this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2025
31 points (100.0% liked)
chat
8538 readers
412 users here now
Chat is a text only community for casual conversation, please keep shitposting to the absolute minimum. This is intended to be a separate space from c/chapotraphouse or the daily megathread. Chat does this by being a long-form community where topics will remain from day to day unlike the megathread, and it is distinct from c/chapotraphouse in that we ask you to engage in this community in a genuine way. Please keep shitposting, bits, and irony to a minimum.
As with all communities posts need to abide by the code of conduct, additionally moderators will remove any posts or comments deemed to be inappropriate.
Thank you and happy chatting!
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think the idea of an "ultra" is flawed because the idea of left wing communism from the first half of the 20th century had many different types. There were mostly the Italian and German ones who believed completely different things. Like the German ones were anti lenin (who Lenin was writing about in his book an infantile leftism) and the Italians were supposed to be "more left wing than lenin" and the most pure leninists of whatever during the era of Stalin.
I think you only really see Italian ultra's now because it's mostly a response to post ussr collapse communism and also the fact that a lot of new communists will say things like "the ussr was communist" when in reality they were never able to reach that material conditions.
I think bordiga, the main Italian left communist, was correct with his analysis that the ussr never reached communism. I think anyone who says that they did or that china is currently communist needs to actually read Marx.
The parties in charge may be striving for communist, and the economies are centralized socialist mixed economies but they definitely aren't communist. I don't even think the CPC would claim China is currently communist.
Bordiga also had a good analysis of Italian fascism and some other things but his own ideas that weren't just analyzing other things usually sucked.
His non centralized organic centralization thing is really fucking stupid and obviously we see now with China how a centralized economy is the best.
He also while imprisoned by Mussolini said some funny things about Hitler and Mussolini ", bringing in communism" or something which I think was probably a joke while he was imprisoned but it's 100% funny. He also died from lasagna cuz Italian.
I think the online rise in bordiga comes from baby leftists who haven't read any theory and say shit like "the ussr was communist" or other things that were just blatantly wrong. And this pushes them towards an icon who they view goes against these people who are loud online and don't read.
I mean I understand it, so many "leftists" and "communist" haven't read a lick of marx and then they say the most idiot shit ever and you kinda wanna distance yourself from them.
But they are kinda choosing a stupid person to represent themselves by doing so. They also treat bordiga like he was Jesus which is weird.
They are/were communist because communism was/is the nominal end goal of their ruling ideologies
I would say that they were/are socialist states with the end goal of communism. I don't think communism is a single state is possible. I do think and I did say I think their parties are communist but communism one one state is a ruse.
IDK you can say I'm being pedantic but I prefer to say they're socialist states with communist parties.
no i mean that's what saying a given state or government is communist means, it's not a statement of "has achieved the theoretical state of communism"
You can't achieve a stateless, classless society when the only way to stop a bad guy with a state is a good guy with a state; therefore, real communism has never been tried
spoiler
Sorry, this is like 98% shitpostYeah that's the point of dotp and using the state apparatus to install a socialist state
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1921/apr/21.htm
Also Lenin would disagree with you
"State capitalism would be a step forward as compared with the present state of affairs in our Soviet Republic. If in approximately six months’ time state capitalism became established in our Republic, this would be a great success and a sure guarantee that within a year socialism will have gained a permanently firm hold and will have become invincible in this country."
Here he is writing about transitioning the ussr into state capitalism, it wasn't even socialist yet.
I fail to see why people can't comprehend the fact that a country doesn't just press the communism button the second a communist party is in charge.
And yet the bolsheviks were still a communist party. Because they were attempting to establish communism.
I never disagreed with this. Neither would lenin. I'm a leninist, I have his books in print.
If I became communist dictator of America right now, if wouldn't stop being a capitalist country over night.
The government would now be communist but the economic mode of production would still be capitalist. It would take years to change to socialism.
That's the entire point of the tax in Kind
I agree their governments are communist but the countries themselves have a not reached communism.
Yeah but saying "China is communist" isn't saying "china has achieved communism"
I think the argument you want to make against is that I'm being pedantic by saying the CPC is communist but the economic mode of China is socialism, which is fair in day to day conversation I wouldn't say that.
But you're kinda just repeating yourself saying china is communist and like, I agree the cpc is communist, they're a Marxist governing body. But I'm just being a pedantic ass and saying their economy isn't communist
when people say x country is communist, they just mean its ruled by a communist (marxist leninist) party. nobody thinks that china doesnt have money or state obviously.
IDK if I'm just too autistic or pedantic but I really prefer to make the distinction that they are socialist states with communist parties instead of communist states.
Like I have also met some people organizing when I was in charge of a book club, who had only read the communist manifesto that thought the USSR reached communism so I don't think its that uncommon of a belief NGL.
I think you could say I am being overly pedantic but I really prefer to make the distinction, especially since it helps people who are just starting to learn and read theory understand the differences between socialism and communism.
i mean yeah when i am discussing countries in depth i prefer to say AES states obviously, i dont think you are super pedantic. the issue i think comes more from the word communism having a range of meanings depending on context: communism the social movement, communism the economic system, communism the ideology. so when people say communist state most of the time i think its communism the ideology, not the economic system. irl ive only heard people say "actually USSR and China are not communist" to discredit the AES achievements and to distance the speaker (who wants to be seen as part of communism the movement) from these countries.
Communism is much more an economic state than an ideology. Marxism or Marxist-Leninism, or maoism, or whatever would be the ideology.
I personally think it would be more fair to say X country has a marxist government whose endgoal is communism
when people say "i am communist" they dont mean that they exist in the economic state of communism. i dont disagree with you. im just pointing out that it can mean different things in different contexts, and sometimes "X country has a marxist government whose endgoal is communism" is fair to shorten to "x country is communist"
I don't disagree with you. Early communists organized under the banner of social Democrats and other things before the ussr was established and people began to organize under the banner of communism.
I think I could just be either pedantic or annoyed that people forget that states with communist governments actually need to develop into socialism.