ไม่สามารถเล่นวิดีโอนี้
ขออภัยในความไม่สะดวก
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ส.ค. 2024
- Today we expand a bit more on the topic of 'Tankies' including the event where it originated from.
Book Rec: Joyful Militancy
theanarchistlibrary.org/libra...
Annotations:
1. In case it wasn't clear, I'm drawing parallels between the two groups, not necessarily making a moral standings on the events. That's not the topic of this discussion.
www.marxisme.dk/arkiv/bakan/90...
www.marxists.org/history/etol...
2. The refutation to Aptheker's book: stars.library.ucf.edu/cgi/vie...
konfliktuskutato.hu/index.php?...
3. Hungarian Tragedy
www.marxists.org/archive/frye...
The proletariat storming heaven” - Mouvement Communiste
libcom.org/article/hungary-56...
Interviews from the time.
libcom.org/article/hungarian-...
4. hatfulofhistory.wordpress.com...
5. This is an interesting thing to think about. Rakosi was the head of state of Hungary from 48-56. Under his government Kadar was sentenced to life imprisonment under the premise that he was a Horthy spy.
People often say that Nagy released ‘conservative elements’ from prisons yet it was Nagy himself who released Kadar in 54 and brought him into the government.
The Kadar party line however still that upheld the fascist revolution position.
But hold on, if you defend the Rakosi government, this is the same government which found Kadar guilty of being a enemy of the state, and was released after the beginning of Khrushchev’s ‘revisionism’
Needless to say, party politics is a mess.
6. As far as I am aware, the event depicted here is a false flag.
7. www.thomassankara.net/kadhafi...
/ gaddafis-role-in-burki...
00:00 - Intro
00:23 - Maoism
02:27 - Trotsky
06:50 - Malcolm X again
07:15 - Hungarian Revolution
13:00 - Russian Invasion of Ukraine
18:32 - Anti-Americanism
24:12 - Aesthetics in Leftism
26:06 - Book Recommendation
"the US uses soft power"
chile, vietnam, iraq : what ?!?
I love those very rare photos of trosky and Stalin when they were young
Nazis getting praised from Zionists is not that rare, Otto Skorzeny, a German nazi got praised from Israel as he allegedly worked for Mossad. And you can still be a fascist such as Bela Kiraly and get praise from Israel. Your point about Bela Kiraly being praised by Israel does not matter.
Hell Israel has been involved in training the Azov battalion it doesn't make them automatically not Nazis lmfao. Israel is as close as it comes to a fascist state
Indeed. Israel is the greatest proponent of fascism across the World, after the United States
@rhys williams This is a good example of why you should research before speaking. Former Mossad head Isser Harel confirmed the story that former Nazis were recruited to provide intelligence on Arab countries. Yes it is not rare for Zionists to praise Fascists and work with them, look at the Lehi and other fascist organizations in Israel. You needa research before you waste your time typing up such things
@rhys williams Recently Netanyahu said "Hitler didn't want to exterminate the Jews" - fascists getting lauded by Israel happens all the time. I'm not sure why anyone would hold Israel up as a good source on anti-fascism, even during the period immediately after the war.
Talk about principled analysis - just because the zionists were jewish and reacting to one of the worst genocides in recorded history doesn't mean that Israel has ever been anything but a colonial (fascist) project.
That's prolly not uncommon because Zionists ARE fascists. This was deeply disturbing and I'm very sus of Bad Mouse' views on Palestine now.
Modern Socialists should look at past Socialist states the same way a Liberal in the 19th century would look at Cromwell's England or Revolutionary France: a groundbreaking experiment that marched humanity down the path of history, but still a flawed template that should be examined and improved upon for future social developments, while still keeping the Marxist tenant of working-class dictatorship. That being said, considering the amount of propaganda (especially in the imperial core/the West) it is hard to be nuanced on the subject and not fall into the comforts of dogmatic support without constructive criticism.
One problem ive noticed while trying to do this is that liberals will say you're "handwaving" away past socialist nations. It's quite infuriating, but i suppose that's because they don't understand the inevitable/necessary change that will be global socialism.
I think that's the most honest thing to do in regards to talking about past socialist experiments. We need to look at them in the same way liberals look at the French Revolution and whatnot. There were tons of liberal experiments that failed miserably.
@@stevekovoc3939 French revolution is our revolution actually. The 'sanscoulletes' r proleteriat in alliance with petty bourgeoisie. And the violence is greatly exaggerated.
Marxism is scientific, and it is not a petrified dogma, as the bourgeoisie accuse it of being. Among Marxism's core and most essential components lies _scientific socialism._ This is a socialism that examines society, its contradictions and its motions (i.e, through the dialectical method) and draws its conclusions therefrom, as opposed to utopian socialists, who are not only dogmatic, but do not even pretend to strive to align their views with reality.
Reality changes, and with it, scientific socialism does as well, albeit not immediately and not without some misconception, just as the natural sciences. Marxists therefore apply the method of struggle, that being discussing and putting arguments before one another, as to reach a higher level of understanding of an issue, to refine our ideas and to reach new conclusions. Struggle is good, and not bad, because, as Chairman Mao Tse-Tung wrote in 1963, "generally speaking, the ideas that succeed are correct and those that fail are incorrect." It works almost as natural selection in nature does.
Marxists examine the contradictions in different societies and between societies, and see class struggle, the struggle between the forces and relations of production, the struggle between the Old society and the New society, the struggle between countries, and so on and so forth. Together, these contradictions, and the methods for solving them, are figured out, and a general plan for the positive qualitative change that society needs is made. Eventually, the New, emerging society, today socialism, before that capitalism, and before that feudalism, will succeed historically, and destroy the Old society, without exception. Chairman Mao also said, in 1944, that "to die for the people is weightier than Mount Tai, but to work for the fascists and die for the exploiters and oppressors is lighter than a feather."
@@srquack27 socialism isn’t inevitable. Just because it’s an evolution from Capitalism doesn’t mean it’s inevitable. Another evolution was found after Marx: fascism. It’s unfortunately just as easy to fall into.
Ah yes, my favorite of Trotsky's work, his role as Steve on the hit show Stranger Things
I wish more people were honest about how difficult it is to read a book the whole way though 😆
it's all in perspective
some people consume books whole, especially with audiobooks
this is not ME mind you
I've seen people say they read like 800 page books in one day which sounds insane to me but then again I've biked almost 200km in one day once
You're not a maoist, you're a badmaoist
"Trotsky wanted to do it more gradually"
Trotsky wanted to do dekulakization and collectivization in 1925, vs when it was actually done in 1928. Everything I've seen says Trotsky is like a Stalinist without the realpolitik. At least as a politician and general.
About the only argument I can think of that this wouldn't be extremely conflicted or even catastrophic is that maybe the Kulaks weren't as entrenched yet. The idea that Trotsky was not gonna collectivize Soviet agriculture by force when that was a key goal of the Soviet government is kinda absurd. Especially in light of his left oppositionalism.
The way I see it, Trotsky would not have stopped with collectivization. He would have nationalized all land (not just on papers but literally). That would have certainly led to peasant insurgency and destruction of USSR.
That is completely the opposite of reality.
@@garethmartin6522 If u r a recent Trotskyist I would like you to not trust ur mentor Trotskyists or Imperialist propaganda.
If u read Trotsky's collected works on the topic of peasants u will realize that Trotsky throughout his career despised the peasantry. In fact he believed that the reason the reason World Revolution was immediately necessary was because majority Russians were peasants, while Lenin believed an alliance with peasant is not only possible but necessary. Something to which Stalin in fact agreed.
@@someesingh2827 Nope, I'm a veteran of some 25 years. And so I would tell you not to trust Stalinist bullshit.
@@someesingh2827 OK and? What exactly does that have to do with, say, the theory of combined and uneven development, or Permanent Revolution?
Don't see the problem with upholding Ho-chi-minh, really.
I don't think BadMouse criticised upholding good ol' uncle Ho, the critique was aimed at the alienating aesthetic of groups of men chanting stupid slogans.
ML's greatest weakness is hero worshipping.
And i say it as an ML myself.
@@redElim Not to distrust a cardassian spy, but isn't protesting groups of ppl chanting slogans?
@@redElim So Ho Chi Minh is based but liking Ho Chi Minh is cringe.
Yeah that sure makes sense.
