I know I’ve expressed dislike for the guy in the past, but seriously? I thought for even something like this, he would at least have a good take on it.

  • TreadOnMe [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    3 months ago

    Yeah, that’s been an ongoing saga for the past couple of years. I was very critical of the decision to ban it initially, you know soc-dems doing soc-dems things, but the CPV’s interventionist response to being banned has me thinking that they have been completely compromised by U.S. money or promises.

    • newacctidk [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      3 months ago

      Communist Parties do do that often times when the ruling socialist or progressive anti-west government turn on them. Happened in Iran to half the communist movement, happened in Egypt under Nasser, happened twice in Syria during and after the UAR, happened in Peru under Velasco though in a situation in which the PCP remainder supported the government but the government refused to work with them meanwhile PCP split and many Marxists opposed or remained critical of the government. In those last three cases that is while the USSR has close ties to the government.

      Sometimes it is people being cranks, but that is not to say there is not a serious precedent for the international position of supporting progressive governments means the squashing of real communist movements in a given country. The USSR and China had their fair share of backing strategic leaders and a good call or not for the USSR, it often times was harmful to a country’s potential move towards communism.

      Even when CPV was backing PSUV there was tension and Marxists calling PSUV revisionist and CPV leadership tailists, so the CC becoming embittered tailists who got pissed when their position in the alliance never rose is not crazy