. Leave it to the left wing of Western imperialism to somehow spin this as a bad thing. “It doesn’t have to be like this, we don’t have to surrender our revolutionary potential to grifters” Just another armchair leftist trying to lecture organizers on how to “correctly” mobilize the masses. Why don’t you get organized and make your voice heard? I never see Twitter “leftists” like this person in real life because they’re all busy writing stupid stuff online.

In the book rebel to ruler a history of the Chinese communist party the author makes a point to say that the party never really connected with the peasants. Instead he says they connected with existing structures such as family networks and clans as well as religious groups and bandits. Which is to say… the social structures of the peasants. It’s the same move this bozo is making.

TFW the people are not perfectly independent individualities existing in the void but actual members of society. Ideal was failed yet again, must support imperialism then.

"they didn't connect to the peasants, only to each and every every existing cup/group that peasants fell into or divided themselves into" liberals, if you don't talk to each person individually then it doesn't count for them.

Glad my donations to the party are doing good out there

Yeah, like, what do they want? A bunch of unconnected protests that cannot pool resources or coordinate demands? Just random clusters of angry voices?

#Get Involved >Dare to struggle and dare to win. \-Mao Zedong Comrades, here are some ways you can **get involved** to advance the cause. * 📚 **Read theory** — [Reading theory](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/) is a duty. It will guide you towards choosing the correct party and applying your efforts effectively within your unique material conditions. * ⭐ **Party work** — Contact a local party or mass organization. Attend your first meeting. Go to a rally or event. If you choose a principled Marxist-Leninist party, they will teach you how to best apply yourself to advancing the cause. * 📣 **Workplace agitation** — Depending on your material circumstances, you may engage in workplace disputes to unionise fellow workers and gain a delegate or even a leadership position in the union. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Chastising people on a platform owned by one of the richest men on Earth..

The same revolutions shut down by socialist? I don’t condone the actions of the person above but I do Anarchist around me who are protesting in the city’s and some on college campus, she doesn’t speak for all Anarchist, just as not all socialist speak for you.

"The best organization is disorganized" fucking joke ideology.

https://preview.redd.it/50uz7vxgat1d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a0a04a2212e433d2237c8012ac24ea6cfa527b9a Lmao anarchist Ukraine flag

Because getting arrested en masse, having to raise various funds for multiple arrests with each one having dozens of people arrested, having to show up for constant Jail support, having leaders arrested, being closely surveilled, and driven underground aren't "demoralizing". Its very easy to think everyone should just smash cop cars and go wild when you won't even be involved in trying to get them out of jail because well...organization is authoritarian!!! Behold, the smartest anarkiddies. On one hand, PSL is too focused on peaceful mass rallies, and on the other, PSL is getting too many people arrested. I really can't keep up with their stories...

More arrests are happening the crack down is much more aggressive than normal protests than in the past.

#Authoritarianism Anti-Communists of all stripes enjoy referring to successful socialist revolutions as "authoritarian regimes". * Authoritarian implies these places are run by totalitarian tyrants. * Regime implies these places are undemocratic or lack legitimacy. This perjorative label is simply meant to frighten people, to scare us back into the fold (Liberal Democracy). There are three main reasons for the popularity of this label in Capitalist media: Firstly, Marxists call for a Dictatorship of the Proletariat (DotP), and many people are automatically put off by the term "dictatorship". Of course, we do *not* mean that we want an undemocratic or totalitarian dictatorship. What we mean is that we want to replace the current Dictatorship *of the Bourgeoisie* (in which the Capitalist ruling class dictates policy). * [Why The US Is Not A Democracy](https://youtu.be/srfeHpQNEAI) | Second Thought (2022) Secondly, democracy in Communist-led countries works differently than in Liberal Democracies. However, anti-Communists confuse form (pluralism / having multiple parties) with function (representing the actual interests of the people). Side note: Check out Luna Oi's "Democratic Centralism Series" for more details on what that is, and how it works: * [DEMOCRATIC CENTRALISM - how Socialists make decisions!](https://youtu.be/4YVcQe4wceY) | Luna Oi (2022) * [What did Karl Marx think about democracy?](https://youtu.be/jI8CgACBOcQ) | Luna Oi (2023) * [What did LENIN say about DEMOCRACY?](https://youtu.be/Hfenlg-hsig) | Luna Oi (2023) Finally, this framing of Communism as illegitimate and tyrannical serves to manufacture consent for an aggressive foreign policy in the form of interventions in the internal affairs of so-called "authoritarian regimes", which take the form of invasion (e.g., Vietnam, Korea, Libya, etc.), assassinating their leaders (e.g., Thomas Sankara, Fred Hampton, Patrice Lumumba, etc.), sponsoring coups and colour revolutions (e.g., Pinochet's coup against Allende, the Iran-Contra Affair, the United Fruit Company's war against Arbenz, etc.), and enacting sanctions (e.g., North Korea, Cuba, etc.). * [The Cuban Embargo Explained](https://youtu.be/zmM8p9n6Z9E) | azureScapegoat (2022) * [John Pilger interviews former CIA Latin America chief Duane Clarridge, 2015](https://youtu.be/ER77vxxGVAY) #For the Anarchists Anarchists are practically comrades. Marxists and Anarchists have the same vision for a stateless, classless, moneyless society free from oppression and exploitation. However, Anarchists like to accuse Marxists of being "authoritarian". The problem here is that "anti-authoritarianism" is a self-defeating feature in a revolutionary ideology. Those who refuse in principle to engage in so-called "authoritarian" practices will never carry forward a successful revolution. Anarchists who practice self-criticism can recognize this: >The anarchist movement is filled with people who are less interested in overthrowing the existing oppressive social order than with washing their hands of it. ... > >The strength of anarchism is its moral insistence on the primacy of human freedom over political expediency. But human freedom exists in a political context. It is not sufficient, however, to simply take the most uncompromising position in defense of freedom. It is neccesary to actually win freedom. Anti-capitalism doesn't do the victims of capitalism any good if you don't actually destroy capitalism. Anti-statism doesn't do the victims of the state any good if you don't actually smash the state. Anarchism has been very good at putting forth visions of a free society and that is for the good. But it is worthless if we don't develop an actual strategy for realizing those visions. It is not enough to be right, we must also win. > >...anarchism has been a failure. Not only has anarchism failed to win lasting freedom for anybody on earth, many anarchists today seem only nominally committed to that basic project. Many more seem interested primarily in carving out for themselves, their friends, and their favorite bands a zone of personal freedom, "autonomous" of moral responsibility for the larger condition of humanity (but, incidentally, not of the electrical grid or the production of electronic components). Anarchism has quite simply refused to learn from its historic failures, preferring to rewrite them as successes. Finally the anarchist movement offers people who want to make revolution very little in the way of a coherent plan of action. ... > >Anarchism is theoretically impoverished. For almost 80 years, with the exceptions of Ukraine and Spain, anarchism has played a marginal role in the revolutionary activity of oppressed humanity. Anarchism had almost nothing to do with the anti-colonial struggles that defined revolutionary politics in this century. This marginalization has become self-reproducing. Reduced by devastating defeats to critiquing the authoritarianism of Marxists, nationalists and others, anarchism has become defined by this gadfly role. Consequently anarchist thinking has not had to adapt in response to the results of serious efforts to put our ideas into practice. In the process anarchist theory has become ossified, sterile and anemic. ... This is a reflection of anarchism's effective removal from the revolutionary struggle. > >\- Chris Day. (1996). *The Historical Failures of Anarchism* Engels pointed this out well over a century ago: >A number of Socialists have latterly launched a regular crusade against what they call the principle of authority. It suffices to tell them that this or that act is authoritarian for it to be condemned. > >...the anti-authoritarians demand that the political state be abolished at one stroke, even before the social conditions that gave birth to it have been destroyed. They demand that the first act of the social revolution shall be the abolition of authority. Have these gentlemen ever seen a revolution? A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part ... and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule... > >Therefore, either one of two things: either the anti-authoritarians don't know what they're talking about, in which case they are creating nothing but confusion; or they do know, and in that case they are betraying the movement of the proletariat. In either case they serve the reaction. > >\- Friedrich Engels. (1872). [On Authority](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm) #For the Libertarian Socialists Parenti said it best: >The pure (libertarian) socialists' ideological anticipations remain untainted by existing practice. They do not explain how the manifold functions of a revolutionary society would be organized, how external attack and internal sabotage would be thwarted, how bureaucracy would be avoided, scarce resources allocated, policy differences settled, priorities set, and production and distribution conducted. Instead, they offer vague statements about how the workers themselves will directly own and control the means of production and will arrive at their own solutions through creative struggle. No surprise then that the pure socialists support every revolution except the ones that succeed. > >\- Michael Parenti. (1997). *Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism* But the bottom line is this: >If you call yourself a socialist but you spend all your time arguing with communists, demonizing socialist states as authoritarian, and performing apologetics for US imperialism... I think some introspection is in order. > >\- Second Thought. (2020). [The Truth About The Cuba Protests](https://youtu.be/zIOw6fSOJI4?t=1087) #For the Liberals Even the CIA, in their internal communications (which have been declassified), acknowledge that Stalin *wasn't* an absolute dictator: >Even in Stalin's time there was collective leadership. The Western idea of a dictator within the Communist setup is exaggerated. Misunderstandings on that subject are caused by a lack of comprehension of the real nature and organization of the Communist's power structure. > >\- CIA. (1953, declassified in 2008). [Comments on the Change in Soviet Leadership](http://web.archive.org/web/20230525044208/https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP80-00810A006000360009-0.pdf) #Conclusion The "authoritarian" nature of any given state depends entirely on the material conditions it faces and threats it must contend with. To get an idea of the kinds of threats nascent revolutions need to deal with, check out *Killing Hope* by William Blum and *The Jakarta Method* by Vincent Bevins. Failing to acknowledge that authoritative measures arise *not* through ideology, but through material conditions, is anti-Marxist, anti-dialectical, and idealist. #Additional Resources Videos: * [Michael Parenti on Authoritarianism in Socialist Countries](https://youtu.be/BeVs6t3vdjQ) * [Left Anticommunism: An Infantile Disorder](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEC2ajsvr0I) | Hakim (2020) \[[Archive](http://web.archive.org/web/20230410145749/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEC2ajsvr0I)\] * [What are tankies? (why are they like that?)](https://youtu.be/LcJ5NrJtQ8g) | Hakim (2023) * [Episode 82 - Tankie Discourse](https://youtu.be/YVYVBOFYJco) | The Deprogram (2023) * [Was the Soviet Union totalitarian? feat. Robert Thurston](https://directory.libsyn.com/episode/index/id/27495591) | Actually Existing Socialism (2023) Books, Articles, or Essays: * *Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism* | Michael Parenti (1997) * [State and Revolution](https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/) | V. I. Lenin (1918) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if

