Over the past week, I've seen a barrage of what effectively amounts to outrage, crying, screaming, and complaining about the American Communist Party.
What is this, if not a literal Reddit Red Scare?
It has all the markings of US red scare culture: Irrational fearmongering, vagueness, fantastical delusions, no single, coherent, line of argumentation or attack. How has no one pointed this out?
First: I'm happy to report that the widespread "negative" attention leftist subreddits has directed our way, has led to spikes in the number of people signing up for our Party. As it always does.
This is what happens when we have a dialectical advantage: You have to prohibit and suppress our perspective, while we can easily respond to yours**. You have no response to us, so when people research us for themselves,** they join us**.**
But second, and in good faith:
What's the point of making up all this nonsense about the ACP, screaming, crying and being outraged over us, when you refuse to even hear what we have to say?
You ban anyone who doesn't conform to the anti-ACP narrative. So what's the point of crying about us all the time then?
Do you think that by whining about us enough, we will disappear? It's true that ACP hasn't been around for long. But the Infrared movement has been around since 2021. We've been through every possible astroturfed smear campaign you can imagine. And we aren't and haven't gone anywhere.
Constantly crying and making yourselves outraged about our existence hasn't gotten you anywhere.
So what's the point of it? You've already banned us from your subreddits. Why do you go out of your way to be outraged about our existence? Isn't it fair to say you are engaging in a type of psychological coping mechanism, induced by cognitive dissonance?
Most of you clearly are beginners when it comes to the Communist tradition, and you came from liberal backgrounds. You had assumptions, thanks to Fox News, that Communism is somehow at the extreme-end of the spectrum of extreme liberal or 'woke' ideology. You are simply losing your mind being confronted with the fact that this isn't the case.
If you were confident in your position, you'd simply ignore us and move on. But you aren't, because we have planted a worm of doubt in your mind. Why not listen to it?
We're happy to educate you and provide you with resources, documented evidence, and a plethora of citations which definitively prove that our position and our line is more rooted in the historical Communist tradition than yours. But you simply ban us! So what do you want? For us to disappear? It won't happen. So it's time to grow up and face reality.
In the face of overwhelming cognitive dissonance, I see many talking about how Jackson surfed with Tulsi Gabbard several years ago. Really? Aren't you just coping? What will you say after being confronted with the following facts?
- Some of you became leftists yesterday, and may not know that by 2019, Tulsi Gabbard was ubiquitously praised and supported by the entire alt-media sphere for her criticism of US regime-change operations in Syria. Nearly every single alt-media personality - including many you're probably fans of, like Fiorella Isabel, have either been photographed with her, interviewed her or praised her.
Why has Jackson Hinkle alone been accused of being a fed for associating with Tulsi, when the rest of alt-media was doing the same thing at the time?
Tulsi joined the Hawaii National Guard in 2003. Jackson surfed with her in 2019. She did not join the US Military CA-PSYOPS until 2020.
Jackson grew up in Orange County. Jackson met Tulsi Gabbard through a former girlfriend of his who also lived there, a place renowned for being frequented by famous people. Years after they broke up, this same ex-girlfriend then went on to date Jonah Hill. This definitively answers the question of who "had the connections" - his ex-girlfriend, who clearly knew a lot of rich & famous people in general.
Tulsi Gabbard was promoted directly by the Trump administration to Director of National Intelligence in 2024 for her political loyalty to Trump.
This was fiercely opposed by the US Intelligence community. Her appointment was regarded as highly controversial, with critics arguing she was not loyal to the US, but too "pro-Russia", with many continuing to point to her past "defense" of Bashar Al-Assad.
Further, portraying Tulsi Gabbard as somehow a representative of the "CIA," naively assumes that the CIA is actually controlled by the DNI in practice. But anyone who knows anything about the intelligence community knows that the CIA has become a rogue power unto itself. Even the Heritage foundation admitted this:
"A number of observers and experts have noted that the Director of National Intelligence lacks any real control over the IC. [...] The DNI also cannot dictate to the heads of the CIA or Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) in the way that the Secretary of Defense, for instance, can issue orders to combatant commanders. [...] And while the Director of Central Intelligence should report directly to the DNI, the powerful and independent-minded leadership and bureaucracy of the CIA reportedly resented the intrusion of another layer of administration into their affairs and have fought against DNI attempts to assert his legal authority. [...] There is no central hub that can enforce change throughout the IC, make the entire community more adaptable, or root out and fire bad managers and leadership."
tl;dr, DNI does not control the CIA, the appointment did not reflect a decision by some "deep state" but Trump's own whimsical, "imperial" agenda.
- Jackson continued to hold out hope that Tulsi might resist the pro-war agenda in Washington. She had after all just recently expressed criticism of US policy on the Ukraine War. But when it became clear Tulsi would not mount any resistance to the agenda, Jackson clearly and unequivocally denounced her.
