Really? Is that why they couldn’t catch Makhno while they were murdering the Nabat, eh tankie?
Makhno and the Soviets had competing visions for the future of Eastern Europe
Should I be surprised at a tankie using such imperialist language? I suppose not.
But hey… do go on. Show me the “vision” the Makhnovists had for Moscow, Prague, Bucharest and Warsaw. Show me the imperialist “vision” Makhno had for Moscow.
Should be easy for you, no?
your account of Makhno as a dull and easily betrayed fool.
Right, right… the Makhno that your precious Bolsheviks could never “liquidate” a “dull and easily betrayed fool.”
Dangle that slender thread of hope, tankie.
suggesting I said “all Marxists are tankies,”
This you?
Either way, your crusade against Marxists is a bit silly.
Again… this you?
a pragmatic anarchist facing pragmatic Marxists
Could have sworn that was you, tankie.
tankie is just a pejorative for those who support historical and currently existing socialist states.
Aww… what’s the matter? Don’t like being called a *tankie?"
I suggested we call you apparatists once, a long time ago… everybody felt it accurate, but they also felt it didn’t exactly roll off the tongue.
So tell you what… why don’t you come up with something better than “Marxist-Leninist” that actually sticks, okay?
Come now… I’m willing to bet you’ve never had an invitation like that from anyone that can be called leftist with a straight face.
Quite reactionary behavior for a supposed anarchist,
Again, Makhno was not the helpless idealist you seem to believe him to be. The Soviets were correct in understanding him as a threat, just as Makhno was correct in identifying the soviets as a threat to him.
“Using imperialist language” is a nonsense jab. The Soviets were never imperialist, this is a non-sequitor to try to shift the argument. My point was clear, the Soviets were trying to establish socialism, while Makhno was trying to establish a horizontalist system. The fact that the Soviets succeeded and Makhno failed to establish even a localized version of his horizontalist vision does not mean these were two competing visions, and as we know, the broad majority supported the Bolsheviks.
The bulk of your comment is you pressing a silly notion that I’m offended at being called a tankie by you. In that a tankie is someone that defends existing socialism, I am absolutely a tankie, so this doesn’t really mean much other than that you don’t like me, which is also obvious. Well done! We figured it out, I like existing socialism, and you don’t. We already knew that from the first comment, though, so all it seems to me is that you’re hoping to get under my skin. It won’t work, though.
I don’t know what you mean by saying we come up with something “better than Marxist-Leninist.” It has stuck, that’s what we MLs are. I’m also fine with tankie, it’s a pejorative, but one for a group we are both aware exists, those who defend existing socialism. It’s fine, I don’t care what you decide to call us, as long as we both agree on what this actually describes, those who defend existing socialism.
There’s not much to respond to here that I haven’t already comprehensively answered. You just listed some assertions with no meaningful backing and then went back to petty name-calling.
Really? Is that why they couldn’t catch Makhno while they were murdering the Nabat, eh tankie?
Should I be surprised at a tankie using such imperialist language? I suppose not.
But hey… do go on. Show me the “vision” the Makhnovists had for Moscow, Prague, Bucharest and Warsaw. Show me the imperialist “vision” Makhno had for Moscow.
Should be easy for you, no?
Right, right… the Makhno that your precious Bolsheviks could never “liquidate” a “dull and easily betrayed fool.”
Dangle that slender thread of hope, tankie.
This you?
Again… this you?
Could have sworn that was you, tankie.
Aww… what’s the matter? Don’t like being called a *tankie?"
I suggested we call you apparatists once, a long time ago… everybody felt it accurate, but they also felt it didn’t exactly roll off the tongue.
So tell you what… why don’t you come up with something better than “Marxist-Leninist” that actually sticks, okay?
Come now… I’m willing to bet you’ve never had an invitation like that from anyone that can be called leftist with a straight face.
Oh boo-fucking-hoo, tankie. Cry me a river.
Again, Makhno was not the helpless idealist you seem to believe him to be. The Soviets were correct in understanding him as a threat, just as Makhno was correct in identifying the soviets as a threat to him.
“Using imperialist language” is a nonsense jab. The Soviets were never imperialist, this is a non-sequitor to try to shift the argument. My point was clear, the Soviets were trying to establish socialism, while Makhno was trying to establish a horizontalist system. The fact that the Soviets succeeded and Makhno failed to establish even a localized version of his horizontalist vision does not mean these were two competing visions, and as we know, the broad majority supported the Bolsheviks.
The bulk of your comment is you pressing a silly notion that I’m offended at being called a tankie by you. In that a tankie is someone that defends existing socialism, I am absolutely a tankie, so this doesn’t really mean much other than that you don’t like me, which is also obvious. Well done! We figured it out, I like existing socialism, and you don’t. We already knew that from the first comment, though, so all it seems to me is that you’re hoping to get under my skin. It won’t work, though.
I don’t know what you mean by saying we come up with something “better than Marxist-Leninist.” It has stuck, that’s what we MLs are. I’m also fine with tankie, it’s a pejorative, but one for a group we are both aware exists, those who defend existing socialism. It’s fine, I don’t care what you decide to call us, as long as we both agree on what this actually describes, those who defend existing socialism.
I really should start numbering your lies, tankie… they are getting so numerous they require admin.
This you?
Could have sworn that was you. Did somebody else type that for you, maybe?
Of coooooorse not, tankie - the mountainous and voluminous history of tankie imperialism is purely a figment of everybody’s imagination, right?
How charitable of you, defending something you don’t even believe in. How heroic.
LOOOL!
Absurdism suits you, tankie.
You’re playing up an intentional misrepresentation of what I said as “imperialist language,” and now again continuing to fall apart.
Again… boo-fucking-hoo, tankie.
No more walls-of-text? That would be a first… normally you lot have the stamina of AI bots.
There’s not much to respond to here that I haven’t already comprehensively answered. You just listed some assertions with no meaningful backing and then went back to petty name-calling.
Is that what you were doing? Good thing you told me.
Make up your mind, tankie… do you want to be called tankies or don’t you?
I can say that hurling a pejorative at me doesn’t bother me while also acknowledging the reason you’re doing so.
Again… is that what you were doing? You really do seem to exist in a fantasy world, don’t you?