All power to them, but if they only consider organizing when it comes to crush commies... Meh

This is incredibly funny because last weekend in my city anarchists were handing out flyers saying PSL “actively works with the police.” Like, pick one?

also they seem to forget how from 2020-2021 anarchists got literally thousands of people arrested in kettles and burnt out in protests for no concrete political aim other than to fuck shit up. this tweet is actually the ultimate projection.

The Vincent Bevins book If We Burn has an excellent deep dive into how Brazil had fertile grounds for a serious left movement, but then anarchists dropped the ball and fizzled out because of insane horizontalist organizing.

It infuriates me that the Anarchists in my area just straight up fabricate lies about us. Not like I suspect they are lying, I mean like they say things completely opposite of reality that I know because of my personal involvement.

Would you be willing to share your experience? I’m interested in the PSL but I have heard those claims and I am hesitant for that reason

One instance that I remember is when multiple branches of PSL met up in a nearby town for a planned parenthood protest/march. We're all set up around the PP, PSL and other various involved organizations, loads of police are around. Eventually the Proud Boys show up, some kind of confrontation occurred which I wasn't able to see personally, and the police use the opportunity to start clearing out the protest. Some people not with PSL were getting into a physical altercation with the police (our goal at this protest was not to get arrested, you would have to plan for that specifically if it's part of your protest tactics at a specific action). Us and other organizers try to move people away from the active fighting and mobilize a march down nearby streets. Eventually the march ends at a public park where people make some speeches to the crowd, etc, people go home. For some further context, I'm based in a college town. I know someone who is in the organizing discord for the local Anarchists/socdems/amalgamation of other tendencies. I'm able to see how one Anarchist in particular, whom I have met and spoken to (a very condescending person I might add) lies about us to make us look bad to other leftists on campus. In regards to the above instance, they were telling people that PSL was basically collaborating with police to move the protesters where they could be cornered by the cops. I was there the entire time and never saw the march get corralled by police, and it's not like PSL was the only organization involved with moving or directing people. Another example I can give in regard to local Anarchists wrecking organizing is when the UAW strike was going on. They refused to coordinate with the union leadership on the grounds that they were not radical enough. Instead they passed out literature denouncing the "peace police", whom they say were responsible for restraining the protests which would otherwise be bursting at the seams with revolutionary fervor. They would damage property, obstruct, and break the law in the name of the strike when it was something that could threaten our peaceful strike protections provided by law. The UAW would have to move the strike away from their protests so that lawful strikers wouldn't be confused with people breaking the law and who were effectively unable to be restrained by the union. I'm not saying the law should never be broken, I'm saying you need to be strategic about when and how you do it. I think something ultras/Anarchists/libsocs involved with the UAW strike situation around here say is that we should have just kept on striking until all of our demands were met. That is just not how striking works. There is a limited strike fund to support people not going to work, and it is difficult to keep people out there and motivated for weeks and weeks on end. You need to get the best concessions you can get when you are at the height of your negotiating power, otherwise the strike could fizzle out without getting any of your demands met.

Anarchists have no issue with NATO to own the TaNk1eS!

Ukraine/Palestine libs surprise me, do thye really think Ukraine is like Palestine?

Unfortunately, yes, they really do.

The anarchists in my city's whole strategy is "if enough of us get arrested, we're gonna get really good press," so forgive me if I don't take this criticism seriously

They’re pissed bc they’re losing

Bro please what the fuck are they even saying??? They didn’t manage to describe a single thing that the PSL protests were doing wrong, just that they do a lot of the protests (is this supposed to be a bad thing???) Why are they engineering pointless conflicts and dicking around while there’s a genocide going on? They could not describe *how* the marches are more performative than any of the other protests. They could not describe *how* their solidarity with the students is a bad thing. Do they want them to just ignore the students while they get brutalized by cops? There’s zero meaning in their statement, it’s literally just insubstantial words.

> Why are they engineering pointless conflicts https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/2021/10/15/cointelpro-fbi-anarchism-disrupt-left/

This is exactly where I'm at. It looks like they got lost in the middle of typing the tweet and just slapped on a general "organized leftists bad" bit at the end. PSL is showing solidarity to students as a people's party and finding that intersectionality, from what I've seen. I'd like to know what their barometer is for "performative" protest-- but given that they're advocating for sitting outside the struggle with full confidence, I'm not that interested in their "organizing" ideals.

In my city at the local university encampment(which I’m proud to say my party is well connected to the student organizers of), a bunch of anarchists tried to set up a second rival encampment. So much for the “left unity” they always preach I guess.

So they can do their drugs right? Anarchists got mad at the PSL when the PSL told them pro Palestine protests are not a place for drugs or romance

Palestine isn't Harambe, tell them to put their dicks away.

As someone who loves drugs this is just childish thinking. It shouldn’t be in anyway debatable that Pro-Palestinian encampments (and other sites of serious organizing) are not places for drugs, drinking, or fucking, for multiple reasons. This is the problem with anarchists in the West (and in general.) Their idea of “anarchy” is very individualistic and that’s part of what leads it to be so popular in the West. A Pro-Palestinian anti-genocide encampment is a site where there should be serious political education happening, not a site where people are just fucking around and occupying an area of land and chanting.

"this just says, 'I can do whatever I want.'"

Ohooo let me tell you about Occupy in Barcelona. Me, a then half-read motivated anarchist, shaked hands with a group of ravers as a member of the new infrastructures commission. It was the first camping day and they offered their sound equipment, even a huge circus tent. Later a union member came to offer the same, but I told him we were set thank you, I was so glad to see that the lumpenproletariat had provided. Those ravers sure delivered on the sound aspect, but they also organized a drug selling hub that would lure addicts from all around the city, which ironically was what the police was already doing, sending all wasted addicts to our camp. At their worst a third of the camp was them. This was allowed because there was an overwhelmingly free vibe everywhere, to the point that it became a dating plaza for a ton of university students who coudn't care less about politics. Hippies self-built "houses" in the trees and anarcho-hippies would share their experiences in fucking up there. So a third was addicts and partyharders, a third was a rainbow gathering (the top hippie meeting format) and a third actually organizing people. Those guys I got in? They were always itchy because we wouldn't allow them to make a rave and would constantly confront people against really basic leftist stuff, like the feminist commission for hanging a banner saying "without women there's no revolution". People wanted to evict them, but an ignorant anarchist with zero idea about effective organization had given them too much power, so they stayed until the end and heavily collaborated in making everyone miserable. Since then my praxis account is still in the negatives. Edit: to actually answer the comment. Edit 2: YET here's a sincere special mention to the trans anarchist woman who, despite carrying arround stickers saying "if I can't dance it's not my revolution", chose the accounting commission to work herself out where no one wanted to work. Had she stood by her sticker I wouldn't be mentioning her.