@@PlayerJV7 literally this but replace “liking” with “chanting”
Thank you for addressing my previous comment on DuBois, Japan anti-americanism. I completely agree with that take 👍🏾
I always thought ML talked about trotsky like he was a vague evil
@@EggEnjoyer yeah, I gotta be honest if you asked me how a trotskite was different from other communists I'd not be able to give you a concrete answer. But I just seems to be like the socialist scapegoat like trotskyite seems to just be short hand for leftist I don't like
No, ML is one scientific trend among many within Marxism
"USA tends to use soft power"
entire western hemisphere and the middle east: "wait... what?"
Hahahaha
Iraq, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Syria, Cuba, Japan etc: am I a f*cking joke to you?
"annexation of tibet" ah yes because the serfs rebelling and liberating themselves is annexation
"Serfs"? The vast majority of Tibetans were practically slaves under the warped false version of Buddhism that the Tibetan monks practiced in order to maintain their absolute tyranical power. Yes, I agree, as much research Badmouse does, he hardly seems to have touched the topic of Tibet.
serfs liberating themselves by taking on han chinese party line? and repressing tibetian buddhist and other faiths and independence? Tibet is not chinese. Thats not tibetians rising up against Opressive illogical buddhist hegemony. Thats china taking over tibet.
This is a bunch of "left-wing" imperialist apologia.
Tibet will be free!
Tibet will be free!
thankfully, it already is.
That quote you read from Joyful Militancy reminded me a lot of the late Harold Bloom's unfinished literary theory of the Anxiety of Influence; a thing I think everyone on the Left, to one extent or another, is still struggling with; perhaps that is the answer to the Tankie question; we've yet to feel confident enough to strike out on our own; fearing what may happen if the training wheels are off.
Also, the revolt in Hungary might be seen as, at least to me, as a chaotic reaction to 'The Secret Speech". Though Hungary had more than average arrest, it hit the whole Marxist world. Not only this country was "turned upside down", but the whole East Europe too. In any case, mistakes happen and will happen.
what does "'average arrest" mean? what does a country being "turned upside down" mean?
@@erdood3235 average social arrest.
@@MTd2 what does that mean?
@@erdood3235 I don't know
I find it out that the flag of the Hungarian Revolution would, in 1957, be presented to the provisional anticommunist coup authorities in San Marino, as they were, with the diplomatic help of the US and military aid of Italy, overthrowing the communist government.
That AzovSomething drop
So sad to be here for your final video, can't wait for the next one 😔😢
I definitely disagree with some parts of this video but these sorts of uncomfortable and nuanced discussions are so so necessary and this video is very refreshing to see
That's how I feel. I do not agree with the implicit charcterisation of the suppression of the Black Army or Kronstadt as clearly negative. Also, while I'd like to think I am faaaaar from a Stalinist, the Holodomor as a genocide does not have very much academic historical backing (since the Soviet archives have been exposed).
@Irta Man thats called not being an anarchist
@RichardMarksman He said not "clearly negative", that doesnt mean automatically positive. Watch TheFinnishBolshevicks video on this, there is evidence, that the Kronstadt-Rebellion was a conglomerate of anarchists, menshevicks and whites. It was tragic, but comprehensible
I still have to watch the first but it just tickled me that thumbnail Stalin turned around for this follow-up video. ‘Oh hello, didn’t see you there.’
Good to see you back man.
I would love it if you made a video about your criticism of the anarcho-NATOist narrative that you hinted at in this video - that sounded really interesting.
9:00 this is a dumb point. Israel has supported many anti semetic movements/governments. Eg: fascist Argentina or more recently Al Nusra in Syria
"Fascist" Argentina lol wut
You raised a good point about Gaddafi and Sankara, finally glad someone covered that! It's strange how you implied that defending past Socialist societies is "apologia" however.
defending anything is apologia; thst's what the word means. it does usually have a negative connotation but ultimately it's just defending something with argument.
@@mykal4779 he chose a negative word for defending past socialist leaders, it’s strange but it’s not surprising for him to dislike stalin as he cites libcom the website
@@fun_ghoul i mean yea he definitely doesn’t like stalin watch the video and look at what he cited
@@fun_ghoul never said it was dog shit
@@ABPHistory I mean, how exactly could one defend Stalin? Genuinely curious, here’s what I think. He definitely wasn’t as bad as he’s been historically viewed, and on a local level at least, the Soviet Union was more Democratic than western democracies. However, it was deeply authoritarian at a national level, which is really bad in my opinion. Any nation where you can be “disappeared” for your political opinions is a fascistic nation. I used to be really intrigued by the USSR based on the possibility of it being actually more Democratic, and demonized for this by the west, but as I’ve looked into it, it just seems like there were way too many atrocities committed and suppression of the people to justify it. Idk, please convince me otherwise.
You're really playing up the antagonism from the Npa towards MLs, the Philippine communist party have cordial relations with many ML parties, most MLs also fucking love the NPA, me included.
Secondly first world MLMs have some of the most extreme tankie tendencies that exist, and it feels ridiculous to find the most extreme anti-revisionism possible to not be tankie because everyone fails to meet their standards.
And yet they are Maoists, you might not hate them but fact is they have a quite distinct ideology and ML's trying to co-opt them as 'ML parties doing stuff' comes across as silly considering most other big ML parties across the world are quite stagnant these days by comparison.
@@BadMouseProductions true! MLM are the only “tankies” leading revolutions
@@BadMouseProductions maoism bases it's ideology on marxism-leninism
@@BadMouseProductions they are Maoists because they're in the fucking Philippines, all socialist movements have to adapt to the conditions of the place they struggle in, and that includes silly secterian western marxists like us, if i lived in the Philippines id be a maoist too.
Also cooption of maoists is silly, they're also Marxist Leninists, saying otherwise would mean we don't have anything in common with Marxists and that MLs arent allowed to "co-opt" China, Cuba, Laos, Vietnam, DPRK or Nepal because they all have specific national variants that were synthesized through struggle.
@@ayeball2 And if you were in India you'd be a Maoist? Yet India has a 1 million strong ML party? Turkey has similar. Maoists aren't simply limited to what place they're in for crying out loud. Its like you just think Maoists are just ML's but with a bit more Mao.
This was a really good video. We need these nuanced critiques
My friend I liked your video, it was very informative. But I have something to add.
"Many Maoists defend China's annexation of Tibet."
"Maoists reject you.."
I would like point out that both r misleading statements.
Firstly, as redundant as it sounds, Tibet was a part of China at that time. In fact US continued to recognise Tibet as part of China when it was under Jiang, who carried out the coronation of Tendzin Gyatso as Dalai Lama. As Natrajan pointed out, Tibet was only deemed independent for geopolitical reasons. Tibet's independence was never a popular demand at that time, unlike now (which happened because of capitalism). The only reason the leaders of Tibet sought self determination was because Mao was doing land reforms, abolishing serfdom, and curbing influence of Tibetan theological educational and legal structure. The people supported Mao as is evident from 2 sources.
1) Eye witnesses like Anna Louise Strong went to Tibet and talked with common people as well as local soldiers discovered that majority Tibetans shared no sympathy with these elites and certainly did not demand secession (up until .uch later).
2) CIA director John Knaus mentioned in his book that they were finding it difficult to recruit mercenaries for their insurgency amongst Tibetan people.
Secondly, we don't reject 'Tankies' because of our dogmatism. Most tankies of this kind support literal capitalist countries like modern day China, Russia and Iran. Likewise, many others who recognise the fallacy of supporting the above three, still support capitalist USSR.
Yes, USSR after 1953 was capitalist. And no, not because Stalin died, but because in June 1953 a military coup literally overthrew people's Democracy in USSR.
Lenin said scientific socialism is state capitalism with a people's democracy. USSR after that coup was merely a bourgeois republic. It certainly had many democratic aspects like vertical checks on power, participatory politics and discussions, influence of trade unions, popular newspapers (which criticized a lot), etc. However it was a capitalist system of weird type.
It flactuated b/w two positions reflected by two seperate capitalist classes. The mid level management (directors) and the top level leadership (bureaucracy). The former called for a traditional market like system while the latter wanted a rigid caste system based centralized monopoly capitalism.
"..and the way condensation feels right..."
Just a good way to let off steam.
I'll see myself out.
