A charismatic leader is what makes or breaks a new political movement. Established political groups do not need them since they are usually created a long time ago and simply perpetuates its comfy existence in a mainstream existence. Clearly we do not have this luxury. Would you agree that without charismatic leader(s) a movement is doomed to fail? In times of peace a new political movement with no charismatic leader amounts to nothing and when instability and chaos happens, people rally around the charismatic leader. For arising powers, charisma is everything.
If we have no charismatic leadership (or at least sufficiently charismatic individuals) in a movement then how do we maintain cohesion, control, and capability?
A side question, ☭TANKIE☭ Parties usually have charismatic leaders (if they don't then it is just a useless sect doing nothing usually), do Anarchist Federations historically have any charismatic individuals that rallied people to anarchism?
Not, but a charismatic leader/charismatic members do help a lot. spooky eh?
Christian Davis
Any rising movements in history that succeeded but had no charismatic leaders?
Jaxson Davis
That is probably harder since you need more charismatics isntead of having a few, then again charismatic members would be successful without needing as much charisma to be sufficient enough to be a "Charismatic Leader"
Jayden Cruz
muke is a soyboy and mexie is a hot libcuck
Ryder Murphy
You should want your leadership to be effective and organized. Even if someone lacks magnetism and speaking kills, they can still form an organization where people can be recruited and trained for these purposes.
It's a weird example, but think Elijah Muhammad. He wasn't charismatic, he was a mediocre speaker and not physically prominent, so he usually stayed in the background, but he managed to create institutions where genuinely charismatic people (Malcolm X, Farrakhan and many others) not only saw themselves drawn to, but they could work on different skills as they performed tasks assigned them. They grew to become charismatic personalities while engaging with their communities and fulfilling their religious roles. On the other had, Malcolm X was a celebrity and immensely charismatic, but couldn't create anything memorable when he left the NOI.
Our task right now is to create something functional.
Kevin Edwards
I think you need charisma, but I don't think you need a charismatic *leader*.
I think you can have a charismatic figure that draws people in but have others that actually do the organizing, as pointed out.
Liam Williams
The next Lenin is shitposting right now, we just don't know it yet.
Jayden Murphy
Now how would you make a functioning and effective organization?
Adrian Kelly
effective organizations are no more than highly motivated ideological bureaucracies tbh
Luke Peterson
Would this mean that the anarchist model of horizontal organization would fundamentally be ineffective since it lacks the bureaucratic capabilities of good parties and organizations?
There's no single solution to all the different circumstances out there.
Jacob Diaz
...
Wyatt Garcia
Is like that story about how several prominent political and cultural leaders of the early 20th century were simultaneously on Vienna at one point, but with imageboards instead.
Any leftist who ties socialism, be it any branch, to their identity and makes any attempt whatsoever to be a figure in the left should do all they can to make themselves presentable. If you're a maoist third worldist, clean up your pube beard and tame that fucking mohawk, not to mention getting a less shitty diet. I don't know how many cans of coke and dozens of donuts I'd have to consume a week to make my face look like it's emerging from my ass. Anybody who takes a look at roo would laugh that he's not just some bizarre comedy youtuber parading with all the commie iconography as an absurdist joke. And leftists who post on twitter with the intent of education, such as DemocraticSocialist01, should not use that same account for talking about starwars and anime.
Shit, I'm not saying there should be no fun allowed for online leftist personalities, or leftists in general. We need an online presence, as the internet is the most massive communications platform the world has ever seen, but if our representatives look and act like buffoons (and we all are capable of buffoonery) our movement will be associated with buffoons. We must be approachable, relatable and respectable.
Isaiah Peterson
kek
Jordan Sanchez
I don't know why everyone is so down on Hitler. He was the leader of the National → Socialist ← Party.
He was charismatic. He redistributed wealth from the rich to the state and used it to build infrastructure and take care of loyal party members. He nationalized the businesses. What exactly did Hitler do wrong from a socialist perspective?
That's a very convoluted way of saying the Nazis were left but not left enough.
What about the Russian Oligarchs? Wealth still concentrated in the hands of a few. The difference is there was no mobility in the USSR. You stayed in whatever class you were born in (unless you were a Jew or a Kulak, then you were just killed).
Grayson Stewart
You're watching too many movies. Take a break from Zig Forums and read a book.
James Cook
No it's an objective way of saying that the Nazis weren't fucking left at all
Cameron Cook
Jesus, it's like someone unfroze a conservative from twenty years ago. It's even somewhat refreshing to hear this.
Hitler purged all of the ones who wanted the revolution to continue to its 'completion' (i.e. a more socialist German), like Gregor Asser. People like the Asser brothers were class collaborationists (to be fair, so was Hitler), Christian and nationalist though so I'm not sure what Marxists would say about their "socialist" credentials, Hitler though, had defined socialism for the NSDAP like: The more socialistic side of the party did want the abolition of private property in land, raw materials and the means of production, along with a planned national economy. They obviously didn't amount to much and neither did the Black Front. t. Stras.serist
I wasn't aware market capitalism was left wing. Hardly. Russia was a feudal aristocracy before the first revolution and using Jews as a scapegoat for government failures was par for the course. Retards today still unironically believe the Protocols of Zion. The USSR was awful in many ways, sure, but for the most part it was merely continuing the problems Russia already had. At least the ☭TANKIE☭s improved quality of life quite a bit, despite their fondness for the old social oppression.
Justin Lewis
Return to Topic Please
Luis Perez
So the revolution didn't solve the problems? I thought that was the entire point. Thousands were sent to the Gulags because they refused to accept that the revolution was glorious and solved all the problems.
Will America's problems be solved? If not, what's the point?
Luke Cruz
I'm not defending the Soviet Union, only criticizing bad history. There is such thing as a lesser evil.
Aiden Morgan
That's how you can tell you're country's gone to shit. When ☭TANKIE☭s make life better.
Y'all realize how far authcoms have set leftism back right?
Carson Johnson
i believe so, that's what my history reading seems to indicate. i mean, can you point out a horizontal organization that suceeded? even if there was it's the minority of cases, though i wouldn't be against such an enterprise if it somehow overcame the mistakes of the past
Jaxon Rogers
It's hardly shocking in historical context. Russia and the other authoritarian leftist states were already autocratic shitholes before the communist era. Burgers watched Anastasia and think the monarchy was perfectly fine before the big mean reds came to ruin everything because Satan told them to.
Nathan Howard
I get you but it doesn't help that authcoms feed into the totalitarian mythos by vonveniently forgetting to dissolve the dictatorship of the proletariat. Seems like the communist regimes take power, execute the bourgie and sieze the means but when it comes time to redistribute the wealth they become porky.
Camden Martinez
"authcoms", "authoritarian leftists", wtf is this nondialectical TRASH. Saying the USSR set leftism back is absolute retardation.
They didn't soil shit, Western propagandists are gonna spaz no matter what
There seem to be some misconceptions here. For starters the dictatorship of the proletariat was never meant to be an autocracy, but rather a dictatorship of the entire working class, a semi-state in which some aspects of the state have been abolished (there's no preservation of class rule through private property enforcement) rather then a traditional bourgeois state. Secondly it's impossible to simply dissolve the DotP, it whithers away as different aspects of it become gradually unnecessary. If you're still having to fend off rival capitalist states and suppress reactionaries at home, then society is still going to be fairly militarised: there's still going to some degree of a repressive state apparatus.
Hunter Gutierrez
Dibs. I give the orders now.
Kayden Harris
Dubs confirm. All rise to honour new supreme leader user