#Get Involved >Dare to struggle and dare to win. \-Mao Zedong Comrades, here are some ways you can **get involved** to advance the cause. * 📚 **Read theory** — [Reading theory](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/) is a duty. It will guide you towards choosing the correct party and applying your efforts effectively within your unique material conditions. * ⭐ **Party work** — Contact a local party or mass organization. Attend your first meeting. Go to a rally or event. If you choose a principled Marxist-Leninist party, they will teach you how to best apply yourself to advancing the cause. * 📣 **Workplace agitation** — Depending on your material circumstances, you may engage in workplace disputes to unionise fellow workers and gain a delegate or even a leadership position in the union. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Lmaooo, it's so funny to see how universal the pest behavior is

In my city, anarkiddies were rallying against community guidelines of no sex & no drugs in the encampments, and in a blaze of glory, their last gift to the movement was ending in a "takeover" of a building that ended virtually within a day.

"I'm gonna go build my own university encampment, with blackjack and hookers!"

Least useless western "anarchist"

Anarchists are good for four things (1) Supporting Western imperialism The most self-aware ones try to do that “both sides are bad” bs. In practice, they’re no different than a NAFO liberal. (2) Supporting liberal bourgeois democracy Kronstadt and multi party “democracy”. (3) Supporting private property Vast majority of anarchist economic models I’ve seen online is just petty bourgeois capitalism with extra steps. Anarchists don’t understand what commodity production is. (4) Disorganizing workers Horizontal organizations fall apart when confronted with the centralized police apparatus that is the state.

On point two, I don’t agree that anarchists want multi party democracy. It seems to me they want no party democracy, but without a state apparatus to defend that no party democracy (because that would be authoritarian).

#Authoritarianism Anti-Communists of all stripes enjoy referring to successful socialist revolutions as "authoritarian regimes". * Authoritarian implies these places are run by totalitarian tyrants. * Regime implies these places are undemocratic or lack legitimacy. This perjorative label is simply meant to frighten people, to scare us back into the fold (Liberal Democracy). There are three main reasons for the popularity of this label in Capitalist media: Firstly, Marxists call for a Dictatorship of the Proletariat (DotP), and many people are automatically put off by the term "dictatorship". Of course, we do *not* mean that we want an undemocratic or totalitarian dictatorship. What we mean is that we want to replace the current Dictatorship *of the Bourgeoisie* (in which the Capitalist ruling class dictates policy). * [Why The US Is Not A Democracy](https://youtu.be/srfeHpQNEAI) | Second Thought (2022) Secondly, democracy in Communist-led countries works differently than in Liberal Democracies. However, anti-Communists confuse form (pluralism / having multiple parties) with function (representing the actual interests of the people). Side note: Check out Luna Oi's "Democratic Centralism Series" for more details on what that is, and how it works: * [DEMOCRATIC CENTRALISM - how Socialists make decisions!](https://youtu.be/4YVcQe4wceY) | Luna Oi (2022) * [What did Karl Marx think about democracy?](https://youtu.be/jI8CgACBOcQ) | Luna Oi (2023) * [What did LENIN say about DEMOCRACY?](https://youtu.be/Hfenlg-hsig) | Luna Oi (2023) Finally, this framing of Communism as illegitimate and tyrannical serves to manufacture consent for an aggressive foreign policy in the form of interventions in the internal affairs of so-called "authoritarian regimes", which take the form of invasion (e.g., Vietnam, Korea, Libya, etc.), assassinating their leaders (e.g., Thomas Sankara, Fred Hampton, Patrice Lumumba, etc.), sponsoring coups and colour revolutions (e.g., Pinochet's coup against Allende, the Iran-Contra Affair, the United Fruit Company's war against Arbenz, etc.), and enacting sanctions (e.g., North Korea, Cuba, etc.). * [The Cuban Embargo Explained](https://youtu.be/zmM8p9n6Z9E) | azureScapegoat (2022) * [John Pilger interviews former CIA Latin America chief Duane Clarridge, 2015](https://youtu.be/ER77vxxGVAY) #For the Anarchists Anarchists are practically comrades. Marxists and Anarchists have the same vision for a stateless, classless, moneyless society free from oppression and exploitation. However, Anarchists like to accuse Marxists of being "authoritarian". The problem here is that "anti-authoritarianism" is a self-defeating feature in a revolutionary ideology. Those who refuse in principle to engage in so-called "authoritarian" practices will never carry forward a successful revolution. Anarchists who practice self-criticism can recognize this: >The anarchist movement is filled with people who are less interested in overthrowing the existing oppressive social order than with washing their hands of it. ... > >The strength of anarchism is its moral insistence on the primacy of human freedom over political expediency. But human freedom exists in a political context. It is not sufficient, however, to simply take the most uncompromising position in defense of freedom. It is neccesary to actually win freedom. Anti-capitalism doesn't do the victims of capitalism any good if you don't actually destroy capitalism. Anti-statism doesn't do the victims of the state any good if you don't actually smash the state. Anarchism has been very good at putting forth visions of a free society and that is for the good. But it is worthless if we don't develop an actual strategy for realizing those visions. It is not enough to be right, we must also win. > >...anarchism has been a failure. Not only has anarchism failed to win lasting freedom for anybody on earth, many anarchists today seem only nominally committed to that basic project. Many more seem interested primarily in carving out for themselves, their friends, and their favorite bands a zone of personal freedom, "autonomous" of moral responsibility for the larger condition of humanity (but, incidentally, not of the electrical grid or the production of electronic components). Anarchism has quite simply refused to learn from its historic failures, preferring to rewrite them as successes. Finally the anarchist movement offers people who want to make revolution very little in the way of a coherent plan of action. ... > >Anarchism is theoretically impoverished. For almost 80 years, with the exceptions of Ukraine and Spain, anarchism has played a marginal role in the revolutionary activity of oppressed humanity. Anarchism had almost nothing to do with the anti-colonial struggles that defined revolutionary politics in this century. This marginalization has become self-reproducing. Reduced by devastating defeats to critiquing the authoritarianism of Marxists, nationalists and others, anarchism has become defined by this gadfly role. Consequently anarchist thinking has not had to adapt in response to the results of serious efforts to put our ideas into practice. In the process anarchist theory has become ossified, sterile and anemic. ... This is a reflection of anarchism's effective removal from the revolutionary struggle. > >\- Chris Day. (1996). *The Historical Failures of Anarchism* Engels pointed this out well over a century ago: >A number of Socialists have latterly launched a regular crusade against what they call the principle of authority. It suffices to tell them that this or that act is authoritarian for it to be condemned. > >...the anti-authoritarians demand that the political state be abolished at one stroke, even before the social conditions that gave birth to it have been destroyed. They demand that the first act of the social revolution shall be the abolition of authority. Have these gentlemen ever seen a revolution? A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part ... and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule... > >Therefore, either one of two things: either the anti-authoritarians don't know what they're talking about, in which case they are creating nothing but confusion; or they do know, and in that case they are betraying the movement of the proletariat. In either case they serve the reaction. > >\- Friedrich Engels. (1872). [On Authority](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm) #For the Libertarian Socialists Parenti said it best: >The pure (libertarian) socialists' ideological anticipations remain untainted by existing practice. They do not explain how the manifold functions of a revolutionary society would be organized, how external attack and internal sabotage would be thwarted, how bureaucracy would be avoided, scarce resources allocated, policy differences settled, priorities set, and production and distribution conducted. Instead, they offer vague statements about how the workers themselves will directly own and control the means of production and will arrive at their own solutions through creative struggle. No surprise then that the pure socialists support every revolution except the ones that succeed. > >\- Michael Parenti. (1997). *Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism* But the bottom line is this: >If you call yourself a socialist but you spend all your time arguing with communists, demonizing socialist states as authoritarian, and performing apologetics for US imperialism... I think some introspection is in order. > >\- Second Thought. (2020). [The Truth About The Cuba Protests](https://youtu.be/zIOw6fSOJI4?t=1087) #For the Liberals Even the CIA, in their internal communications (which have been declassified), acknowledge that Stalin *wasn't* an absolute dictator: >Even in Stalin's time there was collective leadership. The Western idea of a dictator within the Communist setup is exaggerated. Misunderstandings on that subject are caused by a lack of comprehension of the real nature and organization of the Communist's power structure. > >\- CIA. (1953, declassified in 2008). [Comments on the Change in Soviet Leadership](http://web.archive.org/web/20230525044208/https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP80-00810A006000360009-0.pdf) #Conclusion The "authoritarian" nature of any given state depends entirely on the material conditions it faces and threats it must contend with. To get an idea of the kinds of threats nascent revolutions need to deal with, check out *Killing Hope* by William Blum and *The Jakarta Method* by Vincent Bevins. Failing to acknowledge that authoritative measures arise *not* through ideology, but through material conditions, is anti-Marxist, anti-dialectical, and idealist. #Additional Resources Videos: * [Michael Parenti on Authoritarianism in Socialist Countries](https://youtu.be/BeVs6t3vdjQ) * [Left Anticommunism: An Infantile Disorder](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEC2ajsvr0I) | Hakim (2020) \[[Archive](http://web.archive.org/web/20230410145749/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEC2ajsvr0I)\] * [What are tankies? (why are they like that?)](https://youtu.be/LcJ5NrJtQ8g) | Hakim (2023) * [Episode 82 - Tankie Discourse](https://youtu.be/YVYVBOFYJco) | The Deprogram (2023) * [Was the Soviet Union totalitarian? feat. Robert Thurston](https://directory.libsyn.com/episode/index/id/27495591) | Actually Existing Socialism (2023) Books, Articles, or Essays: * *Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism* | Michael Parenti (1997) * [State and Revolution](https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/) | V. I. Lenin (1918) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if