Loved these videos! I call myself a Marxist-Leninist and only with these two videos I realized how that can be so misunderstood. Because of how the communist movement developed in Portugal, where I live, ML can be interpreted very differently ... which just goes to show how nuanced this discussion is. Let me explain:
In Portugal today there is a single, still relevant, communist party (PCP, Portuguese Communist Party) which wavers from 5% to 10% on elections. It's a 101 year old party, founded by anarcho-syndicalists (the only communist party that can claim to have been founded by anarchists) in 1921, who sympathized with the Bolshevik revolution and understood the importance of a strong organization. In those starting years inside the party the anarchist and communist lines still clashed a lot but eventually the communists won out because strict organization was eventually a necessity to survive the yoke of fascism which started in 1926 in Portugal. When fascism ended in 1974 with the Carnation Revolution, the PCP was the ONLY party from 1926 to still exist having withstood 48 years of fascism all the while printing and distributing its journal "Avante !" (Forward !) monthly to the Portuguese people.
Today, the party still clearly states that Marxism-Leninism is its guiding philosophy and the inner life of the party is still centered around democratic-centralism.
It always supported the USSR throughout it's existence (including Hungary and Czechoslovakia affairs) and near it's end in 1991 it even initially supported the attempted party coup against Yeltsin although it quickly retracted that statement as "rash". This being said, the party has already denounced Stalinism and has come forward to claim that "democratic-centralism has been in many places destroyed from within, that the centralist trend has in most socialist countries, and within our own party in the past, overridden the democratic one" reaffirming that the party's understanding of democratic-centralism is of a balance of the two aspects, "freedom of discussion, unity in action".
This being said it denounces Stalinism, the Chinese Communist Party and the eurocommunist parties of Spain, Italy and France to this day, all as traitors. The only two "socialist" nations it has good relations with and keeps in contact with are Cuba and Vietnam.
During the 80's it had to deal with the rise of Maoism and with splinter groups that branded themselves ML (including a short-lived offshoot party called "PCP-ML") which claimed PCP was revisionist (for rejecting Stalinism).
Since 2014 the party had been calling out the actions of the Ukrainian government and Ukrainian fascist organizations against the russian-speaking population (see Odessa massacre or how the central government cut pension payments for citizens of the Donbass in 2015). Later it condemned the Russian occupation of Crimea. When the full scale invasion of Ukraine started PCP was THE ONLY portuguese party to condemn the actions of both countries for the events. It has no illusions on Putin, and clearly condemns his aims as imperialist BUT it doesn't loose sight of Ukraine's actions against its own population and the repeated violation of signed agreements with Russia, as well as it's instrumentalization by NATO to further aggravate Russia.
All in all, a party that still waves the flag of Marxism-Leninism and follows democratic centralism BUT rejects Stalinism AND eurocommunism.
This is indeed a very nuanced and interesting discussion. It is a pleasure to watch, please keep the content coming.
Much of the same applies to the KPÖ (Communist Party of Austria).
Awesome comment! Thank you.
Christ Marxist Lenenism is such an outdated political concept, talking shit about eurocommunism... Do you even read what slop you have just written down??
Dear comrade,
I have had the pleasure (and displeasure sometimes) of working with your party on many occasions, due to our parties being the only surviving ML parties in Europe (me being from Greece). And I agree that the geographic location of your party and its own history can form how you view ML. My party is a more "Stalinist" one (although I have heard "Troskyist" being thrown at us as well), but still denounces the PCE, PCRF and most other communist parties especially due to their "anti-imperialist" stace of siding with Russia, but also denouncing Ukraine and NATO as well. Our parties used to have great relations for a time, up until the point where you decided to join a government in a capitalist nation and we didn't (in the same year mind you), which then put a dent in our relations, with both sides criticising each other for being "against their own people". At the end of the day, we walk down different paths now, which is saddening, but also understandable, given the current state of the ML and the struggle for control of the European Left your party, my party, the CCP and the eurocommunist parties are having. I hope one day we will see each other on the other side of our revolutions and prove that there is more than one way to change the world. But if it isn't meant to be, at least let's hope that neither the eurocommunists or the dengists win this one...
@@jayden3814 Hey :)
Im not actually affiliated in any way with PCP, although I have thought of joining. Its just the party I vote for in the Portuguese general elections.
Also I had the great fortune of being born in Athens to a greek mother and portuguese father (my greek is very rusty nowadays). So yes I know the KKE well :) Salutations comrade :)
On the topic of PCP joining the government that is not true. PCP supported a social democratic government in parliament but it had no ministers in the cabinet. As a portuguese citizen I am glad PCP did that because it meant the liberal/conservative coalition was removed from power and a lot of good measures were passed by the social democratic government which alliviated our people from the yoke of Troika and austerity. That being said that lasted 5 years ... PCP has since then broken its support for the social democrats ... that just forced new elections and got them an absolute majority in parliament. At least its still better than having the liberal/conservative coalition in government. We are better now than before as a country.
I am sad to hear relations have become not so good between KKE and PCP... As a portuguese-greek communist that truly saddens me !
Herbert Aptheker is literally "Herbert Pharmacist" in Dutch with the o in Apotheker omitted.
Given, that he was Hungarian the source of the name is probably rather German (or Austrian, to be more specific), but yes, it's pretty much the same.
Something this video strangely reminded me of was one of Rev Left Radio's interviews with Kyrsten Ghodsee about her book "Sex Was Better Under Socialism" where she wrote hundreds of pages trying to examine all the different aspects of gender equality throughout all the USSR and she would be invited by Left wing parties in East Europe to give a speech or Q&A about the book and what she soon found that they didn't actually want to talk to her about the book and the nuance in the situation, they just wanted a western academic woman to come in and repeat the title of the book for propaganda reasons and then cut it there and send her on her way.
I think it kinda highlights a core issue with ML spaces, even if that's where I tend to find myself most of the time
Good book I'd recommend it. A metric used was the number of orgasms. But seriously, the author listed a number of policies that some socialist countries had that let to greater advancement in the workplace and happier women.
The patriotic group pictured trurned out to be ¨a drop in the ocean¨ within two weeks of the video dropping lol
i like your point about that certian unnamed youtuber very interesting.
i myself watched that video and other videos from that chanal and that one i largely agreed with, until i rewatched it, and got sceptical, i think you summed up these problemes i had with it very well
Yes, the individual in question made some good points about Russian propaganda, but then completely took the cake when it came to the perception of 'Western' Imperialism.
Who is the unnamed youtuber? Why be vague and cowardly? How about say the name? Or are you being libelous, and that's why you are being vague, to prevent a law suit or having your video removed?
@@SimonAshworthWood watch it again.
It's AdamSomethings garbage fucking takes on the Russo-Ukrainian.
Prolekult's documentary on the imperialist war in Ukraine is by far the best video on the topic
thanks for your videos, it's really nice to see a nuanced socialist revolutionary analysis of current topics on the internet, also I think it speaks to the quality of your videos that I'm unable to guess what current you actually follow since I'm not seeing you copy any well known talking point
You know, I don't agree with everything you've just outlined but as someone who is fairly new to Marxist-Leninism and identifies with it, I did sometimes wonder whether the Marxist-Leninist community online can do better than to just become apologists for North Korea and China. Obviously I do respect that there is a lot of misinformation about previously and actually existing socialism, and I guess the online tankie phenomenon is basically a response to that insane amount of misinformation. That being said, I've always maintained that even though I am a Marxist I am not responsible for apologising for Stalin's bad doings. I can agree that there were many things that he did right, and many that he did wrong, I don't want to become a sycophant to any person or any country because at that point you cease to be a Marxist in my opinion. Marxism is about looking at the world from a critical lens and to inspire us to work towards building a socialist society - it says nothing about worshipping certain leaders or certain countries.
While I don't really share your concern about tankies being some kind of problem in the wider scheme of things, I will concede that I've had many issues with MLs who have behaved dogmatically. For example, some MLs tried to "debunk" my critique of the Uyghur situation in China by quoting me a Chinese-government article on what the "actual" situation is. The hilarity of that cannot be understated as China is a state that aims to serve itself, much like the US and any other country around the world. China's government is not some kind of "unbiased source" lmao.
China has nothing to "apologize" for. While the US Evil Empire was massacring millions in the Middle East, the Chinese Communist Party raised 800 million people out of poverty. And no, being a white leftist living in the imperial core does NOT mean you know more about Communism than non-white communists in the Global South.
and what source might be “unbiased”?
there are plenty of first hand accounts, and in people going to xinjiang to document exactly the everyday lives of the uyghur. but because they speak in chinese and are usually not translated into english, they do not get through to the west. (excuse my cynicism)
to say a source is “biased or not” based on anyone’s claim to truth, is ignoring the millions of videos that come out of xinjiang and made by uyghurs on douyin and some on youtube (alex from xinjiang)
@@59gris definitely not a Chinese government source. It’s as if I were to take India’s word for it when they say that there’s no issue in Kashmir, or that the protestors are all Pakistani agents.
