The Internationale RMB

WA Delegate: The People's Republic of Auhl (elected 85 days ago)

Founder: The Internationale of Illa Passiflora

BoardActivity History Admin

World Factbook Entry

The Internationale is a broad alliance of anarchists, socialists, communists, and other left-wing nations and communes.

The Internationale opposes the exploitation and oppression of the people by the forces of capitalism, imperialism and fascism.


"The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Workers of the world, unite!"

"No real social change has ever come about without a revolution. Revolution is but thought carried into action."

LinkThe Internationale in 47 Languages



LinkArchives of the Red & Black
LinkIRC: #TheInternationale on EsperNet

Link/r/Communism101 FAQ LinkIMT Marxism FAQ
LinkAn Anarchist FAQ
LinkMarxists Internet Archive
LinkAnarchy Archives
LinkRevleft



LinkJoin The Red Fleet!
LinkTRF Recruitment Video




Embassies: The International, The Red Fleet, North Korea, Das Kommune, Freedom and Justice Alliance, Antifa, The MT Army, Labour and Socialist International, United Socialist Republics, Democratic Socialist Assembly, Allied States of EuroIslanders, The Communist Region, Marxism Leninism, Eurasia, The League of Reformed Socialist States, The International Communist Union, and 17 others.TI Historical Restoration Project, NSLeft, Marxist Scholars Circle, Socialism, The Leftist Union, Primitive Communism, Anti Nazi Alliance, Federacion Comunista Iberica, Union of Socialist Soviet Republics, ITALIA, The Green Star Socialist Union, The Communist Legion, Hippy Haven, 4th International, The Cannabis Communists, Orientopia, and Worldwide Communist Union.

Construction of embassies with Lazarus has commenced. Completion expected in 9 hours.

Tags: Democratic, Enormous, Anti-Fascist, Non-English, Communist, Social, Anarchist, Casual, Independent, Eco-friendly, Socialist, Anti-Capitalist, and 1 other.Serious.

Regional Power: High

The Internationale contains 276 nations, the 39th most in the world.

Today's World Census Report

The Most Primitive in The Internationale

Nations were ranked by World Census officials based on the number of natural phenomena attributed solely to the unknowable will of the gods.

As a region, The Internationale is ranked 16,126th in the world for Most Primitive.

#NationWA CategoryMotto
191.The United Socialist States of DaishamaDemocratic Socialists“We are but a piece of this world”
192.The United States of OpreiscomDemocratic Socialists“By the power of friendship, we are united.”
193.The Apatheist Simian Thumbocracy of Godless MonkeyWA MemberDemocratic Socialists“YOU HAVE THUMBS!”
194.The Rogue Nation of United Gender TerroristsNew York Times Democracy“From Nothing through Nothing to Nothing”
195.The People's republic of North TrejaIron Fist Socialists“Workers of the world, unite!”
196.The Workers' Republic of SocotiaScandinavian Liberal Paradise“I'd rather die on my feet than die on my knees”
197.The Federal Republic of Jesus SantiagoLiberal Democratic Socialists“Popular power”
198.The Federation of MazakWA MemberLeft-wing Utopia“With Power, But Without It”
199.The Disputed Territories of HighasakiteDemocratic Socialists“Lover, where do you live?”
200.The Most Serene Republic of Dedicated Worship of CheeseCivil Rights Lovefest“Searching for the Garden of Edam”
Page:  «  1  2  . . . 17  18  19  20  21  22  23  . . . 27  28  »

Regional Happenings

More...

The Internationale Regional Message Board

It's France

Today marks the 100th anniversary of the start of the Armenian genocide.