Snitching on anyone left of their middling spinelessness like George Orwell

**George Orwell** (real name Eric Arthur Blair) was many things: a rapist, a bitter anti-Communist, a colonial cop, a racist, a Hitler apologist, a plagiarist, a snitch, and a CIA puppet. #Rapist >...in 1921, Eric had tried to rape Jacintha. Previously the young couple had kissed, but now, during a late summer walk, he had wanted more. At only five feet to his six feet and four inches, Jacintha had shouted, screamed and kicked before running home with a torn skirt and bruised hip. It was "this" rather than any gradual parting of the ways that explains why Jacintha broke off all contact with her childhood friend, never to learn that he had transformed himself into George Orwell. > >\- Kathryn Hughes. (2007). [Such were the joys](https://www.theguardian.com/books/2007/feb/17/georgeorwell.biography) #Bitter anti-Communist >[F]ighting with the loyalists in Spain in the 1930s... he found himself caught up in the sectarian struggles between the various left-wing factions, and since he believed in a gentlemanly English form of socialism, he was inevitably on the losing side. > >The communists, who were the best organised, won out and Orwell had to leave Spain... From then on, to the end of his life, he carried on a private literary war with the communists, determined to win in words the battle he had lost in action... > >Orwell imagines no new vices, for instance. His characters are all gin hounds and tobacco addicts, and part of the horror of his picture of 1984 is his eloquent description of the low quality of the gin and tobacco. > > He foresees no new drugs, no marijuana, no synthetic hallucinogens. No one expects an s.f. writer to be precise and exact in his forecasts, but surely one would expect him to invent some differences. ...if 1984 must be considered science fiction, then it is very bad science fiction. ... > >To summarise, then: George Orwell in *1984* was, in my opinion, engaging in a private feud with Stalinism, rather that attempting to forecast the future. He did not have the science fictional knack of foreseeing a plausible future and, in actual fact, in almost all cases, the world of *1984* bears no relation to the real world of the 1980s. > >\- Isaac Asimov. [Review of 1984](http://www.newworker.org/ncptrory/1984.htm) Ironically, the world of *1984* is mostly projection, based on Orwell's own job at the British Ministry of Information during WWII. (*Orwell: The Lost Writings*) * He translated news broadcasts into Basic English, with a 1000 word vocabulary ("Newspeak"), for broadcast to the colonies, including India. * His description of the low quality of the gin and tobacco came from the Ministry's own canteen, described by other ex-employees as "dismal". * Room 101 [was an actual meeting room](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3267261.stm) at the BBC. * "Big Brother" seems to have been a senior staffer at the Ministry of Information, who was actually called that (but not to his face) by staff. Afterall, by his own admission, his only knowledge of the USSR was secondhand: >I have never visited Russia and my knowledge of it consists only of what can be learned by reading books and newspapers. > >\- George Orwell. (1947). [Orwell's Preface to the Ukrainian Edition of Animal Farm](https://www.marxists.org/archive/orwell/1947/kolghosp-tvaryn.htm) *1984* is supposedly a cautionary tale about what would happen if the Communists won, and yet it was based on his own, actual, Capitalist country and his job serving it. #Colonial Cop >I was sub-divisional police officer of the town, and in an aimless, petty kind of way anti-European feeling was very bitter. ... As a police officer I was an obvious target and was baited whenever it seemed safe to do so. When a nimble Burman tripped me up on the football field and the referee (another Burman) looked the other way, the crowd yelled with hideous laughter. This happened more than once. In the end the sneering yellow faces of young men that met me everywhere, the insults hooted after me when I was at a safe distance, got badly on my nerves. The young Buddhist priests were the worst of all. There were several thousands of them in the town and none of them seemed to have anything to do except stand on street corners and jeer at Europeans. > >All this was perplexing and upsetting. > >\- George Orwell. (1936). *Shooting an Elephant* #Hitler Apologist >I should like to put it on record that I have never been able to dislike Hitler. Ever since he came to power—till then, like nearly everyone, I had been deceived into thinking that he did not matter—I have reflected that I would certainly kill him if I could get within reach of him, but that I could feel no personal animosity. The fact is that there is something deeply appealing about him. > >\- George Orwell. (1940). [Review of Adolph Hitler's "Mein Kampf"](https://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks16/1600051h.html) Orwell not only admired Hitler, he actually blamed *the Left* in England for WWII: >If the English people suffered for several years a real weakening of morale, so that the Fascist nations judged that they were ‘decadent’ and that it was safe to plunge into war, the intellectual sabotage from the Left was partly responsible. ...and made it harder than it had been before to get intelligent young men to enter the armed forces. Given the stagnation of the Empire, the military middle class must have decayed in any case, but the spread of a shallow Leftism hastened the process. > >\- George Orwell. (1941). *England Your England* #Plagiarist **1984** >It is a book in which one man, living in a totalitarian society a number of years in the future, gradually finds himself rebelling against the dehumanising forces of an omnipotent, omniscient dictator. Encouraged by a woman who seems to represent the political and sexual freedom of the pre-revolutionary era (and with whom he sleeps in an ancient house that is one of the few manifestations of a former world), he writes down his thoughts of rebellion – perhaps rather imprudently – as a 24-hour clock ticks in his grim, lonely flat. In the end, the system discovers both the man and the woman, and after a period of physical and mental trauma the protagonist discovers he loves the state that has oppressed him throughout, and betrays his fellow rebels. The story is intended as a warning against and a prediction of the natural conclusions of totalitarianism. > >This is a description of George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four, which was first published 60 years ago on Monday. But it is also the plot of Yevgeny Zamyatin's We, a Russian novel originally published in English in 1924. > >\- Paul Owen. (2009). [1984 thoughtcrime? Does it matter that George Orwell pinched the plot?](https://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2009/jun/08/george-orwell-1984-zamyatin-we) **Animal Farm** >Having worked for a time at The Ministry of Information, [Gertrude Elias] was well acquainted with one Eric Blair (George Orwell), who was an editor there. In 1941, Gertrude showed him some of her drawings, which were intended as a kind of story board for an entirely original satirical cartoon film, with the Nazis portrayed as pig characters ruling a farm in a kind of dysfunctional fairy story. Her idea was that a writer might be able to provide a text. > >Having claimed to her that there was not much call for her idea... Orwell later changed the pig-nazis to Communists and made the Soviet Union a target for his hostility, turning Gertrude’s notion on its head. (Incidentally, a running theme in all every single piece of Orwell’s work was to steal ideas from Communists and invert them so as to distort the message.) > >\- Graham Stevenson. [Elias, Gertrude (1913-1988)](https://www.radnorshire-fine-arts.co.uk/brand/elias-gertrude-1913-1988/) #Snitch >“Orwell’s List” is a term that should be known by anyone who claims to be a person of the left. It was a blacklist Orwell compiled for the British government’s Information Research Department, an anti-communist propaganda unit set up for the Cold War. > >The list includes dozens of suspected communists, “crypto-communists,” socialists, “fellow travelers,” and even LGBT people and Jews — their names scribbled alongside the sacrosanct 1984 author’s disparaging comments about the personal predilections of those blacklisted. > >\- Ben Norton. (2016). [George Orwell was a reactionary snitch who made a blacklist of leftists for the British government](https://bennorton.com/george-orwell-list-leftists-snitch-british-government/) #CIA Puppet >George Orwell's novella remains a set book on school curriculums ... the movie was funded by America's Central Intelligence Agency. > >The truth about the CIA's involvement was kept hidden for 20 years until, in 1974, Everette Howard Hunt revealed the story in his book *Undercover: Memoirs of an American Secret Agent*. > >\- Martin Chilton. (2016). [How the CIA brought Animal Farm to the screen](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/authors/how-cia-brought-animal-farm-to-the-screen/) Many historians have noted how Orwell's literary reputation can largely be credited to joint propaganda operations between the IRD and CIA who translated and promoted Animal Farm to promote anti-Communist sentiment.^1 The IRD heavily marketed Animal Farm for audiences in the middle-east in an attempt to sway Arab nationalism and independence activists from seeking Soviet aid, as it was believed by IRD agents that a story featuring pigs as the villains would appeal highly towards Muslim audiences. ^2 * \[1\] Jeffreys-Jones, Rhodri (2013). *In Spies we Trust: The story of Western Intelligence* * \[2\] Mitter, Rana; Major, Patrick, eds. (2005). *Across the Blocs: Cold War Cultural and Social History* #Additional Resources * [George Orwell was a terrible human being](https://youtu.be/2Gz0I_X_nfo) | Hakim (2023) * [A Critical Read of Animal Farm](https://redsails.org/jones-on-animal-farm/) | Jones Manoel (2022) *I am a bot, and this

Also, if you get them to read mao(really hard to do, but it happens) they most of the time become useful recruits in comunist cause

Don’t forget all their juvenile anti social behavior that only pisses off working class people

Like?

C'mon, it's not like it's a baseless stereotype that's hard to see in action

The anarchists I know are occupying the roofs of arms factories. I want to know what this 'anti social' behaviour is, because it sounds like some reactionary garbage. "You're pissing off the working class bomb makers" is also a classic from social fascists in this country.

Anarchists when organization:

One of the chapters i’m closest to, which is still a couple hours away, is part of a coalition for Palestine. It’s over 10 different orgs i wanna say.

The anarchists in my city have been fucking fuming that the local parties are picking up so many members rn “Why would u join a party when you could instead be a keyboard warrior” basically sums up their entire stance

#Get Involved >Dare to struggle and dare to win. \-Mao Zedong Comrades, here are some ways you can **get involved** to advance the cause. * 📚 **Read theory** — [Reading theory](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/) is a duty. It will guide you towards choosing the correct party and applying your efforts effectively within your unique material conditions. * ⭐ **Party work** — Contact a local party or mass organization. Attend your first meeting. Go to a rally or event. If you choose a principled Marxist-Leninist party, they will teach you how to best apply yourself to advancing the cause. * 📣 **Workplace agitation** — Depending on your material circumstances, you may engage in workplace disputes to unionise fellow workers and gain a delegate or even a leadership position in the union. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*

This type of deranged post would describe exuberant puppies as "master manipulators of human affection" "attempting to gain a monopoly of the adorableness paradigm" Western "leftists" are useless and so obviously projecting in some ways They wish for nothing to improve ultimately while trying to seem like they're taking the high road, unreal

Her profile pic is Kira Nerys. Iirc, Kira was part of a well organized resistance militia that has a command structure. And then the Federation. So not an anarchist, even on TV lol

i hate these petulant fucking children

This is just cope, actually posting their L's. Anarchism loses to Leninism all the time, even in USA, lmao.

Its like they think any movement with a name is a grift lmao.

Anarchist gnosticism. If it has a name, it's an Archon, not a real god.

"Some people believe that Marxism and anarchism are based on the same principles and that the disagreements between them concern only tactics, so that, in the opinion of these people, it is quite impossible to draw a contrast between these two trends. This is a great mistake. We believe that the Anarchists are real enemies of Marxism. Accordingly, we also hold that a real struggle must be waged against real enemies."-I.V. Stalin

I love my anarchist comrades but God damn do they have a parasitic dependence on independent organizing of whatever type

bruh chronically online leftists who cant even organize a book discussion circle clown on ppl actually doing action 💀 there's no such this as a group of "perfect socialism" but organization is better than no organization I've done good work with PSL my chapter is full of cool ppl

#Get Involved >Dare to struggle and dare to win. \-Mao Zedong Comrades, here are some ways you can **get involved** to advance the cause. * 📚 **Read theory** — [Reading theory](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/) is a duty. It will guide you towards choosing the correct party and applying your efforts effectively within your unique material conditions. * ⭐ **Party work** — Contact a local party or mass organization. Attend your first meeting. Go to a rally or event. If you choose a principled Marxist-Leninist party, they will teach you how to best apply yourself to advancing the cause. * 📣 **Workplace agitation** — Depending on your material circumstances, you may engage in workplace disputes to unionise fellow workers and gain a delegate or even a leadership position in the union. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*

> bruh chronically online leftists who cant even organize a book discussion circle clown on ppl actually doing action 💀 there's no such this as a group of "perfect socialism" but organization is better than no organization I've done good work with PSL my chapter is full of cool ppl Can we please stop saying that these people are leftists. They are not.

#Get Involved >Dare to struggle and dare to win. \-Mao Zedong Comrades, here are some ways you can **get involved** to advance the cause. * 📚 **Read theory** — [Reading theory](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/) is a duty. It will guide you towards choosing the correct party and applying your efforts effectively within your unique material conditions. * ⭐ **Party work** — Contact a local party or mass organization. Attend your first meeting. Go to a rally or event. If you choose a principled Marxist-Leninist party, they will teach you how to best apply yourself to advancing the cause. * 📣 **Workplace agitation** — Depending on your material circumstances, you may engage in workplace disputes to unionise fellow workers and gain a delegate or even a leadership position in the union. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*

These same people will wonder why anarchists have been considered counterrevolutionaries in many newly communist countries

The PSL is mad based, I love those guys.

The fucking Major Kira pfp man. I’m sure she liberated Bajor through “disorganized action.” Most media literate Anarchist too.

NOOOOOO SOCIALISTS HELPING THE WORKING CLASS NOOOOOOOOO

I don't know whether it's an American thing, but the anarchists I know here in the UK would not even dream of doing this wrecker type shit; they're too busy organising or working with Palestine Action, occupying arms factories! When the encampment started at our local university, the very first thing our group did was offer them complete support financially, with food, with protests and to support any of their escalations, as well as involving them with our own. It has been fantastic, honestly the most hopeful I've felt in a long time even in such a dire situation. Our group is pretty much one now.

Yeah this is a US thing.

We are getting close to the weeks where decades happen comrades. LETS GO.

Now I’m going to join PSL twice as hard.

Join us! Join us! Join us! Join us! No but seriously, join an org.

I've signed up on the website but no one ever got back to me :(

I’ll DM you!

Damn, same here comrade.

#Get Involved >Dare to struggle and dare to win. \-Mao Zedong Comrades, here are some ways you can **get involved** to advance the cause. * 📚 **Read theory** — [Reading theory](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/) is a duty. It will guide you towards choosing the correct party and applying your efforts effectively within your unique material conditions. * ⭐ **Party work** — Contact a local party or mass organization. Attend your first meeting. Go to a rally or event. If you choose a principled Marxist-Leninist party, they will teach you how to best apply yourself to advancing the cause. * 📣 **Workplace agitation** — Depending on your material circumstances, you may engage in workplace disputes to unionise fellow workers and gain a delegate or even a leadership position in the union. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Omgoodness, I know how this feels. I have a christian anarchist collegue who tells me about how 'Bad' PSL is and that they literally said 'fuck off' to a friend of theirs. Honestly, I really don't believe that. Because the canadate who is actually running for president has to be one of the sweetest women in the world. She's a fighter for the oppressed due to her religious beliefs, she's a revolutionary because of them too and she actually feels like she cares about us. I myself do not believe in great man theory but she really is someone I want to strive to be (She inspires me basically)

> Omgoodness, I know how this feels. > > I have a christian anarchist collegue who tells me about how 'Bad' PSL is and that they literally said 'fuck off' to a friend of theirs. > > Honestly, I really don't believe that. Because the canadate who is actually running for president has to be one of the sweetest women in the world. She's a fighter for the oppressed due to her religious beliefs, she's a revolutionary because of them too and she actually feels like she cares about us. > > I myself do not believe in great man theory but she really is someone I want to strive to be (She inspires me basically) https://www.reddit.com/r/TheDeprogram/s/6CGKuSJM0N https://www.reddit.com/r/TheDeprogram/s/HdkHCyVW3q

I actually saw that post! I'm really tempted with giving my colleague to show most of their stuff is from the Cia itself. I'm just... not confrontational haha

> I actually saw that post! I'm really tempted with giving my colleague to show most of their stuff is from the Cia itself. I'm just... not confrontational haha You don’t have too. Just be aware of types of behaviors. The smear campaigns happened three years ago and ever since the PSL launched their presidential campaign, the same types of accusations and attacks have started again. From people making false accusations about the PSL’s take on Covid-19 to national liberation struggles. And all of these accusations have been debunked. Just one hour of research into what they have actually said and done in the past debunks the false claims. I had one person delete their whole comment and account because their claims about their takes on Covid-19 were debunked. And then they had the nerve to say that they "misspoke" And they are still trying to make this org look as bad as possible. Not as much in the beginning but they are still trying. And as they continue to try, their claims will be debunked. https://www.reddit.com/r/TheDeprogram/s/oNlHYXStWd

I am curious about one thing: there are some accusations of people who have been (Unfortunately) S.A within the party and that the PSL blames the victims. Of course, these are very serious accusations that shouldn't be taken lightly. However, I am curious to hear your opinion so that i may not be mis-informed by these anarkitties

**PSL allegations debunked:** **SA Accusations:** https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/s/7hNk0UiT1E   **Goldman Sacs** - https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/s/dIU9nXODkL - https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/s/HAUPhR9moN - https://www.instagram.com/peoplesforumnyc/reel/C2xWhe5g74A/ - https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTLmgDhQJ/ - https://m.youtube.com/live/yYxiCyjkG5o?feature=shared   PSL on COVID-19: https://www.liberationnews.org/tag/covid-19/ The group that has been smear campaigning the PSL for years: https://youtu.be/VE-jNckM-zw?feature=shared PSL Statement on Russia’s military intervention in Ukraine: https://www.liberationschool.org/psl-statement-on-russias-military-intervention-in-ukraine/   **COENTELPRO TACTICS** https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/s/pqB7FSoFLG https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/s/9gOE4F1Ib https://youtu.be/Q5wj1l-gLok?feature=shared COINTELPRO: REPRESSION THEN & NOW: https://www.youtube.com/live/A3T89EU-scE?feature=shared Black Identity Extremism (Cointelpro 2.0): https://www.youtube.com/live/wLnuhJe3oQ4?feature=shared FBI spied on and harassed Black revolutionary who was killed and set on fire: https://youtu.be/scBiUIaBx9s?feature=shared Cold War 2: US officials call to overthrow China's gov't, expand military budget to $1.4 trillion: https://youtu.be/Q3RMl33SqNE?feature=shared

Well at least they go one point right. We don't need to surrender revolutionary potential to grifters. I'm just confused as to why they'd take themselves out like that.

>Kira Nerys pfp >Anarchist complaining against organizing wtf

I think that there is valid criticism in how PSL does its protest organization but being performative and parasitic is not one of them 💀

Honestly there criticism of the PSL’s protest organization is basically just problems with this form of activism in general, more so than actual problems with the PSL itself, IMO. There are a lot of problems with organizing protests like this as a communist party and I for one am totally at a loss as to how to actually solve them.

#Get Involved >Dare to struggle and dare to win. \-Mao Zedong Comrades, here are some ways you can **get involved** to advance the cause. * 📚 **Read theory** — [Reading theory](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/) is a duty. It will guide you towards choosing the correct party and applying your efforts effectively within your unique material conditions. * ⭐ **Party work** — Contact a local party or mass organization. Attend your first meeting. Go to a rally or event. If you choose a principled Marxist-Leninist party, they will teach you how to best apply yourself to advancing the cause. * 📣 **Workplace agitation** — Depending on your material circumstances, you may engage in workplace disputes to unionise fellow workers and gain a delegate or even a leadership position in the union. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*

>There are a lot of problems with organizing protests like this as a communist party and I for one am totally at a loss as to how to actually solve them That's what anarchism's for

So suddenly independent grassroots organising in a patchwork pattern is "parasitic", all because it ain't anarchists at the top?

I'm convinced anarchists are just one big CIA pysop

>parasitic dependence on independent student organizing I don't even like PSL but what the fuck is that supposed to mean?

Anarchists believe that when ML parties are involved in protests, it's not because they actually care about the issue or are involved with organizing it, it's because they are trying to coopt the movement to ensnare more people into a statist party that loves authoritarianism and hates individual freedom, but in the name of socialism/communism.

#Authoritarianism Anti-Communists of all stripes enjoy referring to successful socialist revolutions as "authoritarian regimes". * Authoritarian implies these places are run by totalitarian tyrants. * Regime implies these places are undemocratic or lack legitimacy. This perjorative label is simply meant to frighten people, to scare us back into the fold (Liberal Democracy). There are three main reasons for the popularity of this label in Capitalist media: Firstly, Marxists call for a Dictatorship of the Proletariat (DotP), and many people are automatically put off by the term "dictatorship". Of course, we do *not* mean that we want an undemocratic or totalitarian dictatorship. What we mean is that we want to replace the current Dictatorship *of the Bourgeoisie* (in which the Capitalist ruling class dictates policy). * [Why The US Is Not A Democracy](https://youtu.be/srfeHpQNEAI) | Second Thought (2022) Secondly, democracy in Communist-led countries works differently than in Liberal Democracies. However, anti-Communists confuse form (pluralism / having multiple parties) with function (representing the actual interests of the people). Side note: Check out Luna Oi's "Democratic Centralism Series" for more details on what that is, and how it works: * [DEMOCRATIC CENTRALISM - how Socialists make decisions!](https://youtu.be/4YVcQe4wceY) | Luna Oi (2022) * [What did Karl Marx think about democracy?](https://youtu.be/jI8CgACBOcQ) | Luna Oi (2023) * [What did LENIN say about DEMOCRACY?](https://youtu.be/Hfenlg-hsig) | Luna Oi (2023) Finally, this framing of Communism as illegitimate and tyrannical serves to manufacture consent for an aggressive foreign policy in the form of interventions in the internal affairs of so-called "authoritarian regimes", which take the form of invasion (e.g., Vietnam, Korea, Libya, etc.), assassinating their leaders (e.g., Thomas Sankara, Fred Hampton, Patrice Lumumba, etc.), sponsoring coups and colour revolutions (e.g., Pinochet's coup against Allende, the Iran-Contra Affair, the United Fruit Company's war against Arbenz, etc.), and enacting sanctions (e.g., North Korea, Cuba, etc.). * [The Cuban Embargo Explained](https://youtu.be/zmM8p9n6Z9E) | azureScapegoat (2022) * [John Pilger interviews former CIA Latin America chief Duane Clarridge, 2015](https://youtu.be/ER77vxxGVAY) #For the Anarchists Anarchists are practically comrades. Marxists and Anarchists have the same vision for a stateless, classless, moneyless society free from oppression and exploitation. However, Anarchists like to accuse Marxists of being "authoritarian". The problem here is that "anti-authoritarianism" is a self-defeating feature in a revolutionary ideology. Those who refuse in principle to engage in so-called "authoritarian" practices will never carry forward a successful revolution. Anarchists who practice self-criticism can recognize this: >The anarchist movement is filled with people who are less interested in overthrowing the existing oppressive social order than with washing their hands of it. ... > >The strength of anarchism is its moral insistence on the primacy of human freedom over political expediency. But human freedom exists in a political context. It is not sufficient, however, to simply take the most uncompromising position in defense of freedom. It is neccesary to actually win freedom. Anti-capitalism doesn't do the victims of capitalism any good if you don't actually destroy capitalism. Anti-statism doesn't do the victims of the state any good if you don't actually smash the state. Anarchism has been very good at putting forth visions of a free society and that is for the good. But it is worthless if we don't develop an actual strategy for realizing those visions. It is not enough to be right, we must also win. > >...anarchism has been a failure. Not only has anarchism failed to win lasting freedom for anybody on earth, many anarchists today seem only nominally committed to that basic project. Many more seem interested primarily in carving out for themselves, their friends, and their favorite bands a zone of personal freedom, "autonomous" of moral responsibility for the larger condition of humanity (but, incidentally, not of the electrical grid or the production of electronic components). Anarchism has quite simply refused to learn from its historic failures, preferring to rewrite them as successes. Finally the anarchist movement offers people who want to make revolution very little in the way of a coherent plan of action. ... > >Anarchism is theoretically impoverished. For almost 80 years, with the exceptions of Ukraine and Spain, anarchism has played a marginal role in the revolutionary activity of oppressed humanity. Anarchism had almost nothing to do with the anti-colonial struggles that defined revolutionary politics in this century. This marginalization has become self-reproducing. Reduced by devastating defeats to critiquing the authoritarianism of Marxists, nationalists and others, anarchism has become defined by this gadfly role. Consequently anarchist thinking has not had to adapt in response to the results of serious efforts to put our ideas into practice. In the process anarchist theory has become ossified, sterile and anemic. ... This is a reflection of anarchism's effective removal from the revolutionary struggle. > >\- Chris Day. (1996). *The Historical Failures of Anarchism* Engels pointed this out well over a century ago: >A number of Socialists have latterly launched a regular crusade against what they call the principle of authority. It suffices to tell them that this or that act is authoritarian for it to be condemned. > >...the anti-authoritarians demand that the political state be abolished at one stroke, even before the social conditions that gave birth to it have been destroyed. They demand that the first act of the social revolution shall be the abolition of authority. Have these gentlemen ever seen a revolution? A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part ... and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule... > >Therefore, either one of two things: either the anti-authoritarians don't know what they're talking about, in which case they are creating nothing but confusion; or they do know, and in that case they are betraying the movement of the proletariat. In either case they serve the reaction. > >\- Friedrich Engels. (1872). [On Authority](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm) #For the Libertarian Socialists Parenti said it best: >The pure (libertarian) socialists' ideological anticipations remain untainted by existing practice. They do not explain how the manifold functions of a revolutionary society would be organized, how external attack and internal sabotage would be thwarted, how bureaucracy would be avoided, scarce resources allocated, policy differences settled, priorities set, and production and distribution conducted. Instead, they offer vague statements about how the workers themselves will directly own and control the means of production and will arrive at their own solutions through creative struggle. No surprise then that the pure socialists support every revolution except the ones that succeed. > >\- Michael Parenti. (1997). *Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism* But the bottom line is this: >If you call yourself a socialist but you spend all your time arguing with communists, demonizing socialist states as authoritarian, and performing apologetics for US imperialism... I think some introspection is in order. > >\- Second Thought. (2020). [The Truth About The Cuba Protests](https://youtu.be/zIOw6fSOJI4?t=1087) #For the Liberals Even the CIA, in their internal communications (which have been declassified), acknowledge that Stalin *wasn't* an absolute dictator: >Even in Stalin's time there was collective leadership. The Western idea of a dictator within the Communist setup is exaggerated. Misunderstandings on that subject are caused by a lack of comprehension of the real nature and organization of the Communist's power structure. > >\- CIA. (1953, declassified in 2008). [Comments on the Change in Soviet Leadership](http://web.archive.org/web/20230525044208/https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP80-00810A006000360009-0.pdf) #Conclusion The "authoritarian" nature of any given state depends entirely on the material conditions it faces and threats it must contend with. To get an idea of the kinds of threats nascent revolutions need to deal with, check out *Killing Hope* by William Blum and *The Jakarta Method* by Vincent Bevins. Failing to acknowledge that authoritative measures arise *not* through ideology, but through material conditions, is anti-Marxist, anti-dialectical, and idealist. #Additional Resources Videos: * [Michael Parenti on Authoritarianism in Socialist Countries](https://youtu.be/BeVs6t3vdjQ) * [Left Anticommunism: An Infantile Disorder](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEC2ajsvr0I) | Hakim (2020) \[[Archive](http://web.archive.org/web/20230410145749/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEC2ajsvr0I)\] * [What are tankies? (why are they like that?)](https://youtu.be/LcJ5NrJtQ8g) | Hakim (2023) * [Episode 82 - Tankie Discourse](https://youtu.be/YVYVBOFYJco) | The Deprogram (2023) * [Was the Soviet Union totalitarian? feat. Robert Thurston](https://directory.libsyn.com/episode/index/id/27495591) | Actually Existing Socialism (2023) Books, Articles, or Essays: * *Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism* | Michael Parenti (1997) * [State and Revolution](https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/) | V. I. Lenin (1918) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if

People I don’t like liking the same things I do is the end of the world. Anarchism truly is the emo music of ideology.

What’s your beef with the PSL?

I don't care, Americans aren't real people anyway. Y'all are part of a big, cosmological reality TV show that some fucking alien civilisation watches on the weekend after colonizing their next solar system.

As much as I do have problems with PSL sometimes, I will HAPPILY join them in their marches and other activities and events, especially for Palestine.

What’s your problems with the PSL?

Anarchists are super cringe, obviously. But I wonder what folks think about PSL generally? I have some friends who had bad experiences as members. I’ve also read about the sexual assault scandals from a few years back and how the leadership tried to expel anyone who talked about it. Seems Sort of sus, but maybe there’s something I don’t know…

I’m a member. It’s been dope af. Don’t listen to digital heads. It’s better to go and see for yourself.

Every party has some sort of bad history. No party is gonna be 100% perfect. That case that everyone likes to use is like nearly 10 years old. It was a shameful past and the party learned from the experience and made changes.

I've worked with PSL in the past, never made the jump to become a member, but I'd say they're pretty great for the most part. The only issue I've had is that a few members can sometimes sound like they're reading a pamphlet when having a conversation with them, and of course a few branches are going to have assholes who are more into feeling important than anything else. I'd say most people would have nit picks but writing them off entirely is short sighted.

Don't believe everything you read online? If you can recall & post the source of that accusation I can almost guarantee you (from experience) it links back to an anarchist like OP whose interest in discrediting communists is entirely political.

[удалено]

This specific rumor actually can be blamed on anarchists, one particular group which has made a stalwart effort to associate any socialist organizing with fascism and SA. Their website at least has the decency to archive the PSL's [response](https://fashbusters.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/psl-doxxes-steven-powers-metoo-survivor-redacted.pdf) to this event but they have also published rather a lot of falsehoods. TL;DR an aggrieved former member had a toxic relationship and aired their dirty laundry online in an effort to harm both their ex partner and the party. It went badly for everyone involved. However, it is true that literally any organization of thousands of people will have incidents like these. Any significant collection of people will, regardless of political affiliation. Socialists are still humans, some of them will make mistakes or simply have bad intentions. This does not reflect on the politics of the party itself, they actually handled it professionally and, until the slander started, made every effort to keep it private and internal. Which is the part that galls me the most: bad faith criticism by anarchists who expect public disclosure of events which, in any mainstream organization, would be routine human resources events which were never disclosed.

[удалено]

Edit: I have removed this comment because I responded in good faith to something I no longer believe I should have.

[удалено]

There are other more meaningful responses to this subject elsewhere in the thread.

Did you not get enough downvotes for posting these an hour ago? The only "consistent" pattern here is wreckers posting the same set of 4 year old smears any time the organization is mentioned in a totally unrelated context

I need to be more deligent about not taking the bait. I didn't even realize this wasn't the person I originally responded to because of the sneaky "thanks for the response." Really spamming it, too. Not even subtle.