Obviously it’s a complex situation, but just because some Uyghurs are found smiling or having a nice time in Xinjiang, doesn’t mean everything’s fine there. It doesn’t necessarily mean there’s a genocide happening either, but still, state oppression by China is not an impossibility.
@@Literally-hw6jv but can’t you see that the very complex national politics sorounding Uighurs (sorry I don’t see any opresion there, what I do see is Islamic radicals being educated and those are a very small minority of the people living there) is used as a tool by the US, just like Tibet was (which is also a bullshit story, the Buddhist rulers of that region were horrible tyrants) to try to destroy the Chinese nation, because it actually threatens The global power of the US?
Oh whuuut a bad mouse notification? This I got to see
The thing I usually say when trying to argue the russo-ukranian war is that it is possible and healthy to differenciate peoples from their governments. Most of us don't align poltically with Hamas at all, and yet that doesn't stop us from expressing the wish for a free Palestine, for example. And Ukraine is a very interesting and complex case study precisely because it shows the dissonance between its people and its rulers, and just how complex situations makes good ground for propaganda.
That Zelensky, like Poroshenko before him, was elected on a platform of ending the war and rolling back the most egregious language laws is indicative of what the people want. That both ended up pivoting so heavily to the most bellicist elements of the far right even when, as is the case with Zelensky, the enjoyed unprecedented popular support should also tell us something about the balances of power and that the actual influence of the far right goes far beyonf their popular support. Which, of course, doesn't justify neither russian or american imperialisms which both exploit and escalate the conflict.
It's hard to know who to listen to on this situation, then, as all we seem to have is pseudo leftists like Maupin and their putinist propaganda or the Pax americana types. So I'm kind of signal boosting ukrainian leftist writers, like Volodymir Ischenko and Taras Bilous and ukrainian leftist groups, like the trade union league Zakhist Pratsi and Sotsialnyi Rukh, a socialist social movement. They don't always agree with each other, and I don't always agree with all of their views, but many, if not all of these groups are actually fighting Russia on the battlefield and do manage to be both against the russian invasion and voice their opposition against the ukrainian government and Nato's political overreach.
badmouse your videos so good. aint seen them in a long time. what are your thoughts on hbomberguy
One thing about Ukraine, stating clear that I don't support the Russian invasion in anyway, but I don't think the neonazi stuff is a marginal thing there, neither do I think the Russian invasion is doing anything to solve this issue (quite the contrary), I remember the time, way before the war, in which Ukraine, Hungary, Poland and Croatia became synonymous with neonazism, in my country (mind you, is a South American third world country), we have problems with German and Italian descents, but by that time, like 2010's, we started to have the same problem with those other nationalities I mentioned, we automatically linked it to the US imperialism, since it was too obvious, but maybe it wasn't all that obvious, the reality goes even further, since those countries were ravaged by neoliberal reforms through the 90's and were decaying even faster than we are here, the difference was that they weren't a third world country before that, so the fascism was the way in which the imperialism and the local oligarchies used to maintain power, the reason why Russia became capable of doing imperialist incursions was practically the reason why the US wished to maintain its own hegemony, NATO, one serves the other, they aren't a real enemy and the fascists in eastern Europe isn't a minority, is a reality, there is no Scape goat in that situation, the real Scape goat is the Russian federation stating that they cared, when they definitely don't, they only care to deny infrastructure for the world Bank and IMF just to use themselves, as the US also don't care about Russia doing that, since they care to use that situation to maintain its hegemony over Europe, sorry about the lengthy text...
24:38 is that an illustration by Viktor Tsoi?
It is!
What concepts would you say can be appropriated from Leninist or Maoist theory and given an anarchist reading/interpretation?
I: Seconding this question
United front comrade, but Anarchists would not stay in power for a second. Maybe I don't know enough about anarchist theory, but how do they expect to gain power without the dictatorship of the proletariat? And how are you supposed to defeat counterrevolution without the state? Why do they reject the Soviet Union, which of course was not a workers' heaven, but offered relatively progressive benefits to the workers - contemporarily speaking.
I am also skeptical of the state like Marx, but I don't know any answers from the anarchist side.
Literature tips are welcome
I think we can understand Adam Something's ideas a little bit better if we consider his context.
He's from eastern Europe, so it's reasonable that he sees Russia as the main threat while underestimating US influence.
It's not that different from western europeans seeing USA as the bigger threat and downplaying russian imperialism.
Hes from Hungary and Hungary is the frendliest nation towards russia within the EU. I'm from slovenia and most of the public is pro russia or at least anti war. Honnestly, Adam's views are very american.
@@jasa_m7990 Yes and no. On one hand, not all Hungarians are pro-Russia (or pro-Orban, Adam Something is very critical of him, and for good reasons), on another hand, well, there is the Hungarian Revolution (it's even in the title of this video).
It's not just american views.
@@alexanderd.f.157 Azov "nuclear war isn't as bad as people make it seem" Something is a fascist git.
@@kallmeej9106 Yes, that was very questionable, to say the least. Call him what you want, but I think it's better to try to understand why he has those views
@@alexanderd.f.157 I don't think everyone's views are worth understanding. That's already beyond the pale but it's not the only abominable thing he's said.
Marxist Leninist Maoist
Vs
Maoism
Are different as well
Trotsky had quite the impressive redemption arc since his beginnings in season 1 as a quasi-antagonist.
As far as Ukraine is concerned, I clearly remember the furore about the 2014 Odessa massacre, and began keeping an eye on goings on there. The rise of fascism in Central and Eastern Europe has not escaped even the notice of ruling class outlets like the BBC, and it was with much consternation that I tracked its rise. If we’re going to talk about “pathological reaction” regarding Ukraine, it must be said most of the west is obviously suffering from writhing brain-worms which all woke up when Russia began its invasion, immediately regurgitating ancient slurs about the Slavic hordes, never mind the more modern cold-war era anti-Soviet rubbish. Russia’s claims of denazification may be obfuscatory, but the fascists are on the rise again and I’ll shed no tears for those who quash workers rights, ban left-wing parties and stencil 14/88 on their rifles.
Is “looking silly” such an awful thing for those standing up to imperialism? It’s absolutely nothing next to the fates of some. What revolutionary fears ridicule?
Funny since the first to send wignats in Ukraine was Russia with the Rusich Battalion.
Also the DLPR have sent their militias to Rinat Akhmetov to crush striking miners.
Almost as if this virtue signaling about fascism is very one sided and is very disingenuous.
correct me if im wrong but was this just a long winded way for you to imply that "actually no, ukraine does in fact have too many nazis, and the west is doing red scare stuff again, therefore its ok for russia to invade them"?
From what I understand many of the revolts in 1956 etc. really have to do with a Pro-Stalin revolt against the Kruschev coup. Kruschev was always a brute, always among the worst repressors
nope
@@dwayne523 To what part? It's a plain fact '56 wouldn't have occurred had Stalin lived a few years more
@@McHobotheBobo 1956 wasn't pro stalin lol
The only pro-Stalin revolt was in Georgia, Hungary had nothing to do with it.
@@bateli9733 I'm sure it was hardly a unified mass considering how readily it was put down in the various republics
People getting praise from Zionists doesn't make them not Nazis. Orban gets praise from Israel yet he's as anti-Semitic as they come. Not saying your takes on Hungary are necessarily wrong (My main interaction with the event is through the quick blurb from the BlowBack podcast where they talk about CIA and Papal support for the rebels), just that I find that particular argument to be a weak one. Then again, I'm no expert, and "he who does not investigate has no right to speak" as the Great Helmsman once said.
Well the bit you are missing is that Király wasn't just "praised by Israel" but was actually proclaimed "Righteous Amongst Nations" (literally one the first things that comes up when you type his name), which pretty definitively asses his character, considering how he obtained that award by saving hundreds of Jews from certain death.
another thing I found is in Britan there's this anti Americanism that comes from a subconscious feeling colonial nostalgia, the fact that its no longer the global top dog, iv got in menny a discussion with ardent patriotic brits who will happily list of the crimes of America as though there contry wasn't as bad and worse, it dosent come from a place of honest discussion about justice but a what aboutism game
Do you not support the annexation of Tibet? Tibet supported the annexation of Tibet for some time prior to maos "invasion". The dalai lama had an agreement with Mao about Tibet's incorporation to china. For a lot of Tibetans Mao is a liberator. Most Tibetans lived feudal lives that meant nothing to the landowners who they served. Before Mao took power even the cia admits most Tibetans supported annexation by the USSR. At least prior to the rise of the Chinese communist party.
