Lets ignore that this isn't a real Bookchin quote for a moment...

Lets ignore that this isn't a real Bookchin quote for a moment. The Source is Parenti's recollection of an encounter with him. He never provides a direct quote, but describes, obviously unflatteringly, the general argument he felt Bookchin made, which the image creator decided to fabricate into this quote. Bookchin was criticizing Parenti neurotically using one example of soviet social progress as deflection for all criticism of the USSR. If it's a matter of people being fed, a sophist could point out how USAID is the largest aid organization in the world, and we would recognize this is an asinine defense of the United States. Not to mention how Parenti himself could be accused of callousness and malice by all the people he hurt when he was running apologism for the Bosnian Genocide. Bookchin's observation is really commendable. Parenti is a hack and his book on Julius Caesar is a literally worthless pop-polemic with no familiarity of the subject that is laughed at by every Roman historian.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (500x604, 387.14K)

Other urls found in this thread:

wsws.org/en/articles/2014/04/05/cuba-a05.html
counterpunch.org/2015/07/16/denying-the-srebrenica-genocide-because-its-not-true-an-interview-with-diana-johnstone/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Soviet Union fed way more people than USAID, and USAID is itself often a tool undermine agriculture in third world nations.

Sounds like you’re missing OP’s point. Obviously the USAID thing was just an example. The point is that the positive accomplishments of the Soviet Union don’t invalidate criticisms of its faults.

...

What’s annoying is that way too few people seem to be able to occupy a middle ground on the USSR. It’s either “Stalin literally did nothing wrong it was all Cornman and Gorby’s fault” or full on anarkid “there’s literally no difference between the USSR and Nazi Germany”. Tbh I’d say that most 20th century revolutions deserve critical support. That goes for the “revisionist” ones like Yugoslavia as well.

Polarization tends to happen when you have a wedge being driven into ideological divisions in a concerted way for a long period of time, for example by state actors and infiltrators. You can do this both by posing as a dogmatist and as an oblivious market of ideas "convince me" liberal.

The other side is the constant turn to talking about problems the Soviets had at any mention of criticism for Western imperialism, capitalism, and so on. It's pure deflection, and an attempt to frame the debate centered on various failings of a partulicular example representing the idea in question. This is classic agitprop and PR optics.

Parenti wasn't even making a rational argument

Attached: 15665522_647774898727469_5414594207392918875_n.png (480x480, 147.97K)

retarded* lmoa

Ismail weighs in:

It's an asinine response.

The subject isn't aid, it's about the ability of socialist countries to care for the basic needs of their citizens. It's like equating charity from rich people with a minimum wage.

USAID is one of the many "foreign aid" veneers of American imperialism, it by no means gives out disinterested aid to the world's needy. In addition it's also involved in other, clearly not aid-related endeavors, e.g. wsws.org/en/articles/2014/04/05/cuba-a05.html

Parenti's point is that "left" anti-communists like Bookchin build up their ideal conceptions of society and then take the USSR and other socialist countries to task for failing to measure up to their own standards, ignoring the facts about these countries (that their socialist systems represented great gains for the people, that they were struggling against imperialism, etc.)

Another ridiculous comparison. Bookchin wasn't disputing the fact that the Soviet system improved the living standards of its people and gave assurances that no capitalist country was capable of providing, he simply mocked this fact as if the gains of the Soviet peoples were unimportant.

The question of Srebrenica is an entirely different subject. Parenti and numerous other authors don't deny people were massacred, they argue it was a war crime rather than genocidal in intent. See: counterpunch.org/2015/07/16/denying-the-srebrenica-genocide-because-its-not-true-an-interview-with-diana-johnstone/

I can't comment on his work on Julius Caesar since I haven't read it and Roman history isn't a subject that interests me. It is also a subject obviously different from his numerous works on US foreign and domestic politics, so if he's a bit silly on the subject of ancient Rome I don't see how that necessarily discredits him writing about, say, the Gulf War or gay marriage.

