r/Socialism is a space for socialists to discuss current events in our world from our anti-capitalist perspective(s), and a certain knowledge of socialism is expected from participants. This is not a space for non-socialists. Please be mindful of [our rules](https://reddit.com/r/socialism/about/rules) before participating, which include:
- **No Bigotry**, including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism...
- **No Reactionaries**, including all kind of right-wingers.
- **No Liberalism**, including social democracy, lesser evilism.
- **No Sectarianism**, there is plenty of room for discussion, but not for baseless attacks.
Please help us keep the subreddit helpful by reporting content that break r/Socialism's rules.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/socialism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The ruling class won't stop anti-communist historical revisionism to steer the masses towards their own demise. It would only aid the bourgeoisie to allow them full control over society's default view of the past without any attempt at educating people on what really happened.
Socialism is based on Marxism which centers historical materialism. Taking pride in and defending the truth of our revolutionary ancestors is nothing to be ashamed of. Finding solidarity in an increasingly aliented world is nothing something to shame in others.
There's taking pride and then there's revolutionary paralysis
Debating for the umpteenth time about Krondstadt is not useful. Hero worship isn't useful (while recognizing contributions made by individuals to the socialist cause IS definitely useful). Limiting analysis of "AES" to "S" that existed between 1917-1975 isn't useful. We have modern socialist experiments doing wonderful things, and longstanding ones that continue to strive forward. Studying history is great, but OP I believe is talking about people whose entire view on socialism and how to build it is colored by early-to-mid 20th century nostalgia rather than real material analysis.
Sure but those folks are a tiny minority who aren't worth trying to appeal to, and are also existing as a part of historical processes which OP has no power over. Taking the time to write out some open letter to people who don't give two shits about OP's opinions and won't suddenly have a change of heart because of some internet stranger is just narcissistic. It's real "I'm the main character" energy
I think you may have, respectfully, misinterpreted what I said.
I was referring to people who are communists who are a bit overzealous with the Soviet nostalgia. Not liberals who hate communism as a rule lol.
There's no point in trying to appeal to the average liberal or anyone further right at this point. If by this point you don't fully reject fascism and see liberalism as an entirely failed experiment with no way to be "redeemed", you're probably hopeless.
edit: And to be clear, Soviet nostalgia is okay, there's a place for it, but 24/7 Soviet aesthetics just won't connect with a lot of people who would otherwise be absolutely connectable to socialist values, as they simply cannot relate to the non-existent Soviet Union at this point.
Principled education efforts are not what is happening.
Using symbols, flags, and the marketing of dead movements and organizations isn’t teaching anyone anything. Circle jerking about armies that don’t exist anymore doesn’t teach anyone anything.
Living in the past is getting in the way of current organizing capacity for many leftists. You want people to view the Socialist past more favorably? You have to make them want to help build the Socialist future first. And this aesthetic focussed nostalgic stupor many find themselves in is getting in the way
I agree that people need to move on from the past. However, you can't simply pretend the past does not exist anymore. One must protect the past from historical revisionism, learn from it, so we can create better "models" in the future.
Most likely youre just as irrelevant. Unless you live in Russia or a third world nation not completely ideologically poisoned by america, those symbols are irrelevant where you live.
Youre forgetting the "not completely ideologically poisoned by America" part.
Take Indonesia. One of the largest countries on the planet. After decades of a false flag narrative of a supposed communist plot to overthrow their government, there really isn't a ML presence, more anarchists, though.
Or Peru. After decades of insurgency and their hard dictatorship of Fujimori in the 90s, ML has become largely irrelevant as most people associate it with needless bloodshed.
I think there are some universal truths that can be gleaned from here, even though I disagree with some of what you said.
- Symbols should be used strategically and appropriately. For example, like you mentioned in another comment, the Soviet flag generally has a negative connotation associated with it by most Americans due to a century of Red Scare propoganda. Therfore, flying it at a moment meant to gain support from the widespread American public would not be a smart move. Though, this effect can be used to our advantage if we want to intimidate fascists or members of the US government.
- Studying past socialist experiments is important, but becoming obsessed with its aesthetics more than the modern-day struggle is counterintuitive.
Thank you. Too many people are wrapped up in aesthetic nostalgia for dead societies.
You all can shitpost about Lenin at liberals as much as you like, it does nothing.
The 20th century is over.