Well I'm quite skeptical as to those claims from other things I've read over time. More so when people defend it by saying 'The communist party of Tibet supported it and voluntarily joined the CCP'. If you look at the reality of it its clear they didn't really have a choice in the matter and the leader of the part was later detained by the CCP.
And fact is taking Tibet was surely more of a geographical grab rather than it genuinely being to 'liberate' people.
@@BadMouseProductions look I don't think the communist party of china had purely altruist intentions with Tibet. Tibet holds the beginning of many important fresh water supplies for china, however one can't deny that china didn't improve the lives of Tibetans.
Most claims about the the theocracy and horrors the Tibetan ruling class inflicted on the Tibetan people were first documented by Western sources. This isn't made up. Amputations, familial separation, indentured servitude.
The cia document talking about Tibetan opinion on the USSR isn't invented. Sure and independent Tibet was out of the question but that wasn't and isn't the greatest issue for most Tibetans.
@@BadMouseProductions the dalai lama was literally gifted the flayed skin of children as a birthday gift
@@BadMouseProductions You honestly believe that Tibetans WANTED to remain peasants and slaves instead of a huge rise in living standards and human rights with their unity with China? That sounds pretty racist to me.
@@BadMouseProductions betraying your Eurocentric gaze here. Not everything everybody else does is for personal gain
I suppose I can be called a tankie, but there is indeed not much to talk against Trostky's ideas other than his diatribes against MLs and his flip flops. But I don't disregard MLMs, but I interacted with English speaking and it looked like they are much more cultists than those in the 3rd world who are actually involved in actual struggles.
No way that many people are going to see this, but I want to write this anyways
I really got into soviet aesthetics a long time ago, to the point that it was somewhat cringey. I like to think I grew out of that “cringe”, but because I continued loving it I’m never sure if I really did. The thing is, there IS a political dimension to it, that is one of the reasons for its appeal. Im not sure how well you can separate politics from the imagery of such a politicized body that was the Soviet experience.
What personally always draws me back is that lost tomorrow that you can see in its imagery. A world we tried to build, and failed to do so, and the beauty of that Dreamworld makes the Catastrophe of its inexistence ever more so bitter. I have studied Russian, Eastern European, Soviet and Post Soviet histories and cultures and arts in undergrad, but even after all these years, I still feel so . . naive. Immature. Ignorant. (Hopefully I’m not obnoxious though!). There is always something to be learned and to feel like shit about because I had casually dismissed suffering or because I had accidentally bought into an Imperialist narrative. And then there is the unfathomable, infinite uncertainty and instability of memory and perception that comes with every ethnography focused on the past, especially a politicized past.
I always feel like I am performing the clumsiest tight-rope walk, trying not to romanticize a deeply flawed past while correcting misconceptions and wanting to point out the beauty and value that still lies in the statues, the mosaics, the posters, the buildings, the music, and the people. I may not be “making it my personality” but I hope I can professionally study this time period for the rest of my life. If one can never NOT be immature and ignorant then what the fuck is the difference between a weeb and a professor of Japanese culture studies? What is the difference between “cringe” love of Soviet aesthetics and a professionalized love of the subject?? “Academia”?? I really don’t like/don’t buy that my love is so much “better” or so much less cringe just because I did it through university. Maybe it is somehow. Probably forced to think about the aesthetics a lot more than the average soviet meme poster. Maybe. I dunno. Just a confused bitch rambling to no one past 1 am about how uncertain she constantly is about her career.
Hey, same carnalito
i read an interesting book about the rajk conspiracy which claimed that there was no "show" about the trials, and the whole story of the conspiracy was really interesting. id love to hear the other side, anyone got any links or anything?
for context, the book was: tito's plot against europe by derek kartun
Trotsky was pivotal in creating and forming up the red army and leading it to victory in the brutal civil war. He was a great thinker. But he would have maybe caused 5 th column and undermined the ussr unity during ww2 just because of his personal feud with Stalin. His book on fascism is good (fascism what is it? And how do we fight it?) and makes his position clear as an anti fascist. Kronstadt was a military decision and a necessary one in the context of a civil war if they didn’t order the assault the ice would have melted making the island inprégnable. I like to simply call myself communist i think the feud between Trotsky and Stalin was mostly personal and it sucks but some times people develop deadly personal feuds. We should look back in reverence like lenin and Trotsky to the heroes of the Paris commune who were mostly jacobins, blanquist internationalists ( anarchists socialists, communists) and adopt more general terms which can accommodate all radical left factions like communists. I bet there are real and serious policy differences between the Maoist party of Nepal and the Marxist Leninist although they United to form the communist party of Nepal and defeat the center left congress they still feud hard, I wonder if it is due to sealing g support from Indian communists or Chinese communists and more material reasons rather than ideological but I don’t know enough about it. I hope all the radical left can unite to over throw the class systems which includes the anarchists and the Marxist lennists and Maoist despite the differences
Yeah I was stationed in Japan when I was in the military and these weebs will make you think that Japan is some type of Utopia, no it is not. Japan is like any other place on this planet you'll find good, you'll find bad and you'll definitely find the ugly.
Socialist countries, e.g. China & Cuba are certainly very different to capitalist countries like the USA and Japan.
We socialists actually ENDED homelessness in socialist countries & we ensure that everyone gets enough food, clean water, health care, etc..
@@SimonAshworthWood "-Socialist countries, e.g. China" Cringe
@@SimonAshworthWood "We socialists" lmao what did you do to end homelessness in China or Cuba, buddy?
@@SimonAshworthWood Idk man, I'd rather live in "capitalist" Scandinavia than "socialist" China.
These words have meaning beyond the convinience of your particular agenda.
16:24 topleft: The red/white bannered flag with swastika is edited in
Filipino here. I thought that the CPP/NPA were MLM. Please share your sources so I'd be enlightened or something
They are MLM? Maoism proper is MLM. But people often just see MLM as a few theoretical difference when the entire thing is has a very different foundation and interpretation that doesn't connect well with ML. Just seeing in this comment section people have been saying stuff like 'Maoism is just what they had to adapt to in their geographical settings, I would be MLM if I was in Philippeans' which is about as logical as saying that if you were in America you would be a De Leonist.
@@BadMouseProductions that's how it came across to me. Here's something you might wanna look at. th-cam.com/video/2KNvvbIIieA/w-d-xo.html
No idea what de leonists are but eh, these guys are at least not part of the boot licking crowd I come across day to day. I swear the majority out here are as vile as the far right American folks, just without the ease of access to firearms
9:05 while im not arguing that the Hungarian Revolution was fascist, i must point out that Israel giving out honors is not the best counterargument, Israel has been close to a lot of fascists, especially in latin america, particularly when it aligns with anti communism, which I imagine is somewhat the case here with the Hungarian Revolution, it was likely more out of hate for the USSR than just love for these two individuals.
Hungarian guy here. Imre Nagy was by far not a fascist, nor the other socialists in the government. Nagy organised the mass deportation of the Germans in the Rákosi government (mostly Swabians), even though the Paris Peace Conference never made Hungary obliged to do that. I don't view him as a hero but certainly he was far better than Rákosi or Gerő before. Now some historians may argue that it was indeed a "white" revolution but... by then nearly all the Horthyist or Arrowcross elements left the country. Except for the state's secret service, that was basically Szálasi's secret police rebranded as ÁVO/ÁVH (State Security Office, roughly translated) but they were not ideologically binded at all, as you can see. Nagy dismantled it, therefore you could argue that the last Arrowcross elements were also got rid of. Also, though never stated officially, Kádár's "Goulash Communism" generally originated in his view of failing to get Hungary pacified on the long run through force so he allowed much more freedom than let's say, Erich Honecker or Ceaucescu.
I also watched your previous Tankie video. I still use the word to any left-minded person who supports the invasion (however, even the Workers' Party (remnant of the the Old State) states that it was wrong so you will hardly find any Hungarian defending the Soviets) but more specifically who justify using force against those whose opinion differs. Even Tito is largely unpopular here, due to him executing a lot of ethnic Hungarians in Vojvodina in retaliation to the Hungarian soldiers doing the same to Serbs durin WW2.