I always suspected this Bookshit garbage was dumb but holy shit

Attached: 22046427_971375403001970_3445099566748759301_n.jpg (720x720, 15.28K)

ok retard

But what is being criticized are seldom its faults, only vaguely bad things that supposedly happened under their watch.

I hope to god none of the cunts I ever talk shit to try and flip a throwaway sentence from an informal chat into disgracing my legacy as an author and theorist

Why does based Bookchin make Zig Forums so rustled?

...

Some people shilled for him really hard 2 years ago, this eventually caused a backlash

Ah yes the "Google Bookchin" crowd, I remember that. These were some interesting times, it was also when Steriner posting was cool.

I miss old Zig Forums in general

Is this how the older Generation in Russia Feel when they think back to the Soviet Union. I think this is it. But yes I do to miss it and I wish we had Catgirl drawfriend still, but we know what happened to her. Damn Redditers.

That's a terrible strawman. Sure some people like to reee about muh oppressed kulaks and shit, but others rightly point out its undemocratic nature, bloated bureaucracy, repressive state, etc. These are all structural problems stemming from the way in which the Soviet state was organized and operated.

The Soviets obviously had faults. While they were very progressive, they made many errors. For example letting these two fuckers into the CPSU. Contemporary socialists shouldn’t pretend everything was perfect, but instead learn from the Soviet experience, and understand what when right and should be repeated, and where were the mistakes were made.

Attached: gorbechovG0306_468x511.jpg (365x512 37.83 KB, 12.79K)

This is exactly the kind of shit people need to stop focusing on. Yeltsin and Gorbachev would be powerless to do what they did without the historical conditions that allowed them to. This means a structural failure on the part of the Soviet Union that goes way beyond a handful of revisionists. Instead of bitching about revisionism we need to ask where revisionism comes from and why it is able to take control of a state that is supposed to be controlled by the workers.

I cri evertim my old maymays go total QUEEF 2 dood.

Fuck I hate ideology.
Nome of this makes any sense. It literally (literally) looks like you cut out a huge chunk in the middle. I can't be assed to engage with this though, so read it yourself.
This post made me think a bit though.
Firstly, not to flash my credentials, but I am a certified person, so I'd really listen to this.
Saying that you "critically support" something is redundant, and only leaves two possibilities. A.) You are an idiot; B.) You say idiotic things. You are telling people "Hey, I like this, but there are things I don't like too". I mean, fuck, can I get a "no shit"? Imagine if you said this about anything else. "Hey, I critically support being Rodney's friend." It implies that you would have otherwise have been just this full tilt uber supporter maniac, when in reality supporting something OBVIOUSLY means recognizing its faults.
What you should really say is "critically worship". That at least has some sort of need to be diluted with a "critically", even if it is such an effete remark.
You are that guy who always wants to totally get behind something, but he always has just one more thing holding him back.
"Oh yeah dude, I'm ready to help you fix your car, but look, I'm not going to hold your hand here. Let's critically repair this vehicle. Lets assess what conditions led to this malfunction, your driving style… and when you really get down to it this malfunction really comes from the freudian misconception of velocity".
When someone says "critically support", 90% of the time they are just total and complete downer assholes who just can not WAIT to finally get to the bottom of things. 10% of the time, they are people who accidentally said "critically support".
Guess what guys, you will NEVER get to the bottom of things. You can't, because you have no understanding of the practicality of thought or reason. You will never be able to do anything other than spout liberal shit, because you are firmly and completely stuck in the marketplace of ideas. All ideas have is exchange values in your addled brain. You have absolutely no conception of the actual uses of ideas, and that value is thusly completely lost on you.
This post is exsctly illustrative of this. You scarcely post any argument. You just regurgitate ideas, deem some wrong, and then assert that Parenti is a doodoo head.
I mean, wow, just the idea that there are actual self-described Communists who see people being fed as unimportant just shows such a complete and utter disconnection from reality.
Well, this ended up being longer than I wanted and I lost my other train of thought.