This week marks the 100th anniversary of the Armenian genocide. On April 24, 1915, the Young Turk government of the Ottoman Empire began a systematic, premeditated genocide against the Armenian people � an unarmed Christian minority living under Turkish rule. An estimated 1.5 million Armenians were exterminated through direct killing, starvation, torture and forced death marches. Another million fled into permanent exile. Today, the Turkish government continues to deny this genocide, and since becoming president, President Obama has avoided using the term "genocide" to describe it.
http://www.democracynow.org/2015/4/24/a_people_expunged_marking_the_100th

https://youtu.be/BSchiqWIB6g <- Includes mention of the Greeks & Assyrians who were also massacred.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide

Seatlle and Absylonia

The Apatheist Simian Thumbocracy of Godless Monkey wrote:Today marks the 100th anniversary of the start of the Armenian genocide.

This week marks the 100th anniversary of the Armenian genocide. On April 24, 1915, the Young Turk government of the Ottoman Empire began a systematic, premeditated genocide against the Armenian people � an unarmed Christian minority living under Turkish rule. An estimated 1.5 million Armenians were exterminated through direct killing, starvation, torture and forced death marches. Another million fled into permanent exile. Today, the Turkish government continues to deny this genocide, and since becoming president, President Obama has avoided using the term "genocide" to describe it.
http://www.democracynow.org/2015/4/24/a_people_expunged_marking_the_100th

https://youtu.be/BSchiqWIB6g <- Includes mention of the Greeks & Assyrians who were also massacred.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide

Indeed. I am glad that someone else seems to know about it, as everyone else seems to not know about it or deny it.

The Apatheist Simian Thumbocracy of Godless Monkey wrote:There are some on the "left" that are simply insane idiots & believe that homosexuality, and the acceptance & normalization of is some kind of American/western/capitalist conspiracy to enforce population or demographic control.


The underlying cause here is both more and less reasonable that your characterization.

Among western socialist groups, much of the enmity towards queer folks is due to the role postmodernism plays in "identity politics". One one level, the leftist reproach of identity politics is completely valid: its orientation is fundamentally liberal, making it a form of capitalist politics.

Of course, as a queer and transgender person, who is also a staunch communist, I am a living embodiment of the flaw inherent to the idea that sex and sexuality are secondary to class position. Fundamentally, the coordinates of the opposition between "class struggle" and "identity politics" is completely wrong: neither is subordinate to the other, because they fully coincide. In other words, the struggles for sexual equality, racial equality, and so on are themselves forms of class struggle. That is how I reproach the leftist homophobes.

However, at the same time, the liberal proponents of identity politics should also be reproached, because the true site of social antagonism is economic. In the discourse of identity politics, it's easy to note that class position is just another in a series: race, class, sexual orientation, etc. It's not that class should be more "important" than the other ones - this misses the larger point that class should be understood as both a moment in the series and also the "container" of the entire series itself. It is here that we should insist on one of Lenin's elementary axioms: in the struggle for communism, the war is fought on the terrain of the political, but we should always bear in mind that in the last instance, the victor is the one who (re)defines or (re)structures the economy.

The flaw in the opposition of leftist homophobes vs identity politics is clear: the former have their attention fixed on the prize (economy) and miss the necessity of the political battles which make possible its attainment, while identity politics focuses exclusively on the political as though it is in itself its own goal.

Godless Monkey and Seatlle

The Rogue Nation of United Gender Terrorists wrote:-respectful snip-

I always enjoy reading your posts. You articulate yourself wonderfully. And give great insight that is sometimes missing.

If anyone has seen vaque. Please tell him Tagamir wishes a telegram sent to him

The Free Soil of BURNINATI0N wrote:The authoritarian strands.

TBH, to some of us on the libertarian left, even the Gramsci (softest Authoritarian lefty I know of) looks too much like fascism. You're right that fascists solve class contradictions with a "great enemy" figure a la Carl Schmitt (essay "Origin of the Political" or something similar), but it looks a lot like the "great enemy" figure for Stalinism or Maoism has been the mytical counterrevolutionary or even the Trotskyist. The other issue with your analysis is Stalin's literal alliance with Hitler, and his policy of taking Lenin's phrase ("socialism in one country") and converting it from a call for international proletarian support to a veil for capitalist-style nationalist political purpose.

