drinkinglakewater

It's also the party of Khrushchev and Gorbachev, Zyuganov is not exactly Stalin.

I'll be waiting, Mecha Lenin

implying you'd prefer they eat shit anyways

This is putting words in my mouth.

I haven't seen any of those criticisms thrown out at the PSL or DSA on here, or the More Perfect Union people (who are legitimately nationalists if the slogan didn't give it away), neither of which accomplishes any electoral victories at all. Like the CPUSA they are a source of both optimism and deep consternation from me

I personally maintain similar criticisms of PSL, CPUSA, and DSA (and I guess More Perfect Union although they're not any sort of party formation as far as I know), why assume I don't?

I support every communist party simultaneously, and you can all deal with it. I am pleased with this as I am the Maoists in India executing Hindutva bastards.

I broadly support most left wing parties, but if I broadly support these things I'm more than allowed to have my critiques of them as well.

Baseless in what way? They're the self described continuation of Gorbachev's CPSU, which most MLs rightly criticize for a ton of reasons. They have an ossified aging leadership that refuses to bend to the more radical youth of the party and instead pushes milquetoast parliamentary "communism" to stagnant electoral results. The same social democratic dead end we've seen a hundred times already.

Oh joy, the revisionists are co-opting communist iconography for nationalist nostalgia

Oh I must've missed that

Not sure it's what you're looking for but I've been listening to a Star Trek inspired improv comedy podcast called "Oh These Those Stars of Space" that's pretty fun

Right, but where are the women in this? Ukraine is still doing male-only conscription (for now)

Well the conscripts maybe, but there should still be a base of anti-conscription women within the country (widows, spouses, etc)

Has there been much in Ukraine in way of anti-war protests? I've heard there have been some but it doesn't seem like there's an organized anti-war or even anti-conscription movement, although that could be due to the western media bubble

I'd say the common definition of a state is an entity with a monopoly on violence within a particular geographic area, and this is not something Marxists generally disagree with as it's a surprisingly materialist understanding of power. The function of a state according to Marxism is to use this monopoly to enforce class relations, which is part of the reason that Leninists view the state as a tool for class struggle, as a socialist/communist state can enforce pro-worker class relations and eventually end the class distinction (this is why Lenin theorized the state would "wither away", because if there are no difference in classes there's nothing to enforce).

So to address your confusion between Marxists and Anarchists, both ultimately do not want the state because it is a coercive tool to enforce specifc class relations, but the Marxists view it as a neutral tool whereas anarchists view it as inherently oppressive and cannot be used positively. Some anarchists view that, rather than classes, the ultimate source of oppression is the state and that is why it must be abolished which is a break from the Marxist view as it either ignores class conflict or folds it into critique of the state.

This is a very surprising policy turn, does this mean reunification is off the table permanently or is it just a shift in priority?