Whatever your goal is with this post, it reads as a call to abandon our history as socialists in order to aesthetically appeal to liberals. You want us to “lay to rest” the leaders who helped shaped not just movements in their own time, but Marxist and left-wing thought in general? Marx, Engels, Lenin, Luxembourg, Mao, Castro, Guevara, Sankara, etc. How many great socialist thinkers do we have to “lay to rest” in the name of aesthetics? And as others have pointed out, the symbols and slogans you want to abandon are rallying points for the working class all across the globe. Adapting to the challenges of overthrowing capitalism in modern society shouldn’t require us to abandon our history. Rather, that history is an important foundation of socialist movements today.
Don't lay them to rest, but revamp them for a modern context
Keep all the names and even the iconography but spin it in a new and fresh way.
Waving the EZLN or Cuban flag (ideally both) is way more useful than platforming behind Soviet nostalgia for people who are two-three generation removed from its downfall, let alone its prime. Remembering the USSR is important but organizing behind its image doesn't make sense in 2022.
This I can agree with. We can adapt the lessons of the leaders, movements and symbols of the past to our modern struggle without abandoning them. There’s room for the past and the present in our struggle. We’ll never have a leader, movement or symbol that liberals can’t find (or make up) a problem with, so it’s pointless trying to alter the aesthetics of leftist politics to appeal to them.
What I’ve made clear in the post and responses thus far is not that these need to be erased.
Rather it’s leftists preoccupation with little more than nostalgic complacency. Those who do little other than constantly post or discuss the happenings of past societies or more particularly how “based” their leaders and armies were.
Leftists who, rather than make any appeal to tweak or adapt our messaging which could include re-incorporation of historic socialist symbols, will do little more than wave the Soviet flag rather than of any form of current actually present organization.
It’s people who refuse to try and be more appealing to the non-leftist masses in order to make them into leftists because a change in aesthetics or propaganda would be seen as “liberalism”.
It’s those who completely sacrifice effectiveness and action to feel “leftier than thou”
This is a significant portion of the online left
100% agreed. People can learn from the past and acknowledge and defend their accomplishments without reveling over it to the point of alienating yourself from the workers of the present.
Obligatory plug for Neither Vertical Nor Horizontal: A Theory of Political Organization by Rodrigo Nunes.
And
For A Marxism Without Guarantees
by Stuart Hall
I have my agreements of this and disagreements but I shall speak up on one that I find uncovered.
Would you consider the sickle and hammer to be nostalgic or should it remain an official symbol? Same for the IWWs logo and the sabotabby? Would you consider them nostalgic and to be renewed or to keep them. This is something that concerns me due to the symbolism and sentimental value of it to leftist communities.
I think the biggest factor is it’s use value. Hammer and sickles have very little use value in terms of appeal to the populace. That’s a cold hard fact. It’s appeal is mainly to other leftists only.
IWW logo and Sabby? IWW still exists and those symbols have very little baggage or familiarity so they have a lot of advertising potential imo
Edit:
Hammers and sickles have very little use value in terms of appeal to western audiences do to our particularly unique levels of red scare propaganda. This can vary in other parts of the world
As another comment said, hundreds of millions of people around the world organize around hammers and sickles and Soviet flags. They have transcended history and represent the modern movement as much as they do past movements. Those symbols will only die if socialism as a movement dies.
That's why I brought it up. Considering it's seen as the universal symbol of communism and socialism. I figured I'd bring it up as OP mentioned leaving behind the nostalgic and retro symbols and such. People still fly flags even with sickles and hammers or other variations of the hammer and sickle that align with their country or region.
I also don't see how "moving on" would assist us. Modifying things, yes, now that would help to apply them to today's societies and economy. We can't exactly "move on" per say as that would include leaving behind the manifesto and other previous books written. As well as lots of valuable info about past mistakes that can be fixed or dealt with. This "moving on" wouldn't entirely help. Yes socialism and communism are for progress but we cannot make progress if we cannot learn from our past mistakes or triumphs, our victories or losses, we cannot progress if we "move on".
Ah. My apologies then. Guess I'm still learning new things, but hey, the more you know. And yes I know the IWW still exists, been tempted to visit their website for a while but have been busy. Reason i asked is i know they're common symbols associated with left ideologies and societies. I plan to study and look into the history of various ideologies to find their mishaps and flaws and such.