TL;DR (or think about), I don't think it's accurate to say that communism in general is close to fascism, but the authoritarian strands (esp those still absurdly apologetic for Stalin) can look a lot like it.


The very similarity between the "great enemy" figures in the early years of the USSR and PRC on the one hand and Nazi Germany on the other betrays their radical difference.

In the example of the USSR, rather than conterrevolutionary or Trotskyist, "sub-kulak" fits much better here. The peasants were divided into three categories: the miserable ones, the middle ones, and the kulaks. As time went on, the distinctions between each class became more and more blurred; eventually, the term sub-kulak was invented, a fourth category that was essentially an "other" classification, a category for those peasants who didn't clearly fit within the other three categories.

Such a categorization operative at the level of state policy is unthinkable in fascism. In Nazi Germany, all Jews and Jewish sympathizers were to be eradicated - and, more importantly, it is not possible in Nazism to think of any Jew, no matter what categorization they belong to, as potentially being an ally (as the Soviet government and popular opinion did in its designation of "the miserable ones" as the natural allies of the proletariat). Furthermore, the designation of sub-kulak was thoroughly ambiguous, a designation of suspicion, while in fascist ideology there is simply no need whatsoever to classify "the enemy" in this way.

This distinction is operative at all levels, from the purely abstract to the empirical. In both fascism and Soviet socialism, after the leader gives his speech everyone has to clap - however, Hitler accepts the applause with gravity and dignity, while Stalin joins the applause himself, even going so far as to step away and join the crowd to applaud an empty podium. Is this not ideology at its purest? - in fascism, the leader and the ideology the leader represents fully coincide, they are one and the same; while in the case of early Soviet socialism, the leader is merely the empirical representative of a greater abstract ideal (communism). Is this not evident in the notion of progress? In fascism, "progress" is always backwards; the goal is to "return" to some mythical, idyllic past, and then to preserve and protect it from change. Soviet socialism is precisely the opposite: everything must be done in the name of progress (towards communism).

(There is of course also the obvious point to make here: fascism is concerned with ethnic and/or national authenticity, which is why the Enemy figure must be a foreign influence, an outsider. While "Stalinism" had at least some "great enemy" figures, variations of the counterrevolutionary, the question of authenticity does not even enter consideration - in Stalin's terms, what mattered was what cause one's actions "objectively" serve. Even Stalin's own racism - anti-semitism, for example - requires reference to scientific Marxism for justification, being unable to stand on its own.)

It is against this background that the common-sense notion that fascism and communism are both "extremes" that shouldn't be pursued because of the danger of "taking things too far" and winding up in Nazism or "Stalinism". No, the problem with fascism is that it is not radical enough; in fact, fascism is precisely the rejection of all radicalism - a rejection that, ironically, can best be described as 'radical', a radical desperation for a return to an imaginary past.

"Stalinism" - although it is of course never clear what this term even means beyond "things that happened in the USSR during his time as General Secretary" - is something entirely different. Early Soviet socialism shares with fascism the flaw of not taking things far enough, but the similarity ends there: Soviet socialism was an authentic attempt for something genuinely new. Ultimately, this attempt ended in failure - the difference is thus that fascism was a failure to act, while Soviet socialism was a failed act. This is evident in the revolutionary redefinition of justice in the USSR as generosity towards people that reshaped the whole world; in the desperate restructuring liberal democracies had to enact to survive the ideological impact of the October Revolution (New Deal, etc).

(By the way, along these lines, liberalism can be characterized as a refusal to act.)

Transemilia

Post self-deleted by Irish Peoples Republic.

The Apatheist Simian Thumbocracy of Godless Monkey wrote:I always enjoy reading your posts. You articulate yourself wonderfully. And give great insight that is sometimes missing.

I second that!

I made a new factbook c: CPPE knows that when I was in TCB, I used to make one factbook every day..
nation=kampouchea/detail=factbook/id=409421

Forum View

by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics