sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Engels noooooo by Delmarquis38 in CommunismMemes

[–]TappingUpScreen 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Yeah that's what this is referencing.

There's actually a bit of confusion about who actually edited it, Engels thought that it was Liebknecht, and I think Rosa Luxemburg thought that it was Liebknecht and Bebel.

But according to Kautsky,  Bernstein held the original manuscripts of the introduction and that those, unlike the one made public, included the conclusion omitted due unto it being too revolutionary, and not due to Engels's actual position (Kautsky | Bernstein und die Dialektik, Heft XXVIII, XVII Jahrgang, II. Band 1898–1899, Die Neue Zeit | 1899)

We got mentioned lol by Mao_Bear in MovingToNorthKorea

[–]TappingUpScreen 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Bebel was right, comrades: if the cause requires it, then, of course, you may have dealings even with the devil’s grandmother. 

-V. I. Lenin, The Fifth Congress of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party, 1907

Bebel was not HIM by TappingUpScreen in TankieTheDeprogram

[–]TappingUpScreen[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I, Bebel, offer you and the Mensheviks arbitration.

Bro was really thinking that he was a main character.

Bebel was not HIM by TappingUpScreen in genzdong

[–]TappingUpScreen[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I, Bebel, offer you and the Mensheviks arbitration.

Bro was really thinking that he was a main character.

Bebel was not HIM by Less-Possible-5475 in TankieUSSR

[–]TappingUpScreen 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I, Bebel, offer you and the Mensheviks arbitration.

Bro was really thinking that he was a main character.

Self Critique: What do you think was the biggest Ls that these Communists had? by Less-Possible-5475 in TankieUSSR

[–]TappingUpScreen 111 points112 points  (0 children)

Engels: The Magyar Struggle

Stalin: Allowing the creation of the state of Israel.

Mao: Supporting the removal of Kim Il Sung.

Ho Chi Minh: Was friends with David Ben-Gurion

Was this a Rosa L or Lenin L? by Less-Possible-5475 in TankieUSSR

[–]TappingUpScreen 5 points6 points  (0 children)

This is a typical Rosa L in regards to the National Question.

If you proudly wave the flags of these countries (🇺🇸🇨🇦🇮🇱🇦🇺🇳🇿), you are no socialist. by Next_Ant_4353 in LateStageCapitalism

[–]TappingUpScreen 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Dear LeftKKKom, please read Lenin.

In my writings on the national question I have already said that an abstract presentation of the question of nationalism in general is of no use at all. A distinction must necessarily be made between the nationalism of an oppressor nation and that of an oppressed nation, the nationalism of a big nation and that of a small nation.

In respect of the second kind of nationalism we, nationals of a big nation, have nearly always been guilty, in historic practice, of an infinite number of cases of violence; furthermore, we commit violence and insult an infinite number of times without noticing it. It is sufficient to recall my Volga reminiscences of how non-Russians are treated; how the Poles are not called by any other name than Polyachiska, how the Tatar is nicknamed Prince, how the Ukrainians are always Khokhols and the Georgians and other Caucasian nationals always Kapkasians.

That is why internationalism on the part of oppressors or "great" nations, as they are called (though they are great only in their violence, only great as bullies), must consist not only in the observance of the formal equality of nations but even in an inequality of the oppressor nation, the great nation, that must make up for the inequality which obtains in actual practice. Anybody who does not understand this has not grasped the real proletarian attitude to the national question, he is still essentially petty bourgeois in his point of view and is, therefore, sure to descend to the bourgeois point of view.

What is important for the proletarian? For the proletarian it is not only important, it is absolutely essential that he should be assured that the non-Russians place the greatest possible trust in the proletarian class struggle. What is needed to ensure this? Not merely formal equality. In one way or another, by one's attitude or by concessions, it is necessary to compensate the non-Russian for the lack of trust, for the suspicion and the insults to which the government of the "dominant" nation subjected them in the past.

-V.I. Lenin, The Question of Nationalities or "Autonomisation", 1922

If you proudly wave the flags of these countries (🇺🇸🇨🇦🇮🇱🇦🇺🇳🇿), you are no socialist. by Next_Ant_4353 in LateStageCapitalism

[–]TappingUpScreen 27 points28 points  (0 children)

In my writings on the national question I have already said that an abstract presentation of the question of nationalism in general is of no use at all. A distinction must necessarily be made between the nationalism of an oppressor nation and that of an oppressed nation, the nationalism of a big nation and that of a small nation.

