Gopnik_Award

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] Gopnik_Award@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Add this one to the collection:

fascist-imperialist Russo-Chinese bourgeoisie

[–] Gopnik_Award@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 2 years ago

As a person who's about to head to University in a few months and currently does Maths, Computer Science, and Business Studies, I can definitely state that any degree/subject which involves liberal topics such as Economics and Political Science are useless.

As an example, in Business Studies, it's always about the business. They just put the thing out there, "the business is what matters". Of course they delve into ethics and stuff but they don't care about that because businesses are supposed to be the best option. It's just capitalist realism combined with writing too much.

Economics is similar, it just doesn't involve businesses as much. It's just: "keep the economy going, line go up means world more gooder." It's an absolute joke. People with Economics or PoliSci degrees are also utterly atrocious and worse than marxists who don't hold any degree of the sort.

I'm surprised that this shit is being taught to begin with. It's all liberal nonsense, really. I don't have much on PoliSci, but someone here made a series of posts where it delves into the liberal nature of PoliSci.

[–] Gopnik_Award@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

If lesser-evilism would also benefit the proletariat more overall than not, then yes. It would be. But lesser-evilism relies on the fact that you're delaying the inevitable. Capitalism would eventually destroy quality of life.

Not with critical support. Russia, even if it is bigoted, will benefit the global proletariat more than not. That's because Russia is fighting against a unipolar imperialist power, and destroying the grip of the western world would make revolutions and potential revolutions much easier.

[–] Gopnik_Award@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Comrade, what do you think about this article in particular?

[–] Gopnik_Award@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I am 100% convinced that Wisconcom is CIA agent who is tasked with eliminating online communist servers

 

Hi comrades, some people on the prolewiki discord already know this, but I have decided to come out as trans!

I'm a woman and my name is Anna!

I will be changing my pfp and name tomorrow. I don't know what else to say and I don't want to overthink, so here you go.

Edit 1: Thanks for the all positivity comrades! I written this like near midnight and I was just hiding and anticipating some response. This community really just is great.

Edit 2: I've changed my PFP and Username. I feel happier now that it's this way!

[–] Gopnik_Award@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Basically be an adventurist, ruin the name of socialism in Peru, and cause a massacre of peasants which basically lead to the downfall of the party. He was also against modern socialist nations, calling them revisionist.

[–] Gopnik_Award@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 2 years ago (8 children)
[–] Gopnik_Award@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 2 years ago

They think the DPRK is bourgeois because it doesn't align with their theory, it's as simple as that.

[–] Gopnik_Award@lemmygrad.ml -1 points 2 years ago

MLMs are liberals, they just don't want to admit it.

[–] Gopnik_Award@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 2 years ago

To those who support sison or downvoted, I would like to say something.

Is it marxism to continue a failed armed struggle that the PKP stopped because the proletariat were not ready?

Deteriorating events under the neocolonial conditions in 1949 led to an erroneous assessment of a “revolutionary situation” by the Jose Lava leadership of the party at that time, which proceeded to organize the Hukbong Mapagpalaya ng Bayan (HMB, or the People’s Liberation Army), and to launch an armed bid for power. The armed uprising was crushed by the mid-1950s, at a loss of around 10,000 fighters, mostly HUKBALAHAP veterans. [...] By the early 1960s, the PKP had to be rebuilt, and had to shift from the underground armed struggle to an open political path of struggle. [...] However, the rebuilding of the party and its mass organizations was hampered by the rise of maoism in 1966. Under the influence of the so-called “great proletarian cultural revolution” in China, a youth-based maoist group was nurtured within the PKP by Jose Maria Sison, then a member of the party’s political bureau. Sison wanted to continue with an adventurist armed struggle on the basis of Mao’s “world revolutionary situation” thesis, while the veterans who comprised the majority of the party leaders were convinced that there was no revolutionary situation in the country, and that the armed struggle was then already a futile road to gaining political power in the Philippines. Sison and his maoist cohorts were expelled from the party in April 1967. [1]

Is it marxism to support US imperialism consistently?