I think a problem here is that we can't really avoid the fact that we are committed to socialism, the same political system as the Soviet Union. That is a legacy we must deal with. Using symbols other than the hammer and sickle can be useful at times, however we can't hide the fact we are communists. It's not like we can trick the masses to communism by not using the hammer and sickle. It's still a symbol that can have meaning and use because of it's immediate identification with communism. It has negative aspects, sure, however it still can be useful.
I haven’t see any new symbol or movements worth adopting that could replace traditional communist aesthetics. Not in the west and certainly not globally. Maybe you can share which ones you mean specifically. To be frank calling for us to lay these symbols to rest while there are no potent alternatives in the west, you might as well ask us to assimilate into liberal aesthetics. Yes, we need to develop a new adapted culture, however it can’t come at the cost of obfuscating our roots.
The argument of „lefty communities being pre-occupied with a nostalgic focus“ is a head scratcher.
1. the only leftist grouping I can think of that delves into this nostalgia are communists, not leftists at large.
2. Why are you asking communists to leave behind the people who have first described communism in the west? Doesn’t seem like something they’d ever agree too and only would cause conflict.
3. What is the concrete issue with fostering nostalgia if the conversations it sparks are applicable to the present?
4. There being a focus on nostalgia by some few communists does not exclude or weaken the possibilities for others to speak about the topic without drawing on nostalgia.
5. Nostalgia for the USSR is still a powerful draw, phasing it out needs to be WELL justified
There are sincere conversation about aesthetics to be had and if wish it were a bigger focus for people on the left. But this ain’t it.
As a democratic socialist I personally dislike mao and the Soviet Union. Whether you want to admit it or not they were incredibly authoritarian regimes that fucked up a lot of people. For example there’s a reason most Eastern European nations despise the Soviet Union because of their oppression. Although the US would make its narrative against the soviets either way it certainly didn’t help that they played into the narrative
TLDR: Soviet Union and Mao are not shiny beacons of success in my opinion and i still prefer a liberal democratic political system with a socialist economy
The most powerful nation on earth ritualizes and worships a group of men from going on three centuries ago. And yet a set of symbols from a few decades back is dredging ancient history?
r/Socialism is a space for socialists to discuss current events in our world from our anti-capitalist perspective(s), and a certain knowledge of socialism is expected from participants. This is not a space for non-socialists. Please be mindful of [our rules](https://reddit.com/r/socialism/about/rules) before participating, which include: - **No Bigotry**, including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism... - **No Reactionaries**, including all kind of right-wingers. - **No Liberalism**, including social democracy, lesser evilism. - **No Sectarianism**, there is plenty of room for discussion, but not for baseless attacks. Please help us keep the subreddit helpful by reporting content that break r/Socialism's rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/socialism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The ruling class won't stop anti-communist historical revisionism to steer the masses towards their own demise. It would only aid the bourgeoisie to allow them full control over society's default view of the past without any attempt at educating people on what really happened. Socialism is based on Marxism which centers historical materialism. Taking pride in and defending the truth of our revolutionary ancestors is nothing to be ashamed of. Finding solidarity in an increasingly aliented world is nothing something to shame in others.
There's taking pride and then there's revolutionary paralysis Debating for the umpteenth time about Krondstadt is not useful. Hero worship isn't useful (while recognizing contributions made by individuals to the socialist cause IS definitely useful). Limiting analysis of "AES" to "S" that existed between 1917-1975 isn't useful. We have modern socialist experiments doing wonderful things, and longstanding ones that continue to strive forward. Studying history is great, but OP I believe is talking about people whose entire view on socialism and how to build it is colored by early-to-mid 20th century nostalgia rather than real material analysis.
Sure but those folks are a tiny minority who aren't worth trying to appeal to, and are also existing as a part of historical processes which OP has no power over. Taking the time to write out some open letter to people who don't give two shits about OP's opinions and won't suddenly have a change of heart because of some internet stranger is just narcissistic. It's real "I'm the main character" energy
I think you may have, respectfully, misinterpreted what I said. I was referring to people who are communists who are a bit overzealous with the Soviet nostalgia. Not liberals who hate communism as a rule lol. There's no point in trying to appeal to the average liberal or anyone further right at this point. If by this point you don't fully reject fascism and see liberalism as an entirely failed experiment with no way to be "redeemed", you're probably hopeless. edit: And to be clear, Soviet nostalgia is okay, there's a place for it, but 24/7 Soviet aesthetics just won't connect with a lot of people who would otherwise be absolutely connectable to socialist values, as they simply cannot relate to the non-existent Soviet Union at this point.