It doesn't get more explicit than this.
There's also the claim that our website is "registered on Langley." This is a comical delusion in reference to our domain name, acp.us - this domian name was apparently created in 2002 by some guy named Ben Gerber. Slanderers of the ACP tried to claim that this was in fact "Burton Gerber," who was some CIA academic. Anyway it wouldn't have mattered. We purchased this domain name on a public website for approximately $7000 in 2024.
Ben Gerber turned out to be some IT guy who bought a bunch of domains before the Dotcom bubble crashed. But where domain names originate has nothing to do with where a website is being "hosted from." People who don't know how the internet or computers work continue to spread this lie that almost comical in how stupid it is. They are effectively arguing that the "CIA" created the WEBSITE ADDRESS "ACP.US" in 2002, in anticipation of it being used by our Party 22 years later.
So do the people fedjacketing us have any rational response to this? Or will they continue to hallucinate themselves into psychosis over their cognitive dissonance, which stems simply from the fact that they don't know anything about Marxism?
Let's now address the claim that we are "Nazis" because we do not believe alternative sexual behaviors (or any private behaviors for that matter) can be the basis of a revolutionary movement.
1. Genuine question: What is your response to the fact that the tweets I made in 2023 critical of the LGBT movement (not individuals, mind you) are actually far more socially liberal than the official stance of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Hezbollah, & Hamas? You should clarify to your "pan-leftist" communities that you regard these as fascist movements.
It is also far more socially liberal than the default outlook of the USSR, and not just under Stalin. It's a major myth that the abolition of the Tsarist code of 1917 amounted to legalization in practice, let alone widespread socio-cultural tolerance of what were then regarded as "deviant" sexual behaviors.
While some avant-garde ideas were entertained by medical theorists and sexologists, in practice, there was no acceptance of this phenomena at any point in the history of Soviet society, nor any campaign for its normalization. No private relationships between adults were formally criminalized until the Stalin era, but they continued to be prosecuted despite the absence of specific legal codes prohibiting them.
That was just about as "progressive" the Soviet state was toward the phenomena: Something actually far more "conservative" than the position of the ACP! Simply not jailing adults for their private consensual relations is somehow regarded as the epitome of "progressivism" - but when our Party actually takes a step further and bans discrimination and harassment toward people for their private lives, we're somehow fascists?
By this logic:
The entire Islamic resistance movement is fascist. The USSR was fascist. China was fascist under Mao. Today's China, unlike under Mao, does not expressly persecute private same-sex relations, but still does not have legal same-sex marriage, so I guess it's fascist? The overwhelming majority of all Communist movements and states in history were fascist by this twisted logic which defines fascism based on "openness" to sexual trends in society.
Some people point to certain tendencies shown by Communist states like the GDR and today's Cuba. But these reflect overall tendencies of liberalisation that stem from Khrushchev's original de-Stalinization.
That is why Communist states which remained "Stalinist" - like Enver Hoxha's Albania, never had such "progressive" laws.
The GDR simply de-criminalized it in 1968. At no point did they launch any campaigns to make it normalized or tolerated within society.
In 1985, during the Soviet Glasnost/Perestroika period, limited attempts were made to integrate institutions devoted to alternative sexualities with the state. This was during the most extreme period of liberalisation, where a shift in the cultural (not legal) attitudes of West Germany had already long taken place, that was more "progressive" than the GDR.
While legally, the West was "conservative" on such issues, in practice, they had huge, robust, flourishing subcultures for sexual minorities on a scale incomparable to anything that ever existed in any Communist state.
Further, the "progressive" GDR activism was directly imported from West Germany. For while West Germany had "conservative" legal codes, it had a much more "open" and "tolerant" cultural civil society and subculture which was not found in the DDR. Self-organization and activism was allowed in "liberal" West German society much earlier than in the GDR.
I'm not saying this because me or my Party advocate for returning to traditional Communist policies on such things. I'm saying this to point out that by comparison, we are far more tolerant and liberal than they were**.**
And yet we're called Nazis? Why, because we acknowledge the fact that there is no intrinsic connection between "progress" in the Marxist sense and people's private sexual habits? That we acknowledge that such questions are primarily determined culturally, by a people and by civil society, and not politically? Different cultures and societies have different attitudes toward such questions and it's racist to assume one is more "progressive" or "superior" than the other. That's my simple view.
2. The Thirteenth Plenum of the Executive Committee of the Communist International defined Fascism as: The open terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most chauvinistic and most imperialist elements of finance capital.
Why should I, as a Communist, abandon the official Communist definition of fascism in favor of this vague axis of psychological-cultural 'openness' or 'closedness' (which, as a paradigm, was used to define past and present Communist states as "red fascists?")
As per the Communist definition of fascism, it's the "progressive" DSA who are more adjacent to fascism: Because they actually have connections to imperialist financial capital (which bankrolls an assortment of different NGOs, activist networks, that also build consensus for foreign regime change).