The formation of the CPP, and later of its “New People’s Army” (NPA), had the covert material support not only of maoist China, but also of then-Senator Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino and media magnate Don Chino Roces, both known agents of the US Central Intelligence Agency. [1]

The CPP has not once but twice, supported the same side as the US. I can recall 2 instances, one instance is that the CPP critically supports Alexei Navalny (a former white nationalist and US puppet) and the other instance is that the CPP supports the Hong Kong Protests (Despite being also US backed). [2]

Is it marxism (and brave) that he self-exiled himself from the Philippines to be in a developed imperialist nation?

Sison self-exiled himself from the Philippines and currently resides in the Netherlands. I haven't seen Lenin do this (he was exiled) or Mao Zedong. This is nothing but a sign of cowardice and shows that Sison doesn't really care about what's happening within the national borders. [2]

Is it marxism to order a bombing into Manila so that you can get members?

The then NPA head, Victor Corpus, later revealed that Sison ordered the bombing to force the government to institute more repressive measures, on the diabolical theory that more repression would force more moderate oppositionists to go underground and join then very limited NPA ranks. Thousands of recruits were needed to handle the thousands of high-powered rifles and grenade launchers in military assistance that Sison was then arranging from maoist China. [...] The PKP and its mass organizations opposed the drift towards martial law, while the maoists practically taunted the government into declaring martial law, claiming that such will be met with their “people's war”. Other terrorist actions by the CPP-NPA, including bombings on civilian facilities in Metropolitan Manila, plus the July 1972 landing of thousands of armalite rifles and their ammunition at Digoyo Point, Palanan, Isabela, aboard the M/V “Karagatan” which came from maoist China, led to Marcos’ declaration of martial law in September 1972. [1]

Not only that, is it Marxism that you should support 'one side of imperialism' over another?

Sison maintains that it is good to have a “multipolar” world and that Russia, China, SCIO, and BRICS play a positive role against the US. It is not in line with Maoism to suggest that competition between imperialists is something that helps revolutionary movements. This is a revisionist position. [3]

Even though this is from a maoist and I do not agree with this article at all, I whole-heartedly agree with this. If you claim that two sides are imperialist, you should refute to support either side. This is indeed a revisionist position, but not for the right reasons.

Sison should not be supported by any Marxist. He is closer to Proudhon and Anarchism in comparison to Lenin and Marxism. Sison is a petit bourgeois individual that seeks to only uphold himself and his clique, like the Gang of Four did.

 

RIP Bozo hope his party goes down with it

 

This is a copy of what he sent to me after I wrote my "What even is 'Dengism'?" essay. Here's what he said lol:

I have read your essay on ProleWiki, "What even is "dengism"?", and I must say, it is absolutely repugnant, as are the other essays (or rather, screeds which are little more than dengist propaganda and pseudo-socialist nonsense) you have concoted on the revisionist hive that is ProleWiki.

The contents of your scribbles is, in short, nothing beyond citing a few examples of Deng Xiaoping's propaganda in which he allegedly affirms his socialist ideology. You totally omit the true aspects of his bourgeois ideology (even claiming quotes he is well-known to have said were "fake" and "made up by Maoists").

Yes, of course it would be the case that if you took this-or-that Deng quote, while removing everything else he said, you could misinform your readers that he is a socialist. Of course, this is both false and intellectually dishonest.

Deng Xiaoping omited class struggle in favor of the "development of the productive forces". To this day, the revisionist CPC keeps ill-informed revisionist propagandists such as yourself servile to their social-fascist ideological line by merely "kicking the can down the road" as to when they are going to become truly "socialist". Once the year 2049 arrives, the revisionists in China are simply going to move the target for "reaching socialism" to 2100, and then 2200, and so on. I believe comrade Enver Hoxha wisely noted this trend when he said:

"In a demagogic way, Mao Tse-tung and the Communist Party of China have subordinated all their declarations about the construction of the socialist and communist society to their pragmatic policy. Thus, in the years of the so-called great leap forward, with the aim of throwing dust in the eyes of the masses, who, emerging from the revolution, aspired to socialism, they declared that within 2-3 five-year periods, they would pass directly over to communism. Later, however, in order to cover up their failures, they began to theorize that the construction and triumph of socialism would require ten thousand years."

