“Our practice in the Ukraine showed clearly that the peasant problem had very different solutions from those imposed by Bolshevism. If our experience had spread to the rest of Russia, a pernicious division between country and city would not have been created. Years of famine would have been avoided and useless struggles between peasant and workers. And what is more important, the revolution would have grown and developed along very different lines … We were all fighters and workers. The popular assembly made the decisions. In military life it was the War Committee composed of delegates of all the guerrilla detachments which acted. To sum up, everyone took part in the collective work, to prevent the birth of a managing class which would monopolise power. And we were successful. Because we had succeeded and gave lie to Bolshevik bureaucratic practices, Trotsky, betraying the treaty between the Ukraine and the Bolshevik authorities, sent the Red Army to fight us. Bolshevism triumphed militarily over the Ukraine and at Kronstadt, but revolutionary history will acclaim us one day and condemn the victors as counter-revolutionary grave-diggers of the Russian Revolution.”
- Nestor Makhno, quoted by Abel Paz, Durruti: The People Armed, p. 88-9

alt-right fascists: fuck sjws. especially those ugly manhating lesbians

sjws: fuck fascists. especially those ugly transmisogynistic lesbians

it reminds me of what i read about ww2 where nazis were calling homosexuality a “degeneracy of sexual Bolshevism” and communists were calling homosexuality a “bourgeois decadence” and “capitalist degeneration”. always painted as a social disease and as a result of bad politics.

“For two decades the supporters of Bolshevism have been hammering it into the masses that dictatorship is a vital necessity for the defense of the so-called proletarian interests against the assaults of counter-revolution and for paving the way for Socialism. They have not advanced the cause of Socialism by this propaganda, but have merely smoothed the way for Fascism in Italy, Germany and Austria by causing millions of people to forget that dictatorship, the most extreme form of tyranny, can never lead to social liberation. In Russia, the so-called dictatorship of the proletariat has not led to Socialism, but to the domination of a new bureaucracy over the proletariat and the whole people. …
What the Russian autocrats and their supporters fear most is that the success of libertarian Socialism in Spain might prove to their blind followers that the much vaunted "necessity of dictatorship” is nothing but one vast fraud which in Russia has led to the despotism of Stalin and is to serve today in Spain to help the counter-revolution to a victory over the revolution of the workers and the peasants.“
- Rudolf Rocker, The Tragedy of Spain (1937)

connard-cynique  asked:

Here's a tricky one: define cultural marxism

The actual movement of cultural Marxism or the Right wing Conspiracy theory?  Ok well lets do a bit of background

First off, the Progressive movement and most of its subgroups (Feminism, Class reform, Racial Equality then the abolitionist movement) started in the Enlightenment, we see the birth of the modern left in the American and French Revolutions long before Marx was born, so this notion that say, feminism comes from Marx is just temporally stupid, because you see early feminists (though the term didn’t exist yet) back in the 1790, again before Marx was born.  So the the Right wing conspiracy theory is basically an attempt to link all progressive movements into this single monolithic thing that is descended from Marx and since Marx is bad therefore progressiveness is bad therefore Far Right is good.  This was a literal Nazi conspiracy theory, they called it “Cultural Bolshevism” back then and liked it to the giant Jewish conspiracy.  Becauses as always, when you look at the specific progressive issues one by one, you see that most of them are not only really popular but also you know…just good sense.  Like take Gamergate for example, there was no Nathan Greyson article and the notion that feminists are controlling the gaming industry is absurd, but if you take all this bullshit and make it an attack on a vague nebulous “Cultural Marxism” then you can avoid getting into the specifics, because Far Rightists almost always fail when you talk specific policy rather than abstract rhetorical ideas.  

     The vast majority of leftist aren’t Marxist, Marxism is a very specific political philosophy that is actually quite stringent, for example I am very progressive but I also like capitalism (though I want it to be more regulated, more taxed and include better social programs) actual marxists don’t like me and I’d likely find a bullet in my skull in a Marxist goverment, but I’m lumped into with Marxists by the right because if we actually talk about wealth inequality in America, they don’t really have a leg to stand on.  Cultural Marxists is just a vague “Other” who people can rally around to oppose and avoid talking about actual issues with you know…facts.  Again, Marx is taught a great deal on college campuses, but many of those classes are talking about how he is wrong or what mistakes he made or why Communist countries tend to fall apart so disastrously.  But in the grown up world somebody can be a critic of Marx and still like some of his ideas, or dislike Marx and still be a leftist. 

