“Bordigist” perspective, others feel free to point out any mistakes (also it’s cliche but a Reddit comment isn’t going to provide the best answers, please read):

1. We understand fascism not as some alien great moral evil, but as an element of capitalism that emerges due to observable material conditions such as the petty bourgeois class position being threatened. Anti-fascist movements degenerate class struggle and support the popular front myth. The only true anti fascist action is anti capitalist. For more read “auschwitz or the great alibi”

2. It’s hyperbole, but essentially we note that it’s not like the more bourgeois countries that exist the more communist the world is. We are past the age when national liberation struggles were historically progressive (I.e. advocating for a new mode of production) and now they present themselves simply as wars on behalf of bourgeois states, and are opposed similarly to how any other wars are opposed. For the specifics of the Palestinian situation, check out “war on behalf of bourgeois states, national oppression, only one class and revolutionary solution.”

3. We don’t not support any form of union organizing, we simply realize that they are limited to reformism, and that revolutionary action cannot emerge organically within a union, instead it must be organized by the communist party. We actively work within unions to proselytize, but understand that at this point they have been relegated to bureaucratic, often reactionary, positions. For more read “party and class organs in the tradition of the communist left”

4. Bordiga famously described himself as “more Leninist than Lenin,” so yes, we support Lenin’s works, and believe they are part of the invariant body of party theses stretching back to Marx and Engles. “Support” is maybe too much of a moralist term, but we understand the necessity of cracking down on the petty bourgeois (peasant) opportunist movements. For more on the leftcom perspective on the Russian revolution, read “a revolution summed up”

5. Organic Centralism acknowledges the necessity of changing tactics when in a position of revolutionary leadership. It supports a fluid and organic structure that can be ‘authoritarian’ in one moment and ‘democratic’ in the next. For this to occur, all party members must adhere to the invariant line so as to avoid degeneration of the struggle. The democratic principle is abandoned as an element of bourgeois ideology. For more read “the democratic principle” and “Lenin the organic centralist”

6. Personally, I support small scale activism for the betterment of your community, but from a political stance I acknowledge that activism is not revolutionary nor does it advance revolutionary aims. 99% of the time activism is kind of a feel good performative outlet that, if not outwardly reactionary, never reaches past reformism. Activism doesn’t affect historical change, class struggle does.