I just want to explain what I don't like about Trotsky.
He was extremely authoritarian, more so than Stalin, but he got outmaneuvered by Stalin and decided to try something else. I see him as an opportunist that will change is political opinions to gain power, and I do not like that.
Without incorporating the concept of dialectical materialism in these videos - the content is incomplete in its intention to inform on the subject of "Tankies"
saw your video on Co-Operatives and i want to inform you that there is a huge Co-Operative bank in Canada called Desjardins who is not only competing with the capitalists but is winning. You should make a video about Socialist Canada and Desjardins.
2:32. LOL. He does look kind of like Trotsky, TBH.
10/10 would talk again.
idk the MLs I asked "why is trotsky/trotskyism bad?" just responded "basically, because he weren't/they aren't MLs"
short answer: because he was wrong and his leadership would've been disastrous
You can reduce any ideological disagreement to that tho. If I asked an anarchist why MLs are bad the answer can be summarized with "they're not anarchist".
Im certain no “ML” who hates trotsky has ever read him. Give any ML text of trotsky and don’t tell them who wrote it, they’ll most likely agree with it. Tell them it’s trotsky who wrote that, and they’ll lose their mind and call it bullshit.
Also the rise of reactionary “MLs” in the west is evident of how disingenuous they are to the movement. They are pro-russia, “patriotic” about a settler colony. Hostile to “identity politics”, class reductionists, anti LGBTQ+, anti “actually existing socialism” if it’s not an authoritarian state rules by a socialist party, Which mean they denounce global south movements like the rojava revolution, for superficial reasons.
@@ABPHistory "wrong" about what though? That the workers' state deteriorated during the Stalinist era?
And whether he would've been a "good leader" or not is practically irrelevant, the fact is that he wrote some good analysis of the October Revolution, Bolshevism, Stalinism, fascism etc. Why waste our time on pointless counterfactuals like "well he would've sucked as leader" or otherwise fighting over some specific individual. The fact is, after Lenin's death he was one of few people who actually kept Marxist theory going. Without devolving into nonsensical postmodernism or similar trash like the Frankfurt School, that is
@@CarlNiemi You mean the soviet government from 1924 onwards was postmodernist?
2:0 whats wrong with the annexation of Tibet?
It was a very peaceful resolution to the civil war and brought feudal slavery in the region to an end.
I can't like this video enough
Most people being called Weebs or even calling themselves that humoursly do not actually fit the proper definition. I'm an American Leftist Otaku who understands that Otaku culture is a Counter Culture even in Japan itself.
About Hungary, sure it's BS to claim that all of the rebels were fascists. But the opposite (that all of them were socialists) is also BS.
There were all kind of people, but i believe that if the USSR didn't intervine, then the US would have done that eventually cause why wouldn't they use this to their advantage? Like a country that is no longer part of the Warsaw pact and shares borders with the USSR. That's an opportunity they cannot miss.
Not to say it's matters anymore considering the fate of the USSR, but back then no one knew that the USSR will ceise to exist.
Correct, it feels to me looking at it quite similar the way the Paris Commune happened, where you had lots of different ideas erupting characterised by a discontent of the government. Why people feel the need to jump to Fascism instead of just understandable discontent with everything that had happened is what is suspicious.
@@BadMouseProductions Many people feel an overt attachment to the party line and see going against it as contrarian to communist ideals, even when that has nothing to do with communism to start with.
Maybe Leninists, but even then they should realize that the party is not always right.
If the USSR didn’t intervene and the Hungarian government successfully desatellitized itself as well as withdrew from the Warsaw Pact then this revolution that eventually happened in 1989 would have happened decades earlier and the eastern bloc would have collapsed then and there. The US wouldn’t need to invade because the country already has animosity towards the USSR, though the plight of more isolationist and repressive states like Albania is a bit more complicated since they themselves did split from the USSR, but for the complete opposite reason Hungary and Czechoslovakia wanted to.
I always though of the 1956 revolution as predominantly anti-imperialist. They wanted the soviet soldiers out, and the military occupation to end. What happens after that's done there was no consensus on but based on the diaries and memoirs I've read the most popular option was some for of third-way market socialism like Yugoslavia.
So:
Anti-communist (eg.: fascist) - mostly not.
Anti-socialist (eg.: free market liberal) - very decidedly not.
Anti Soviet Union (or more correctly Anti-Russian) - most definitely.
Another point to support this: In Hungarian the participants are usually referred to as "freedom fighters" not "revolutionaries" or "rebels". They did not want 180° a change of the system they wanted the ability to make independent decisions and reforms without interference from "The Party".
Another point to highlight here is that almost all the chants and battle cries referred to the opposing forces as "The Russians" (eg.: Russians go home!). For most people participating this was more about "big country conquered smaller country with force, and now smaller country wants independence back", than anything to do with political or economic systems of governance.
How do you write your essays?
What's the source of the NATO Libya graph?
How'd the ml brew pub go?
Trotsky biopic starring Joe Keery when?
16:50 The problem of fascist groups inside the Ukrainian military is certainly not one that infests the majority of the Ukrainian military, but I would not call it non systemic, these groups only exist out of systemic issues inside Ukraine (this does not justify the Russian invasion)
I always felt Adam Something's attitude was kinda weird.
why did you show the stranger things guy when you said Trotsky this is a certified bruh moment
I assumed it was a joke
_Spread this, algorhithm!_
When did you return mate
That’s what m I’m sayin lol glad to see he’s back
@@deathuponusalll agreed, he has made the old vids public too
I fucking died at the YCL clip
As a Maoist I'll just say that most left anti-Communists do not distinguish us as different in the tankie discourse. I get called tankie, blamed for events in the Spanish Civil War and told in the event of a revolution Anarchists killing me will be a defensive measure. This is not to say that what you said was incorrect per se just that the facts on the ground are - as ever - much stupider.
Wtf do they mean by anarchist revolution
Like what, they're gonna form a actual military rank system to fight and form a government?
This is why I'm saying "tankie" became a smear word like "woke". A lot of non-Leninist leftists don't like to make the distonction between MLs, Trotskyists, MLMs, MLM Third Worldists and several others. Some are just downright silly and use "tankie" and "fascist" interchangeably.
Literally any "marxist" project, doesnt matter if its maoist or ML ends up in liberalism or fascism or both.
Oh boy you just triggered me with operation broadsword xD Frigging actual deepstate op
An offer to the algorythm
10:40 We can agree on that.
Tankies vs anarchist vs trotskyist vs mlm vs etc is all just online fandom bs and distracts from arguments and facts.
RIP mouseman, deaded from last-video-itis
Please keep doing videos!. I'm a huge fan. It's always nice to have more voices talking about leftist topics (especially ML) for us who can't do much reading.
I have four main issues with your "Tankie" video.
1) Maoism is more of an Umbrella ideology because there's to many variants of Maoism. There's MLM, Maoism, Gonzalism, as well Mao's Three Worlds theory.
2) Anti-Americanism is pretty based as far as people of color are concerned. America was built on the Genocide of Native Americans and the enslavement and continued exploitation of Black people. There's no good reason a Black, Hispanic, or Native Man or women should stand with America on any given issue at least 90% of the time. Which brings me to #3
3) The war between Russia and Ukraine is an Inter-Imperialist struggle so supporting Russia or Ukraine in this war is an unleftist position. The Russia is a Bonapartist Nation while Ukraine is a Fascist nation. And yes, having fascist in positions of power in the Government does imply that the Nation has fallen to fascist ideology. I'm sure some self-proclaimed ML's support the Russian government but Caleb Maupin is not an ML. He's an evolved Liberal. He rejects Dialectical-Materialism in favor of Conspiracy Theories and Fascist Dog-whistling. Plus he even defends non-leftist Anti-Semites.
4) North Korea is not an autocratic nation. To be autocratic would go against the election process, North Korean parliamentary system, the North Korean Constitution, as well as Juche Idea and Theory. Also it's sociologically impossible for North Korea to be an autocratic nation. Especially being constantly underfire by nations over 10 times it's Size and Population. An autocratic nation/country lacks the infrastructure and Sociological development to constantly defend itself under these conditions.
The main current of Maoism in 2022 is MLM. This is what the groups listed adhere to.
Then the same would be true of Russia when it comes to say Tatars, Georgians, Chechens, Komi, Yakuts etc. Those people groups were all put under the foot of the bear? But ideological Anti-Rus sentiment would not get us anywhere would it?