   Ok so unto the actual real life Cultural Marxists who were a very specific thing. 

    So Marxism talks about how it is about the people and it represents the common folk against the elites but if you look at it in practice it is actually a very elitist philosophy, particular Leninism.  Its not only very anti religion, anti tradition, and anti national culture (all of which make you pretty unpopular with every day people) but it is very urban worker focused and also tends to subscribe to Vanguardism, the notion that you need this special elite of ideologically pure Marxist intellectuals to run the country as a dictatorship for your own sake until you are ready for the glorious communist utopia which will come about any second I swear.  The Reds in the Russian Civil War never had the most popular support, and until WWII the Soviets were mostly unpopular among their people.  So for a lot of international Marxists, they were left with a question 

“If the current system is so awful for the common people, why do the common people keep siding with conservatives”.  And then with the rise of fascism in Europe, they were like “wait why are people getting behind this pseudo populism which doesn’t actually serve their interests?”  Thus was born the Frankfurt School, people who wanted to study culture itself from a Marxist stand point.  Normally Marxism is quite dismissive of culture, so these guys were never really popular with mainstream Marxists since they focused on entertainment rather than economics.  

   Now the Frankfurt school actually had a lot of really interesting and valuable insights about media which i recommend everybody checking out, but with the major caveat of remembering that like all Marxists, they really love to simplify complicated issues into nice little simple formulas just like Marx did with his linear view of history, which as somebody who studies both History and Film I have…..complicated feelings towards Marx.  But Cultural Marxists did have a valid point about how if you look at popular media as a whole rather than specific examples, patterns emerge.  They weren’t the first to notice this and not everybody who notices this is a communist, but they talked a lot about the movies that came out in pre Nazi Germany.  Because films are a popular media made by a group of people for a mass audience, if you notice reoccurring trends in a film, it likely say something about the culture as a whole.  The point they made was that even works that weren’t overtly Nazi propaganda (Triumph of the Will, the Eternal Jew and all that) and instead look at the non Nazi works that also had similar themes.  For example, a lot of movies in 1920s and early 30s germany were about a society who have lose their identity and are subjected to some sort of humiliation, and many of them involve either

Strong men taking upset people and driving them to murder (M, Dr. Mabusai, Caligari) 

A secretive manipulative cabal who are secretly causing chaos in society (Nosferatu, D.r Mabusai again, 

A people stripped of what made them respectable and distinct (Metropolis, the Last Laugh, The Blue Angel) 


Movies about how great Nature is and how wonderful it is when people work together to deal with a natural disaster.  (People on a Sunday, the Mountain Films like Holy Mountain) with the city as a negative bad thing that we hate.  

There are reoccurring trends and themes in all these films which hint at what is going on in germany at the time and if you look at the films at the time you see a culture which has lost its way and is in a state of confusion and fear.  

“Again Caligari to Hitler” is a really good book to check out, even if I don’t agree with it at all, cause it really loves its simplifications.  

This is a good introduction to the Frankfurt School though I think that it buys into their arguments a bit too much, if people are interested i could offer my criticism of Kyle’s criticism (for example, Cultivation theory predated Cultural Marxism)

     But the main point is that it is about looking at the larger culture as a whole is a viable form of critical observation that reveals a great deal.  

While the Frankfurt School did get critical acclaim among intellectuals world ride, liberal and non liberal (notice how the Alt Right basically uses the same  times of criticism against popular film like Star Wars or Ghost Hunters), the communist aspect of it never caught on, because as always, Marxist is very good at noticing patterns and identifying problems, not so much with the solutions, bit of an underpants gnome problem.  

Very Good Question, let me know if youwant any follow ups

Edit: Wait, did I even answer the question?  Let me know @connard-cynique  cause I don’t know if I actually defined it so much as explained it 

the really scary hypothetical is the world where Hitler didn’t invade Poland or France, but just acted as the stalwart ally against Bolshevism that Britain desperately wanted and quietly committed genocide inside its own borders.

would the rest of the world have gone to war over that? I’m guessing not.

perhaps in 2k17 the Holocaust would be like the Armenian genocide: something that everyone knows happened, but politely avoids mentioning so as not to make a scene.

This is intro comic to a series of  mini comics I wanted to do about Soviet Union’s famine of 1921 and America’s relief efforts. 