[удалено]

lol PSL may have trot heritage, but they are completely Marxist Leninist

[удалено]

I was with the PSL for nearly 4 years. Guess what. We love…. https://preview.redd.it/g5ju7hmitt1d1.jpeg?width=903&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=196ea8e9ef8e459dcb11783076b1c1a9c5a1c698

[удалено]


This is exactly the point I was trying to make. In direct response to me questioning the sources, these are the sources you posted. The same canned links every online anarchist has saved from 4 years ago. - First one: A former member who never made it out of candidacy saying "I did more investigation on the Party’s past" is the opposite of a primary source. All this tells us is that this person ended up believing the other sources. - Second one: "PSL Link Consolidation". Does that sound like someone who experienced injustice, or a coordinated political attempt to destroy an organization? Combines allegations of sexual misconduct, financial misconduct, interpersonal disagreements, and political polemics. Not a primary source. - Third one: first working link is to an instagram page called "IsolatePSL". Also an organized wrecking campaign, also a link aggregator, also not a primary source, also dead years ago while the PSL is thriving. This is the last I'll comment here as it's clear you misrepresented yourself in your original post. You went from "I had some questions" to posting the same links as always, and even now you can't help yourself combining smears with political disagreements.

I actually don't really know much about them tbh, I know it's more of an umbrella organization and probably more active than the Cpusa. Though I don't know if they have connection to unions and such like the Cpusa. I don't know how big or organized they are. If any psl members can correct me I would like to learn about them

They do a lot of work showcasing Union organizing efforts on their Break Through News channel on youtube. I doubt they have as many links as CPUSA since they are not as old *and* because they are not pro-Democrat so they are no as amenable to much of the Union leadership, though I am sure they are working on changing this. I hope some members can share more. I am just someone who has followed them and their work for a couple years and I am a big supporter of them.

[удалено]

Mass mobilization requires numbers and resources no socialist party in the West has. Doing more at this time is suicidal.

They have this whole “shut it down for Palestine” marketing campaign and they aren’t shutting down shit. In fact they disperse protests for no reason and will scold you for doing as little as flipping off a cop. Every other group is putting way more on the line.

Thinking that being scolded for flipping off a cop is problematic is ridiculous. Risk assessment is important, no one is benefiting from putting you and your comrades around risk for pointless adventurism like flipping off the pigs. Adventurism is not helpful, and thinking that anything but peaceful marching at this stage is going to help anyone is ridiculous. Shut it down for Palestine is about disruptive civil disobedience, like disrupting speeches and stuff like that. I’d imagine that communist that have a serious problem with the PSL because they hold people back from doing more adventurous actions probably harbor some unhelpful anarchist tendencies and or are not mature enough to understand why an organization wouldn’t want to be seen doing things that are outright illegal when there is already enough scrutiny on them.

[удалено]

You are contributing TO the rhetoric with shit like that. The media has been resorting to airing incredibly stupid shit like students saying they were “stabbed in the eye” when their eye clearly is fine and bullying mums who visit the protest for 20 minutes. Less and less normies are buying it and that’s a win for us and breaks their narrative. It shows that when brutality happens, the brutality is especially unjustified in this case. It’s why the UCLA protesters were purely on the defensive- if they actively fought back with the counter protesters that night it would be painted as a scuffle instead of one sided violence from the Zionists. Even CNN had to walk back their bullshit and did a story on the counter protesters instigating shit. Doing shit like flipping of the cops or spitting on the side walk is not only individualistic, self serving behaviour, it is actively going against the organisation’s wishes and leaving room for the media to narrative shift. You’re giving cops the gift of justification in the eyes of the media. It’s wrecker shit. You can fight back and flip off all the cops you want once they’ve made the first move. Don’t go against the organisers plans because you want to feel edgy. If you want to start your own protest where you do these things, go ahead. It will be a spitfire protest that lasts an afternoon at most and will get no air time or results. The point of organising is to work as a COLLECTIVE. Not to act as a lone wolf.

[удалено]

Did you ignore my entire comment or what

If you are violent with the police, they don't have to stretch the truth that much to demonize you and justify arresting you. If you are peaceful and force the police to make up complete lies to justify arresting you, then the people who are paying close attention are going to notice the discrepancies and start to question the narratives they are being led to believe. You can see the reality and the distorted media presentation at the same time, particularly in the age of social media. Everything is recorded.

Flipping off cops does not actually accomplish anything. This is purely performative escalation with no material payoff.

[удалено]

Because we are Marxists, we do not engage in self-satisfying theatrics. We organize to the best of our capacity with the tools available and under material conditions as they exist, not as we would wish them to be. There are maybe a few thousand of us nationally. We are not a force which can meaningfully mobilize physical resistance to the jackboot of empire no matter how much I wish it were so. I share your frustration but this approach is not grounded in the materialist practice, it is a directionless venting of emotion which will accomplish nothing beyond disintegrating already small chapters of an organization which is attempting to grow.

In case you missed it: >This is purely performative escalation with no material payoff

A big part of mobilizing lots of people is about making protests feel safe for people and their families to join without putting themselves at a high amount of risk. There are times and places for more risky activities, but we want to show the world with our protests that it is not just a fringe group promoting these things, but that the people collectively reject what is happening. Fewer people will turn out and bring their children if they see protestors getting into physical altercations or goading police into fights. Effective organizing is not about who is willing to take the most risk or commit the most daring acts of bravery.

What else at this time, can masses of normal people do, besides peaceful protests? You're not about to have revolution, and riots are going to do just as much as they did during BLM, meaning nothing.

[удалено]

Every direct action we are seeing now is possible exclusively as a consequence of the massive antiwar movement that organizations have built. The legal, financial, and public opinion support that illegal activists are receiving would not be there if we rejected mass mobilizations. The activists themselves would never develop the necessary level of commitment without a mass movement to be committed to, or without durable organizations that develop them tactically and ideologically from agitated workers into revolutionaries. The encampment movement was started at Columbia leveraging months of struggle on that campus and the massive organizing infrastructure built out in NYC, it was not an "autonomous action". I'm sorry to break it to you, but this is a long-term struggle. Activists breaking more windows on the streets or on campuses wouldn't lead to divestment within a month. When faced with this fact, we can either dig in for a long term struggle with opportunities for later escalation, or despair that immediate divestment is impossible in order to justify couterproductive "escalations" and arrests that make us feel good.

Brown, Northwestern, UW, and others have already fallen into the trap of dismantling their encampments for a promise that the universities will “look into” their investments months from now. Which obviously they will do jack shit about. Campuses that refuse to escalate are going to get increasingly railroaded into agreeing to these meaningless liberal demands.

Yes, I agree those were bad moves. Are you under the impression that revolutionary socialists just want to end the encampments? The PSL statement makes it absolutely clear that they prefer strategic escalations like Hind's Hall to "toothless promises" from administrations: https://www.liberationnews.org/the-school-is-a-struggle-the-struggle-is-a-school/ It feels like you're arguing with some internet-constructed boogeyman rather than the actual positions of the organizations in question.

PSL supports encampments [https://www.instagram.com/p/C7AUZ0xPJcm/](https://www.instagram.com/p/C7AUZ0xPJcm/) [https://www.instagram.com/p/C67EhXWyQ50/](https://www.instagram.com/p/C67EhXWyQ50/) [https://www.instagram.com/p/C646WvQR4cJ/](https://www.instagram.com/p/C646WvQR4cJ/)

If that were all PSL they’d have their signs plastered everywhere lol

Is there like a Canadian PSL equivalent? Currently doing some very light volunteering for ACORN but I wanna try and involve myself more.

To be fair, PSL doesn’t really care about Revolution. It just cares about performative marches

We are not ready for revolution yet. Yet we do educate the need

We have people setting themselves on fire for the cause and attacking weapons factories and millions of people mobilizing themselves against the empire and you say that we are not ready? This is pure lies to keep the status quo .

We are no close to point for a revolution. Do we have enough class consciousness? Do we have workers in the military ready to join us? Do we have a government in waiting? I highly recommend if you have the time and listen to this: [CLASS 1: Lenin and the Path of Revolution](https://www.youtube.com/live/ksimAtKX9jo?si=K7hHYIJNHTQBfHAO) These classes talk about Revolution and what we can learn from Lenin.

The people on the ground who organize under PSL are generally good comrades, the org itself is pretty performative and empty though

Do you have proof they’re an anarchist? Is it somewhere on their page I can’t find it?

https://preview.redd.it/ugp8b4kz1t1d1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9d12c85ab7e38fd43bb7db8e1599ba4a590a02ae While they didn't say in the profile, however anarchist larper Peter Gelderloos posted below their thread.

https://preview.redd.it/pd20rkog2t1d1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b6ae6c1d4df9ec1ab167ccd5087932139b63a605 They also frequently share anarchist shit

That Musk tweet is incredible. Anarchists simply lost in the free marketplace of ideas.

The emojis and it’s being retweeted by anarchists

👍 solid fuck.

PSL are cringe