Who are the nazis/fascists that are in power in Ukraine?
If that what you wish to call it so be it, the main point at hand is that it has similarities in his presentation between Turkmenistan, yet the west does not give them any degree of media coverage in the same way.
@@BadMouseProductions Come on bro, Tatars Georgians and Yakuts were not enslaved by Russians for centuries and nor was the Soviet Union built on the back of colonisation. Was it built off of the back of a brutal 5 year plan that curtailed democracy for a short period for the purpose of industrialising at a rapid pace? Yes, that was so the USSR could be strong enough to compete with the Western world. Was that ideal? Well no, but we don't live in a perfect world. Is there discrimination towards ethnic groups in Russia? of course. No one's denying this. But to compare the conditions of minorities between US and Russia is just absurd, those are two completely different countries with a different history.
You're sounding a bit like a liberal here if I'm being honest.
@@BadMouseProductions I was only pointing towards the fact that many of these Maoist have different platforms as well as different parts of Maoism they follow. Even though many parts of Mao Zedong Thought and Praxis are correct there's also many parts that are contradictory. Three worlds theory is just one example.
Finnish Bolshevik a ML who is neither for Russia or against Russia. Made a video on this subject.
th-cam.com/video/GUX49qg22Os/w-d-xo.html
The Ukraine War is unfortunately a hard lesson for both the worker's of Ukraine and Russia.
Lastly I know there's a lot of contention around to subject of North Korea and it's easy to get caught up in the North Korea is evil or North Korea is innocent sides of the coin. But the evidence points towards North Korea not being an Autocratic nation nor Capitalist.
@@BadMouseProductions Are you doing the thing where you say they aren't germans members of the nazi party in the 20th century so they can't be nazis? Ukraine has instituted discriminatory laws, banned all leftist parties, made national holidays for nazis, given awards to nazis and made an openly nazi paramilitary an official part of their military. What do you need to consider them a nazi state? Do they need to resurrect Hitler?
@@Literally-hw6jv I mean yes they did actually. As they took Siberia they enslaved people as they went, including the Yakuts. As they took more land from indigenous people they Russified them and minoritised their identity and alienated them from their culture.
Russia literally sent people to places, such as Vladivostok, to settle those areas, areas that people were already living in.
And as for the USSR there's plenty of examples of forced resettlement, including most notably the Tatars who were almost completely removed from Crimea. I know all the excuses, "there was fascist threat so collective punishment of all was justified etc". Despite in nearly all these Minorities having less overall desertion than ethnic Russians who did not face nearly the same degree of collective punishment.
If your argument is "Oh it wasn't that bad" then again you're doing that exact thing I listed in the video. I've listened to the voices of some of those Minorities and they attest that that entire legacy is greatly felt by the minorities across Russia and on its borders.
Do you get how incredibly irksome it would be if you went up to them and said "no it's different it's not as bad for you" whilst all of their resources went to the muscovites.
19:36 speaking as an anti zionist Jew, I've read in Mondoweiss that that these sentiments ultimately come from anti Palestinian racism, and Holocaust guilt is ultimately an excuse for that
@erdood Do you have any resources?
@@BadMouseProductions resources?
@@erdood3235 Where's the website or page where I can find this info?
World Eaters mentioned
Even when Italy was fascist it was still ITALY! It's one of the most fascinating places on the planet. No wonder Trotsky wanted a look. I've read Stalinists that waxed poetic about their visits to Italy.
Glad to see im not the only one who is annoyed by Adam something/Nafo types. Its just straight cringeworthy
2:50 that's... that's not Trotsky... that's Joe Keery
never would've noticed that, certainly not.
I withheld commenting on your last video, considering it a waste of everyone's time to try and convince you to abandon this turn towards increasingly idealist miasma you've been on lately BadMouse, but I'm going to put my foot down here.
Specifically regarding the Hungarian "Revolution" of 1956, there's *so* much to be said.
First of all, I (someone who supports the Soviet/AVH suppression of the "Revolution") had never heard the name "Béla Király" before this video, and consequently, I don't really have an opinion on him one way or the other. The highest ranking military member in the Hungarian army that joined the rebels (and had previously fought for the fascists during Operation Barbarossa) I had heard of was Pál Maléter, who was captured at Corvin Passage in one of the most pitched battles of the 1956 "Revolution" along with his second-in-command **which he chose** Gergely Pongrátz, aka the future founder of the Neo-Nazi youth organization and political party Jobbik.
Now you might be able to claim that the situation in Hungary included some genuine (if naïve) communists among their ranks, but what is undeniable is that the most fervent fighters in that "Revolution" were all the most violently extreme fascist holdouts of Horthy and the Arrow Cross Party that were either too young or too low rank to have been adequately purged by the Soviets in the post-War era.
Please, if Hungary was such a vigorously 'Communist' or 'Socialist' experiment, why then were the rebels burning Lenin's books [external-preview.redd.it/GyUd1ed2091X8oWcEsNxPYIrg7rWEk2exkV468NCqyk.jpg?auto=webp&s=e1f14babe5e739d62ade67f6e4bca72005ae8038] and lynching Communists [64.media.tumblr.com/9cfdad23f8526148ca69ea1911c390db/tumblr_mjmmrdcHTx1rcoy9ro1_640.jpg] in the streets? Why was an AVH headquarters attacked and its members also lynched [2.bp.blogspot.com/-BpR9DKUzbuA/Vv5Pj_1KgNI/AAAAAAAAAYo/SrSF8pA0i1YbrVfxWwnvHiL5UFVqIW6DQ/s1600/Hungarian%2Bcounter-revolution%2Bviolence%2B1956.jpg] after a crowd had been ginned up on a lie of a "secret communist torture dungeon" (that was never found btw) reeking an awful lot of Blood Libel used to whip up fascist anti-Semites in pre-War Europe?
I maintain, regardless of these people having a tenuous connection to Imre Nagy as the opposition figure for them to rally around, the actual goals of their foot soldiers were not, in the slightest, anything approaching 'Communist' or 'Socialist' or hell, even fucking Liberal.
If you need another example, Pinochet was considered to be loyal to Allende for his role in helping suppress a disorganized coup attempt in Chile (Tanquetazo) 2 months before he actually overthrew the government on 11 September 1973.
Again, socially securing a revolution takes time, usually it takes an entire generation to get it done- the Soviet Great Purge which really peaked between 1936-38 came about just as the first generation of young politicians and industrial specialists that were either born in the Soviet Union or had really only living memory of post-Revolutionary life came of age and into their primes, that timing wasn't just coincidental, it was when the CPSU could finally start replacing people (many of them nationalists that sided with the Reds against the Allied intervention in Russia) with ideologically committed communists into positions of power en masse.
And since we're on the topic of the Soviet Union and the loyalties of the underlings rallying behind reform movements that turn revolutionary, I think we ought to discuss Gorbachyov and his right-hand man: Alexander Nikolayevich Yakovlev.
Yakovlev was considered the "Godfather of Glasnost" thinking of himself quite explicitly as "the Soviet Union's Henry Wallace" (FDR's second Vice President and "Intellectual Father of the New Deal"). By no means could we call this guy a fascist- he literally called Canada a "Totalitarian Police State" taking orders from the US.
He was however a fucking idiot that despite being a zealous Social Democrat, threw his lot in with Boris fucking Yeltsin in 1991. Later, he went on to found the Russian Party of Social Democracy in 1995 which fused into the "United Democrats bloc" and by 2002, was totally sidelined when his party was officially absorbed into the Union of Right Forces, spearheaded by Anatoly Chubias and Yegor Gaidar, the two men most responsible for the mass privatization of Soviet industries after the dissolution of the USSR.
Yakovlev wasn't in favor of that devastating fire sale, but guess what? **IT DID NOT FUCKING MATTER** because he was an idiot that lived in a fairy tale world of ideals that broke the moment they came into contact with reality, and a bunch of gangster crooks like Chubais and Gaidar ate his lunch.
Now look, Badmouse, I know you took down your "why I'm no longer an anarchist (I think)" post, but I'd like to paraphrase with you a little snippet of that post I personally saved for instances just like this-
"If the [Tankies] had lost because they acted like the Catalans I could only guess that people like me would have been heralding the Bolshevik failure as a great attempt by the workers to crush the state, and if the Kurds win and take up practices similar to the Soviets in our timeline we will probably be denouncing them, its an endless cycle of ideals. [...] Have you ever lived under a Fascist dictatorship? Spain was left to suffer under one for 40 years, and I highly doubt most of those Spaniards would have looked upon you kindly when you go around hinting that a Fascist regime is preferable to a State-Socialist one. This isn’t just rhetoric, I’ve genuinely heard people say this."