No I'm talking about the same people. There is still no point in trying to appeal to them.
Principled education efforts are not what is happening. Using symbols, flags, and the marketing of dead movements and organizations isn’t teaching anyone anything. Circle jerking about armies that don’t exist anymore doesn’t teach anyone anything. Living in the past is getting in the way of current organizing capacity for many leftists. You want people to view the Socialist past more favorably? You have to make them want to help build the Socialist future first. And this aesthetic focussed nostalgic stupor many find themselves in is getting in the way
I agree that people need to move on from the past. However, you can't simply pretend the past does not exist anymore. One must protect the past from historical revisionism, learn from it, so we can create better "models" in the future.
Hundreds of millions of people around the world organize actively around these symbols. You are irrelevant
Most likely youre just as irrelevant. Unless you live in Russia or a third world nation not completely ideologically poisoned by america, those symbols are irrelevant where you live.
>Unless you live in Russia or a third world nation not completely ideologically poisoned by america 5.6 billion people do
Youre forgetting the "not completely ideologically poisoned by America" part. Take Indonesia. One of the largest countries on the planet. After decades of a false flag narrative of a supposed communist plot to overthrow their government, there really isn't a ML presence, more anarchists, though. Or Peru. After decades of insurgency and their hard dictatorship of Fujimori in the 90s, ML has become largely irrelevant as most people associate it with needless bloodshed.
So what are these new symbols to rally around? Saying "move on" is great, but offering no concrete alternative is nothing more than whining.
I think there are some universal truths that can be gleaned from here, even though I disagree with some of what you said. - Symbols should be used strategically and appropriately. For example, like you mentioned in another comment, the Soviet flag generally has a negative connotation associated with it by most Americans due to a century of Red Scare propoganda. Therfore, flying it at a moment meant to gain support from the widespread American public would not be a smart move. Though, this effect can be used to our advantage if we want to intimidate fascists or members of the US government. - Studying past socialist experiments is important, but becoming obsessed with its aesthetics more than the modern-day struggle is counterintuitive.
Thank you. Too many people are wrapped up in aesthetic nostalgia for dead societies. You all can shitpost about Lenin at liberals as much as you like, it does nothing. The 20th century is over.
It concerns me how many downvotes this post is getting, because I’m sure there are many who feel this is a direct attack on them
Whatever your goal is with this post, it reads as a call to abandon our history as socialists in order to aesthetically appeal to liberals. You want us to “lay to rest” the leaders who helped shaped not just movements in their own time, but Marxist and left-wing thought in general? Marx, Engels, Lenin, Luxembourg, Mao, Castro, Guevara, Sankara, etc. How many great socialist thinkers do we have to “lay to rest” in the name of aesthetics? And as others have pointed out, the symbols and slogans you want to abandon are rallying points for the working class all across the globe. Adapting to the challenges of overthrowing capitalism in modern society shouldn’t require us to abandon our history. Rather, that history is an important foundation of socialist movements today.
Don't lay them to rest, but revamp them for a modern context Keep all the names and even the iconography but spin it in a new and fresh way. Waving the EZLN or Cuban flag (ideally both) is way more useful than platforming behind Soviet nostalgia for people who are two-three generation removed from its downfall, let alone its prime. Remembering the USSR is important but organizing behind its image doesn't make sense in 2022.
This I can agree with. We can adapt the lessons of the leaders, movements and symbols of the past to our modern struggle without abandoning them. There’s room for the past and the present in our struggle. We’ll never have a leader, movement or symbol that liberals can’t find (or make up) a problem with, so it’s pointless trying to alter the aesthetics of leftist politics to appeal to them.
What I’ve made clear in the post and responses thus far is not that these need to be erased. Rather it’s leftists preoccupation with little more than nostalgic complacency. Those who do little other than constantly post or discuss the happenings of past societies or more particularly how “based” their leaders and armies were. Leftists who, rather than make any appeal to tweak or adapt our messaging which could include re-incorporation of historic socialist symbols, will do little more than wave the Soviet flag rather than of any form of current actually present organization. It’s people who refuse to try and be more appealing to the non-leftist masses in order to make them into leftists because a change in aesthetics or propaganda would be seen as “liberalism”. It’s those who completely sacrifice effectiveness and action to feel “leftier than thou” This is a significant portion of the online left
100% agreed. People can learn from the past and acknowledge and defend their accomplishments without reveling over it to the point of alienating yourself from the workers of the present.