So Hoover is mainly known for the depression but in the early 1920’s Hoover was seen as a very capable hard head humanitarian. He was the head of the ARA and was known as the master of emergencies because he he knew how to move men and food to helped feed millions starving in war torn countries. One of his greatest challenges was Soviet Union in 1921.  

One reason was that Soviet Union was weary about America’s intentions. They didn’t understand why America was suddenly giving them aid. Sure most of it was because ARA wanted to help those who where in need but Hoover also saw Bolshevism as wicked and  evil and did hope to use the food as a political weapon. So they where right to be suspicious.


Volunteer SS Legionnaires March in Latvia’17

Russia’s self-glorification as a winner in the Second World War and its monopoly on the greatest contribution to the victory is often used as an instrument in geopolitics and wars against those who reject a neocolonial status in the USSR which Putin’s trying to rebuild.

A phenomenon of the Waffen-SS volunteers has been known since the times of active struggle by oppressed peoples against the evil of Bolshevism, which is being gradually revived in the offices of the Kremlin and is preparing for a new attack on the freedom and independence of both its citizens and European nations.

March 16, 2017 in Riga was traditionally held the march of veterans of the Latvian SS Legion who fought against the Soviet occupation of Latvia during the Second World War. This year’s march, in addition to comrades from Estonia and Lithuania, was also attended by representatives of the Ukrainian diaspora from the Congress of Ukrainians in Latvia, as well as Vladyslav Kovalchuk, official representative of the party “National Corps,” and Polish nationalists supporting Ukraine and its fight against  the Neo-Bolshevist offensive from the East.

It is worth noting that the participants warmly greeted the Ukrainian presence at the march. Local channels and foreign press were eagerly asking questions and disseminating information about Ukraine’s solidarity with the Latvian people on such an important for their history day.

The celebrations began with a memorial service in the Latvian Orthodox Church of St. Prophet John the Baptist, and then people started forming a column. During the preparation for the march they could communicate with foreign press and answer some unclear to the Western audience questions, regarding the Legion’s operating as part of the Waffen SS in particular.

It’s worth mentioning that there were representatives of the Latvian press planning to shoot a film about Latvian legionaries. Their goal is to justify the veterans denounced by a variety of liberal foundations. Besides, they plan to refer to the Ukrainian “Galicia” volunteer division of the SS and Polish volunteers who fought side by side with the Latvians.

Since the event falls on the anniversary of the Russian occupation of Crimea,  representatives of “National Corps,” Congress of Ukrainians in Latvia and Polish nationalists made a joint photo with the poster “Crimea is Ukraine” and national flags. It was widely covered both by Latvian and foreign media, including Russian. Apparently, Russian media and a pro-Putin audience cannot accept the fact that Eastern Europe is beware of a yoke of Bolshevism and at the first opportunity reminds Russia that the fact that it avoided the Nuremberg Tribunal does not mean that the crimes of the Red Army and NKVD are forgotten.

After the memorial service, the procession marched through the streets of Riga, having united both younger and older generations of Latvians. Vigilance and alertness of the police that silently detained two admirers of the “Russian world” with St. George ribbons, as well as representatives of the German antifa, is also quite praiseworthy.

The march ended at the Freedom Monument where representatives of “National Corps,” Congress of Ukrainians in Latvia and Polish nationalists put flowers in memory of the fallen for the freedom of Latvia.

Further took place a meeting with representatives of the Latvian nationalist party “National Alliance.” Afterwards all together went to the military cemetery of the legionnaires in Lesten.

The cemetery was attended by representatives of the government, society and nationalists. The choir was singing war songs of the legionnaires between their speeches.

It should be noted that Latvia is an exemplary country in terms of resistance and criticism of the liberal discourse of “ubiquitous fascism and a shadow of Hitlerism looming over Europe.” Latvia exists today namely thanks to the legionnaires. They may be called “Nazis” a thousand times, but the Latvians will never renounce those who shed their blood and gave away their lives for the independence of Latvia.

So when someone wants to teach Ukrainians that the “Galicia” division of the SS contradicts the European values, the example of Latvia, a long-time member of the EU, will be more than relevant.