Badmouse, I don't even know what else to say at this point other than that I'm disappointed- you made some progress in realizing that sometimes, ideal visions of how a society ought to be must be temporarily suspended in the face of otherwise devastating forces (little thing called "Imperialism") only to circle back round right into this idealist miasma about how "Tankies" are a disservice to the cause of Communism, since we'd rather set parameters that bring in ideologically committed true believers to the cause instead of trying to grow numbers by promising fantasies from a post-scarcity society.
Good luck going forward mate, I know not where the future is going to take you, and I'm loathe to stick around just to cringe when I find out.
Well most of your links don't work, but its funny you listed the last one that does work because that isn't just 'A communist being lynched' that's Laszlo Elek, he's was a member of the AVH police force, so yes hardly just 'a communist' he was an active part of the government. The AVH HQ is being attacked because... they didn't like the police, the same way that East Germans didn't like the Stasi? I don't see what you're getting at here?
Most of your other stuff is just conjecture.
Quite ironic to be anti-imperialist yet support the satellitization of a country just because of fringe elements in an uprising that largely had support of dissident and eventually the main figure of the Hungarian government that wanted to break away from Soviet domination.
@@BadMouseProductions God willing there will be a socialist revolution in the UK in our life time and you'll be put in whatever british equivalent to the Stasi's basement
Dude went to the ideology shop again lmao
13:34 yeah.. ive been a huge adam something fan for a while and i still am but he has been really overly aggressive against russians for the past while. condemning them for the crimes theyve committed is an obvious must, but hes sort of crossing a line. being surrounded by pro russian politics in a country that borders ukraine might contribute to that mindset though,,
Your videos about the Eastern Bloc, in general, suffer severely from what I'd call "monolingual bias". It's very clear that you depend on sources that have been translated to English - while most of the source material that actually exists is A: not on the internet and B: has never been translated. I have access to testimonies and books about the GDR that you will never read - and the same is true for Hungarian, Chinese, and Russian sources. When you tell us to "name sources" - what are we supposed to do? Go to our local bookstore or library, nick a book in our language that you don't speak and mail it to the UK?
Please let go of the idea that if it hasn't been translated to English it's not true or not worth knowing. And might I respectfully suggest that when talking about countries you don't speak the language of, it would be good to look for partners who can help you with sources and translations?
Send me your sources, I am a communist historian and I can get translations if I need.
@@someesingh2827 three books to start with:
Erich Honecker: "Revolutionäre Theorie und geschichtlich Erfahrungen in der Politik der SED" - that one's a good look into the ideological underpinnings of the GDR and mainly consists of speeches and interviews. Can be taken with a grain of salt, but still an interesting read because it chronicles the development of the state and what was deemed an achievement.
Sigfried Wenzel: "Was war die DDR wert?" - this one's all about the economy and how the fiction that the GDR was bankrupt came to be. Cites almost exclusively sources from the West - like the Federal Bank of Germany.
Arno Hecht: "Die Wissenschaftselite Ostdeutschlands. Feindliche Übernahme oder Integration?" - this one describes the big cleansing of east German universities after the Reunifuckation (yes, I always call it that).
There are good papers about cultural life that I no longer have access to (they're in university libraries, and I'm not a student) same for queerness in the GDR. But this is a pretty good article www.ndr.de/geschichte/Schwule-und-Lesben-in-der-DDR-Unsichtbar-im-Osten,homosexualitaet212.html
And then there are, of course, the Stasi archives.
Also, having grown up in the GDR, I might also be considered a source. And then there's the thing where I can just. Go and talk to people around me if I wanna know something specific.
@@TheSleepyowlet He thinks having an anti-DDR bias is being unbiassed, so good luck convincing him to listen.
THANKS for highlighting the train wreck that is the Antideutsche!
13:10 Caleb Maupin fucked up there, but Russia is proetcting Loughansk and Donesk, it may not be there main goal but it is a thing. Do not forget that Ukrianian communist are aware of that.
Ukrainian communists are against the DPR and LPR, they are fedops created by oligarchs and the FSB. The KVPU which is the biggest union in Ukraine has hundreds if not thousands of members fighting against these tsarist enclaves.
They're not, they invaded because they were about to lose their proxies.
Ukrainian communists are fighting in the armed forces of Ukraine since 2014, and no the KPU is not "communist".
the three point programme of the communist party is as follows
-ho ho ho chi minh
-che guvera
-stalin
Great video! But one gripe: when people point out the fascists in Ukraine, I thought they were only talking about the high-government officials because people have given them an unwarranted amount of acclaim during this war.
Are people besides Putin and his far-right followers really just saying that Ukraine is a N*zi country? Because I agree, that would be downright despicable to say.
@UClQHmMcc9H5r7QfaxFFfFcQ yes N*zi Germany was a N*zi country, the fascists had almost unconditional support, from a country that at the time believed in fascism. What the hell does that have to do with Ukrainians?
"Ukraine is a fascist country" means that unlike other european countries. Hate crimes were essentially legalized in Ukraine. The police don't give a sh*t about them anymore.
Depends on your definition of "a nazi country".
Ukraine is certainly DOMINATED by nazis. There was a United Nations prosposal to condemn nazism and Ukraine's coup govt voted AGAINST that proposal. Since 2014, Ukraine's coup govt has outlawed all leftwing parties & leftwing media, tore down statues honouring the USSR's victory over nazi Germany, put up statues glorifying nazis, renamed streets after nazis (including the street leading to the famous site of a massacre of Jews near Kiev), made a national holiday to glorify the nazi Stepan Bandera, game an award in parliament to a current nazi, approved the integration of explicitly nazi units into Ukraine's military & local security forces (which carry out pogroms against Romani ["Gypsies"] & ethnic Russians & have disappeared thousands of people), the coup regime stopped Russian from being an official language despite a large % of the population having Russian as their first language, the coup govt tried to outlaw the Russian language, the coup govt waged a war against its citizens who refused to submit to the regime, thus killing 10,000+ people, etc., and the majority of people in Ukraine support that govt.
What would Ukraine have to do for YOU to call it a nazi country? You do know that not everyone in nazi Germany supported the nazi regine there, yet the policies were similar to those of Ukraine today? And we do say that nazi Germany "was a nazi country". Does the regime have to actually kill millions of people in a holocaust before you will call it "a nazi country"? How about we stop nazism in Ukraine TO PREVENT ANOTHER HOLOCAUST?
@@SimonAshworthWood No, it doesn't have to kill a million people, nor does everyone have to support the regime. Simply being passive to it makes you an active part of it.
I commented on the high government officials in my original comment and do consider them very fascist.
But if the people having a positive view of this government and acclaiming problematic figures makes the country itself a "Nazi country" then calling a country a Nazi country simply isn't special.
The USA has undoubtedly many fascist politicians, people who support extremely controversial figures and also voted against fighting fascism.
Also, simply labeling any place as a "Nazi" country is to shoehorn an entire nation into one box. Whilst we should certainly always have the guts to compare any location to our Idea of a "Nazi country" the idea of simply calling a country one with no nuance would be childish.
I guess Simon Wood proved very successfully, that Putin has also loyalist followers, that consider themselves far-left.
Edit: I won't go through his entire laundry list, just the claim of 10.000+ killed from 2014 to 2022. If you use the OHCHR report on Ukraine as a valid source, you should try reading it first. The number claimed refers to both sides of the conflict, with a much larger proportion of combat losses than civilians died, and 80% of those died in the immediate aftermath of the small green men appearing in Ukraine. Casualties in the last few years were mainly through to unexploded ordonance, and did not go beyond low double digits per year.
In the last Parliamentary Election in Ukraine, the far-right parties had to run as a coalition, and still did not reach enough votes to actually get a seat.
I completley agree with Maoists on them rejecting the idea that any socialist state exists today.
I feel like this discussion can fall into the realm of semantics really quickly. I don't know what the correct term for states like Vietnam or Cuba would be. I'd agree they aren't socialist countries (based on my limited understanding of their political structure), but they're clearly different to liberal or social democracy. The distinction probably matters, but after a point we're just arguing over terminology when we all know what we mean.
We all do
How many patriotic-socialists / National-socialists watching this 🤔