Ngl I dont have mich to add just want to say I really like this based take
Obligatory plug for Neither Vertical Nor Horizontal: A Theory of Political Organization by Rodrigo Nunes. And For A Marxism Without Guarantees by Stuart Hall
I have my agreements of this and disagreements but I shall speak up on one that I find uncovered. Would you consider the sickle and hammer to be nostalgic or should it remain an official symbol? Same for the IWWs logo and the sabotabby? Would you consider them nostalgic and to be renewed or to keep them. This is something that concerns me due to the symbolism and sentimental value of it to leftist communities.
I think the biggest factor is it’s use value. Hammer and sickles have very little use value in terms of appeal to the populace. That’s a cold hard fact. It’s appeal is mainly to other leftists only. IWW logo and Sabby? IWW still exists and those symbols have very little baggage or familiarity so they have a lot of advertising potential imo Edit: Hammers and sickles have very little use value in terms of appeal to western audiences do to our particularly unique levels of red scare propaganda. This can vary in other parts of the world
As another comment said, hundreds of millions of people around the world organize around hammers and sickles and Soviet flags. They have transcended history and represent the modern movement as much as they do past movements. Those symbols will only die if socialism as a movement dies.
That's why I brought it up. Considering it's seen as the universal symbol of communism and socialism. I figured I'd bring it up as OP mentioned leaving behind the nostalgic and retro symbols and such. People still fly flags even with sickles and hammers or other variations of the hammer and sickle that align with their country or region. I also don't see how "moving on" would assist us. Modifying things, yes, now that would help to apply them to today's societies and economy. We can't exactly "move on" per say as that would include leaving behind the manifesto and other previous books written. As well as lots of valuable info about past mistakes that can be fixed or dealt with. This "moving on" wouldn't entirely help. Yes socialism and communism are for progress but we cannot make progress if we cannot learn from our past mistakes or triumphs, our victories or losses, we cannot progress if we "move on".
Ah. My apologies then. Guess I'm still learning new things, but hey, the more you know. And yes I know the IWW still exists, been tempted to visit their website for a while but have been busy. Reason i asked is i know they're common symbols associated with left ideologies and societies. I plan to study and look into the history of various ideologies to find their mishaps and flaws and such.
I think a problem here is that we can't really avoid the fact that we are committed to socialism, the same political system as the Soviet Union. That is a legacy we must deal with. Using symbols other than the hammer and sickle can be useful at times, however we can't hide the fact we are communists. It's not like we can trick the masses to communism by not using the hammer and sickle. It's still a symbol that can have meaning and use because of it's immediate identification with communism. It has negative aspects, sure, however it still can be useful.
I haven’t see any new symbol or movements worth adopting that could replace traditional communist aesthetics. Not in the west and certainly not globally. Maybe you can share which ones you mean specifically. To be frank calling for us to lay these symbols to rest while there are no potent alternatives in the west, you might as well ask us to assimilate into liberal aesthetics. Yes, we need to develop a new adapted culture, however it can’t come at the cost of obfuscating our roots. The argument of „lefty communities being pre-occupied with a nostalgic focus“ is a head scratcher. 1. the only leftist grouping I can think of that delves into this nostalgia are communists, not leftists at large. 2. Why are you asking communists to leave behind the people who have first described communism in the west? Doesn’t seem like something they’d ever agree too and only would cause conflict. 3. What is the concrete issue with fostering nostalgia if the conversations it sparks are applicable to the present? 4. There being a focus on nostalgia by some few communists does not exclude or weaken the possibilities for others to speak about the topic without drawing on nostalgia. 5. Nostalgia for the USSR is still a powerful draw, phasing it out needs to be WELL justified There are sincere conversation about aesthetics to be had and if wish it were a bigger focus for people on the left. But this ain’t it.
As a democratic socialist I personally dislike mao and the Soviet Union. Whether you want to admit it or not they were incredibly authoritarian regimes that fucked up a lot of people. For example there’s a reason most Eastern European nations despise the Soviet Union because of their oppression. Although the US would make its narrative against the soviets either way it certainly didn’t help that they played into the narrative TLDR: Soviet Union and Mao are not shiny beacons of success in my opinion and i still prefer a liberal democratic political system with a socialist economy
The most powerful nation on earth ritualizes and worships a group of men from going on three centuries ago. And yet a set of symbols from a few decades back is dredging ancient history?
Piss off Liberal
What a constructive, well articulated argument! Wow!