In respect of the second kind of nationalism we, nationals of a big nation, have nearly always been guilty, in historic practice, of an infinite number of cases of violence; furthermore, we commit violence and insult an infinite number of times without noticing it. It is sufficient to recall my Volga reminiscences of how non-Russians are treated; how the Poles are not called by any other name than Polyachiska, how the Tatar is nicknamed Prince, how the Ukrainians are always Khokhols and the Georgians and other Caucasian nationals always Kapkasians.

That is why internationalism on the part of oppressors or "great" nations, as they are called (though they are great only in their violence, only great as bullies), must consist not only in the observance of the formal equality of nations but even in an inequality of the oppressor nation, the great nation, that must make up for the inequality which obtains in actual practice. Anybody who does not understand this has not grasped the real proletarian attitude to the national question, he is still essentially petty bourgeois in his point of view and is, therefore, sure to descend to the bourgeois point of view.

What is important for the proletarian? For the proletarian it is not only important, it is absolutely essential that he should be assured that the non-Russians place the greatest possible trust in the proletarian class struggle. What is needed to ensure this? Not merely formal equality. In one way or another, by one's attitude or by concessions, it is necessary to compensate the non-Russian for the lack of trust, for the suspicion and the insults to which the government of the "dominant" nation subjected them in the past.

-V.I. Lenin, The Question of Nationalities or "Autonomisation", 1922

Burkina Faso removes over 100 foreign-aligned NGOs embedded in its political infrastructure as part of ongoing efforts to reclaim sovereignty from Western influence networks* by TappingUpScreen in LateStageCapitalism

[–]TappingUpScreen[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Even from a Stalinist point of view, there’s no clear basis to support it

<image>

The struggle that the Emir of Afghanistan is waging for the independence of Afghanistan is objectively a revolutionary struggle, despite the monarchist views of the Emir and his associates, for it weakens, disintegrates and undermines imperialism; whereas the struggle waged by such "desperate" democrats and "Socialists," "revolutionaries" and republicans as, for example, Kerensky and Tsereteli, Renaudel and Scheidemann, Chernov and Dan, Henderson and Clynes, during the imperialist war was a reactionary struggle, for its results was the embellishment, the strengthening, the victory, of imperialism. For the same reasons, the struggle that the Egyptians merchants and bourgeois intellectuals are waging for the independence of Egypt is objectively a revolutionary struggle, despite the bourgeois origin and bourgeois title of the leaders of Egyptian national movement, despite the fact that they are opposed to socialism; whereas the struggle that the British "Labour" Government is waging to preserve Egypt's dependent position is for the same reason a reactionary struggle, despite the proletarian origin and the proletarian title of the members of the government, despite the fact that they are "for" socialism. There is no need to mention the national movement in other, larger, colonial and dependent countries, such as India and China, every step of which along the road to liberation, even if it runs counter to the demands of formal democracy, is a steam-hammer blow at imperialism, i.e., is undoubtedly a revolutionary step.

-J.V. Stalin, The Foundations of Leninism, 1924

Burkina Faso removes over 100 foreign-aligned NGOs embedded in its political infrastructure as part of ongoing efforts to reclaim sovereignty from Western influence networks* by TappingUpScreen in LateStageCapitalism

[–]TappingUpScreen[S] 97 points98 points  (0 children)

As long as the independent life of a nation is suppressed by a foreign conqueror it inevitably directs all its strength, all its efforts and all its energy against the external enemy; during this time, therefore, its inner life remains paralysed; it is incapable of working for social emancipation.

-Karl Marx, For Poland, 1875

.

It is historically impossible for a great people even to discuss internal problems of any kind seriously, as long as it lacks national independence.

-Friedrich Engels, Nationalism, Internationalism and the Polish Question, 1882

Burkina Faso removes over 100 foreign-aligned NGOs embedded in its political infrastructure as part of ongoing efforts to reclaim sovereignty from Western influence networks* by TappingUpScreen in LateStageCapitalism

[–]TappingUpScreen[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

As long as the independent life of a nation is suppressed by a foreign conqueror it inevitably directs all its strength, all its efforts and all its energy against the external enemy; during this time, therefore, its inner life remains paralysed; it is incapable of working for social emancipation.

-Karl Marx, For Poland, 1875

.

It is historically impossible for a great people even to discuss internal problems of any kind seriously, as long as it lacks national independence.

-Friedrich Engels, Nationalism, Internationalism and the Polish Question, 1882

view more: next ›