Leftist Infighting: A community dedicated to allowing leftists to vent their frustrations

1421 readers

1 users here now

The purpose of this community is sort of a "work out your frustrations by letting it all out" where different leftist tendencies can vent their frustrations with one another and more assertively and directly challenge one another. Hostility is allowed, but any racist, fascist, or reactionary crap wont be tolerated, nor will explicit threats.

founded 6 years ago

MODERATORS

DashRendar@lemmygrad.ml

I don't understand the appeal of "multipolarity" (lemmygrad.ml)

submitted 2 weeks ago by Lilybump@lemmygrad.ml to c/leftistinfighting@lemmygrad.ml

38 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Personally, I fail to see why many Marxist-Leninists support multipolarity. The primary goal of the Leninist movements has always been "workers of the world unite!" and not "non-US-aligned countries unite!".

To be clear, in saying this, I am not endorsing US-led unipolarity. I am just saying that multipolarity is not inherently good as some MLs suggest. For example, the world in 1914 and 1939 were without a doubt multipolar, and those both resulted in brutal world wars which killed millions.

Could somebody explain why people support multipolarity so much?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[+] Lilybump@lemmygrad.ml -8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Nobody is suggesting that Russia will become an imperialist power in the course of a day or even a few years. Rather, what is being suggested is that Russia will become one after a difficult series of armed conflicts, annexations, etc. etc. Looking at Nazi Germany, it went from being a defeated imperialist power with practically no sphere of influence to one which conquered nearly all of Europe and waged war in multiple continents in the course of a few years.

Let us no forget that the Russian state was born out of reaction to a similar extent the EU countries were, coming out of the restoration of capitalism in the USSR and rise of the new Soviet bourgeoisie, its undemocratic and illegal dissolution, the rapid introduction of neoliberal "shocktherapy" under Yeltsin, the events of 1993, etc. This state is obviously and backwards force with horrible origins and so it becoming imperialist is not far away to say the least.

[–] rainpizza@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

For me, Russia is more likely heading back to Socialism rather than turning imperialist if you check the material conditions within the country and external. Some internal conditions mentioned in this post are the following:

the share of supporters of socialism has grown from 26 to 43%, while support for the capitalist model has fallen to 15%
Despite the fact that they only know the pioneers from the stories of the older generation, two-thirds of young people are in favor of their return.

For Russia to turn imperialist lots of conditions(happy paths if we use the programming meaning) have to happen before we even consider this a possibility. For me, it is harder to see these possibilities come true knowing that the better route of socialist development is a more favorable view for the common Russian citizen.

Also, let's be real here... If we have the time to only think in the worst possible scenarios, we should also give ourselves time to think in the other more realistic scenarios which is socialism returning to Russia.

[–] Lilybump@lemmygrad.ml -5 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Exactly. Our goal should be world socialist revolution, not capitalist multipolarity.

[–] bennieandthez@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 2 weeks ago

“You see, we Marxists believe that a revolution will also take place in other countries. But it will take place only when the revolutionaries in those countries think it possible, or necessary. The export of revolution is nonsense. Every country will make its own revolution if it wants to, and if it does not want to, there will be no revolution. For example, our country wanted to make a revolution and made it, and now we are building a new, classless society. But to assert that we want to make a revolution in other countries, to interfere in their lives, means saying what is untrue, and what we have never advocated.” —Joseph Stalin, Interview Between J. Stalin and Roy Howard

[–] rainpizza@lemmygrad.ml 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

To reach that world socialist revolution, there is a process that has to be taken in order for that to happen. Lots of comrades here have shared good answers to explain that throughout this thread.

Just as I described for Russia, the same is true for the rest of the countries in the global south. In a multipolar world, their interests are directly aligned with their mutual development and fair trade. This is a far cry to what the west offered through imperialism which exploited the global south.

Please, don't dismiss the comrades that have eloquently explained why it is important to have a multipolar world first to jump to socialist world revolution.

[–] Lilybump@lemmygrad.ml -2 points 2 weeks ago

I am not being dismissive.

[–] davel@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 2 weeks ago

That is unquestionably the end-goal. But you can’t always skip ahead, directly to the end-goal. Sometimes you even have to seemingly go backwards to get there. Take for instance China’s reform and opening up.