Vladyslav Kovalchuk

Photo courtesy of Witold Dobrowolski (SZTURM) and National Alliance


So just a clarification: Kronstadt was never truly a “stronghold of Bolshevism,” that was the betrayed by the very regime it brought to life. It was always primarily a stronghold of anarchism, looking at the voting patterns in the local soviet, one that conditionally aligned itself with the Bolsheviks when the two groups’ interests seemed to converge, and then became more and more disillusioned as the new government exerted more and more authority in the Civil War period. I know this seems like a pointless distinction to make, but it brings up the problem of the phenomenon of “non-partyism”-the rejection of political parties in the soviets in favor of direct election of individual workers from the local community-and what it represented. The Bolsheviks lashed out against this popular outcry for an end to their dominance of soviet institutions, for the understandable reason that they expected a diminishing of their influence to lead to a commesurate rise in the stature of the Mensheviks and SRs, who at that point professed platforms that were clearly revolutionary, not to mention their hostile history toward the Bolshies (people rarely mention the Menshevik-SR attempt at a counter-coup in the immediate aftermath of October, when those parties summoned a host of Cossacks to attempt to suppress the now Bolshevik dominated city Soviet). Critics of the Bolsheviks can claim that non-partyism posed no such risk, but rather indicated that the working people of the former Russian empire were ready and willing to take the reins of power into their own hands, without the mediation of a vanguard party.

Churchill's love for Fascism

Just about the greatest myth peddled about Winston Churchill is that he led a great anti-fascist crusade against the Axis power during World War II - his finest hour. What utter baloney. The man welcomed the coming to power of Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler - viewing them as valuable bulwarks against communism. Churchill only became ‘anti-fascist’ when he felt that the British empire was threatened by the expanding ambitions of these rivals. Defending British imperial interests, not fighting a democratic crusade against fascism, was his aim during World War II.

Previously, Churchill had praised Mussolini to the skies - the man could do no wrong. Il Duce had “rendered a service to the whole world” by showing the “way to combat subversive forces”. In fact, Churchill thought, Mussolini was the “Roman genius” - the “greatest lawgiver among men”. Speaking in Rome in 1927, he told Italy’s Fascist Party: “If I had been an Italian, I would have been entirely with you from the beginning to the end of your victorious struggle against the bestial appetites and passions of Leninism.”

He heaped similar praise upon Hitler too. After the Nazis came to power, Churchill proclaimed in a 1935 article that if Britain was defeated like Germany had been in 1918, he hoped “we should find a champion as indomitable to restore our courage and lead us back to our place among the nations”. While all manner of “formidable transformations” were occurring in Europe, Churchill continued, corporal Hitler was “fighting his long, wearing battle for the German heart” - the story of that struggle “cannot be read without admiration for the courage, the perseverance and the vital force which enabled him to challenge, defy, conciliate or overcome all the authorities or resistances which barred his path”. If only things had been different, Britain could have done a deal with fascist Italy and Germany against the common enemy - ie, ‘international Bolshevism’.

~Eddie Ford(weekly worker)

The Goldman house

Amazing house, amazing history: Located at 143 School St., in the North Stelton section of Piscataway NJ, is a house that was the brainchild of Sam Goldman, a Russian born artist, musician, paper-hanger and follower of anarchist doctrines. Built in 1915 by Goldman, the home is adorned with reliefs of Bolshevic symbolism, along with some abstract and oddly placed columns.The area surrounding the house was once a farm commune, established as a cooperative organization called Fellowship Farms. It was a utopian enterprise based on socialist-Marxist teachings, and Sam was one of the leaders of the movement. At its center was the Modern School, conducted along progressive lines by followers of the Spanish martyr-anarchist Francisco Ferrer.

Birçoğumuz Nadejda Krupskaya’yı yalnızca Vladimir Lenin’in eşi olarak biliriz. Ama Nadejda, aynı zamanda Bolşevik bir devrimciydi ve kendisi de bir politikacıydı. Çarlık Rusyası’nın eğitim anlayışına karşı çikarak başladığı politik hayatında 1929’dan 1939’daki vefatına dek Sovyetler Birliği’nde Eğitim Bakanlığı Yardımcılığı dâhil çeşitli siyasi faaliyetlerde yoğun biçimde yer alırken aynı zamanda eğitim alanında da bazı görevler üstlendi. Devrimden önce, kıta genelindeki çoğu şifreli yapılan ve kod çözme işi gerektiren yazışmaları yürüten, Bolşevik Partinin yayın organı olan İskra grubunda sekreter olarak çalıştı. Görünmeyen mürekkeple şifreli mektuplar yazmak konusunda uzmandi. Devrimden sonra sosyalist eğitim sistemini geliştirdi; hayatını işçi ve köylülere yönelik, herkesin erişebileceği kütüphanelerin açılması gibi çabalarıyla, eğitim imkânlarının ıslahına adadı.