Lol the Soviet Union didn't feed people, farmers did.

wait what? I don't

they organized the factories for the equipment farmers used

Letting them in wasn't a problem, letting the USSR turn into an aristocratic gerontocracy was. Almost the entire nomenklatura supported the dissolution because they wanted to be as wealthy as their Western peers. It also failed at providing for its citizens, none of them had a reason to fight to keep it alive.

Checkmate Americans.

Is Bookchin worth reading at all?

Just about every theorist is worth reading.

Attached: aae51d7abb5c9d82d057d9315b92d9d7cd07c2ed330e7e4802a453a03fad7b3c.png (780x1200, 760.06K)

Yes!

Attached: WhoWouldWinCommunalism.jpg (1074x1598 105.62 KB, 1.21M)

Sure, but the point Parenti was making is that Bookchin often ignored some important factors in his criticisms SUCH AS said positive accomplishments. Not to mention that Bookchin has a ton of questionable ideology, zionism being only one part.

t.idiot who never read Parenti's FACTUAL and LOGIC based criticisms of the USSR
Bookchin was being obtuse by belittling the MASSIVE amount of achievements of the USSR and inflating the problems to support his "muh no tru socialism" sectarianist horse shit.
rationality is a social construct m8

The creator of political ideology catgirls deleted their art and site, Alunya was memed to shit by Zig Forums and forgotten by Zig Forums. The legacy lives on only in leftybooru.

About a year ago a comrade here posted an email response he got from Parenti where he further criticized Bookchin. Unfortunately I forgot to save the pic but one thing I remember he said is that Bookchin did not believe in class struggle. Does anyone here have the pic?

...

...

What did he mean by this?

Attached: parenti.png (778x731, 413.65K)

real marxism is extremely virile

Attached: 7f14cede068940535b1b39f225ddb1245ef9d2bb0c414bc6a2eb6468b18dcfc4.jpeg (600x800, 70.82K)

He has good taste in women, like all proper Marxists

Attached: 48363212_307066389910059_257825117252354048_n.jpg (540x327, 11.4K)

ok

Why was this poster banned

"imperialism"

Watch MLs conveniently forget he said this

He's like 90 for fuck's sake

The original is actually from here lol that one was an edit.

Attached: 3DLOeFy3hak6UqFrmMTMXvOmQlQBiEJpUng9bksQNKY.jpg (640x952, 143.13K)

BO only started lurking the board when they decided to start wrecking for free.

I just think it's hilarious. It's the same material that's been floating around for over a year. Dude got banned because of a "y" and ignorance of the mods' own board.

Attached: chanarcho-communism.png (471x500, 47.11K)

their post history only goes back a day ago and is just a bunch of r*java shilling. they got unbanned and have yet to post anything else so chances are he's just another retard from Zig Forums who comes here to stir shit and leaves.

I had work in the morning. This place isn't exactly a priority yunno

He meant to type it in the search bar but accidentaly posted it.

So now one has to accumulate a rich posting history in "approved threads" before discussing topics they wish? Good to know. Can we get a list of topics that are halal?

I would actually like to unironically know this, i don't want to accidentally get banned.
It wasn't immediately obvious to me to not post about YPJ/PKK/etc/etc/, maybe i'm just autistic but i'd definitely like to at least have what's what laid out in stone so we know what to avoid.

it's not a matter of "you need x amount of post history or you're banned", it's a matter of "wow this person has only made two posts, both of which are promoting r*java (which have always been bannable offences for a while now) and include a Zig Forums reading list"

What about Zapatistas?

I don't care about that. What i am interested in is a set in stone list of topics that BO is going to bring the hammer down on.

i don't know much about them tbh so i wouldn't know. they're in the banners so it's probably fine to talk about them? pretty sure there's a thread with zapatistas pics in them too.

it's probably just one big US military base in Syria because of the whole imperialist thing.

wow. lol.

Welcome to Zig Forums. Enjoy your stay. :)

Is this an actual bookchimp quote then?

Attached: rojava_irl.jpg (800x2116, 328.59K)

Yeah I know its just funny, I love Parenti buts he's quite old so its fine that he's not technologically literate