Otherwise, you, in your essay, refuse to view things from a Marxist and dialectical view. You remove, among many other features, one of the most critical aspects of socialism: the removal of the bourgeoisie from economic power in favor of the proletariat.

Developing the productive forces is important, but it must be given lesser importance to class struggle, the creation of public ownership of the means of production, and so on.

Using your (very much poor) standards of "proof" for the ideological nature of these leaders, with which you use in this context to make Deng Xiaoping seem to be a Marxist, you could deceit others into viewing Adolf Hitler as a socialist. Your writing is nothing but propaganda to promote dengist ideology, an ideology which the rest of ProleWiki maintains with great zeal.

In the middle of your essay, you use the "cultural revolution" in China under Mao Zedong as a justification for Deng's coup and rise to power over the Gang of Four. However, you fail to account for the fact that, as comrade Hoxha once again correctly noted:

"The course of events showed that the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution was neither a revolution, nor great, nor cultural, and in particular, not in the least proletarian. It was a palace Putsch on an all-China scale for the liquidation of a handful of reactionaries who had seized power."

It is correct Deng Xiaoping was merely following Mao Zedong Thought (albeit a extremely bourgeois interruption of it), however, it is the case that Mao Zedong Thought was, at its core, a revisionist and anti-Marxist ideology, with reactionary elements it attained from religion, among other sources.

Of all, it is your conclusion which is the most revisionary and false.

Not only do you imply that it is exclusively supporters of the capitalist state of China who constitute "legitimate" Marxist-Leninists, you effectively say that only Dengists (additional note, Stalinism does in fact exist) are real Marxist-Leninists.

Not only do you pollute Marxism via attempting to claim pseudo-socialists such as yourself are theoretically genuine, you are engaging in what is effectively dogmato-revisionism; the adoption of revisionism, and attempt to make said revisionism seem like truthful Marxism, and the rejection of all non-revisionists as being "revisionist".

While it is true that Marxist-Leninist-Maoists are revisionists, you attempting to claim that all Anti-revisionists are "revisionists" is nothing but a dogmatic attempt to defend your revisionism.

Regarding what dengism is, it is true that not all Marxists who support the People's Republic of China are dengist, rather, most of them are simply misinformed or have made a correctable ideological mistake. Rather, dengists are those "Marxists" who persist in this mistake, and defend it, which is what both you and the rest of the ProleWiki community is doing.

I wish to present to you a definition of what dengism is from a well-informed and wise Anti-revisionist who is a comrade of mine:

"Dengism is a revisionist and pseudo-Marxist ideology which originated during the full restoration of capitalism in China in the late 1970s. With regards to its followers in this context, it refers to the “Communists” who maintain the view that state-capitalism is socialism, class struggle is trivial and secondary in comparison to the development of the productive forces, that maintaining the bourgeoisie in power is socialist, and that working towards a revolution in one’s own country is useless, and all effort of the Communists must be towards defending supposed “actually existing socialism.”

Dengism is the ideology of counter-revolution, stagnation, and social-imperialism..."

We call you revisionists dengists not because we seek to vacuously attack you, but to separate Marxists from pseudo-Marxists like you.

It is groups such as ProleWiki, GenZedong, and others which have motivated me to cease calling myself a "Marxist-Leninist", and instead refer to myself as a "Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist". You people are giving outsiders to Marxism a bad view due to your crypto-capitalist ideology, your defense of revisionist and social-fascist state such as China, Vietnam, the DPRK, and so on. "Marxism-Leninism" has long since been hijacked and corrupted by revisionists starting with Trotsky and Khruschev, and presently with people such as yourself.

I hope you reconsider your views regarding dengist revisionism. Thank you and good day.

(I suggest you post this criticism on the talk page of your essay to give others an alternative view on this subject.)

[–] Gopnik_Award@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Note that the redirect states that it was originally Wisconcom. Anyways good riddance snake.

Addition:

Wisconcom has intentionally changed his name and made it as a request. His username is now Fiscornus.

view more: next ›