What's the point of the sidebar's rules if the mods are going to bury their heads in the sand about the lemmy.world-lib bot-farm

  • Lad@reddthat.com
    ·
    5 months ago

    I thought this was lefty memes not "vague and incredibly specific brand of leftwing politics" memes

    • umbrella@lemmy.ml
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      yeah this rule sounds very specific and very vague at the same time. and needlessly sectarian. i get pushing out libs but some of the people mentioned seem to imply china isnt on the road to socialism? or that socdems or dengists are right wing? i get disagreeing with them, because i mostly do, but like cmon.

      socialism and the process to achieve it will be different on each place according to its particularities. its not a perfect dogma to be applied like a cake recipe to every country to make it socialist.

    • Septimaeus@infosec.pub
      ·
      5 months ago

      For a minute I was hung up on the apparent oxymoron of vague and specific, but I think I see now: vague re: what leftism is allowed, yet hyper specific re: what is not. Agreed.

  • anarchoilluminati [comrade/them]
    ·
    5 months ago

    I thought this was a joke for a second.

    Who are "actual Marxist-Leninists" as opposed to Lemmygrad Marxist-Leninists?

    • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      ·
      5 months ago

      I do agree that those rules are kinda confusing. I'd rather this was anarchism memes tbh 😅

        • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          ·
          4 months ago

          Well, "Revolutionary marxist" is a bit vague anyway. Are you of the ML variety? A Trot? A Luxembourgist? Marx has precious little to say about the process of revolution anyway, so outside of MLs and maybe Luxembourg, there's really only anarchism

          • алсааас [she/they]@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            that's the thing, I don't like confining myself to a specific school of thought/dogma. I'm heavily influnced by Council Communism but also think that Bolshevism (i.e. Leninism + Trotskyism), various branches Maoism and (non-soviet) ML (read: the ideology of a lot of liberationist movements in the 3rd world, like those In Grenada or Burkina Faso) had a lot of good ideas/analyses, even if I do not agree with all of them 100%

            I also have respect for anarcho-communists and anarchists in general, even if I do not agree with their theoretical basis. (I mean that in the non "usa-perverted" sense of the word, as in smth like Bakunin's or Goldman's tradition, not the absolutely deranged idea that anarchism is just "anti-statism" and reconcilable with capitalism ("anarcho"-capitalism is mindboggling))

            • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              ·
              4 months ago

              Hmm, consider that Anarchism is. in essence, the idea of revolutionary socialism without specific school of thought/dogma. It's why Anarchists don't go by specific names like ML-strains. We don't call ourselves Bakunists, Kropotkinists and Goldmanists. The various flags we use is about which praxis we emphasize, rather than a schism. There's no anarchist heresy (and we don't consider AnCaps "Anarchists" in the first place)

              Likewise, most anarchist follow the same approach. We learn from what worked. I've read Marx, I've read Trotsky and I've read various MLs and Marxists as well as anarchists and took the best parts for my praxis. So did the other Anarchists I know of. We're still anarchists, not because of what theory we espouse, but because of the non-dogmatic praxis we practice.

              • алсааас [she/they]@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                Ik that there is no such thing as "Kropotkinism" etc., was just using the "traditions" as a way to differentiate it from/make a comparison with "anarcho"-capitalism

                All of the major anarchist works are on my reading list and I do want to understand them once I have a good grasp of Marxism as a philosoph/school of thought.
                Thus far I find materialist dialectics & organized (party) work to be one of/if not the best approach(es), but that might change as my understanding grows, who knows :p

                • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I personally can't stop suggesting the Anarchist FAQ enough as the first stop for getting into Anarchism.

  • алсааас [she/they]@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
    ·
    4 months ago

    I understand and partially share your concern, although I would harshly disagree with calling ppl "bots".

    tbh I neither have the time nor capacity in the free time that I have, to manage this batch of communities. I should probably invite some additional moderators, but I have never done that before and imagine that the vetting process will be tedious. Thus far I have just been procrastinating on this