Marxism-Leninism always defined chauvinism in terms of imperialistic attitudes toward other nations. What can we call widespread leftist condemnation of Iran or Burkina Faso for their policies on sexuality - if not chauvinism in the Leninist sense?
3. The Left-Wing, Marxist, definition and meaning of terms like reactionary, progressive, chauvinist, etc. seem to have been totally re-defined by Western liberal "leftists" in the postwar period, with the help of the CIA/OSS backed Frankfurt School
The meaning of being reactionary or progressive has absolutely nothing to do with your attitude toward cultural trends.
In fact, historically, Marxists - Lenin included - regarded many 'fashionable trends' as decadent. The idea that because something is 'new,' it is progressive, ignores that in the Marxist view, bourgeois society tends toward decadence.
Does that mean I regard people with alternative sexual lifestyles as decadent? Not necessarily at all. I'm simply stating that what Marxism regards as objectively progressive cannot be reliably measured in cultural trends or activist.
There is nothing inherently progressive or reactionary about attitudes toward LGBT phenomena whatsoever. One way or the other! It is absolutely irrelevant to the Marxist understanding of progress.
The historical Left-Wing definition of the revolutionary/reactionary dichotomy is based on ones stance toward revolutionary political change - so, ones position with respect to an established political order.
As per this definition, right-leaning Libertarians out in the boonies who want to overthrow the US government are less reactionary than NYC liberal New York Democrat activists who were trying to defend the federal government institutions, engaged in Russiagating, and support regime change abroad.
The specifically Marxist definition of progress/reaction extends the basic Left-Wing view (inherited from the French revolution), but also applies it to ones stance with respect to changes in the forces and relations of production.
Thus the Communist Manifesto describes classes which, while potentially being politically revolutionary with respect to the state, are simultaneously reactionary in the larger historical sense, since they, in vain, attach themselves to a program of attempting to restore an outmoded mode of production:
Some people think that "rolling back the wheels of history" refers to nostalgia for out-of-fashion cultural attitudes. But that is not the sense in which Marx and Engels use this term: They refer to it as attempting to reverse the transition from one mode of production into another.
Leftists need to stop abusing phrases and think critically about many of their assumptions. There is no reason not to think that a redneck out in the boonies critical of foreign regime-change interventions is more "reactionary" than some kind of "woke" urban interpretive dance instructor who calls for Tibetan Independence.
You need to un-learn these various false associations that have been programmed into your head and which have contributed to the absolute confusion and disarray of the US Left.
4. Recently, some people have abused Lenin's Quote to "Attack" the ACP:
No Marxist will forget, however, that capitalism is progressive compared with feudalism, and that imperialism is progressive compared with pre-monopoly capitalism. Hence, it is not every struggle against imperialism that we should support. We will not support a struggle of the reactionary classes against imperialism; we will not support an uprising of the reactionary classes against imperialism and capitalism.
Notice that Lenin is referring to distinct stages in the transformation of modes of production and not changes in cultural attitudes, which as per the Marxist view, can "develop" in both decadent or 'progressive' directions.
As per my quote - written in 2023, before the ACP even existed - regarding supporting all competent opponents of the US government regardless of their cultural attitudes, it seems the word "competent" was forgotten by people skimming this - reactionary opposition to the current status quo - which in the Marxist sense, takes the form of anti-AI sentiment, anti-4th industrial revolution sentiment, anti-Information age sentiment, etc. - can be anything but competent.
What does Lenin really say on this matter?
The more powerful enemy can be vanquished only by exerting the utmost effort, and by the most thorough, careful, attentive, skilful and obligatory use of any, even the smallest, rift between the enemies, any conflict of interests among the bourgeoisie of the various countries and among the various groups or types of bourgeoisie within the various countries, and also by taking advantage of any, even the smallest, opportunity of winning a mass ally, even though this ally is temporary, vacillating, unstable, unreliable and conditional*.*
The Marxist-Leninist attitude toward reactionary opponents of the status quo is not one of condemnation, but recognizing that their opposition is vain and doomed, however rooted in genuine revolutionary sentiment.
Thus, the Boxer Rebellion may have been led by "reactionary" and "backward" outlooks, but this does not mean Communists condemn the Boxers - their heart, so to speak, is in the right place - it's their mind which is the problem.
Marxist education helps clarify the true causes of social conflict and antagonism, and thus facilitates, rather than sets terms-and-conditions upon - the competent growth of revolutionary struggle.
The mistake of various "liberal leftists" is the assumption that fascists were revolutionary or opponents of the status quo. This is a major myth. Fascism was - in Dimitrov's words - the power of finance capital itself. They were the hired thugs of the most powerful sections of the bourgeoisie.
But the important thing: Reactionary has nothing to do with open/closed mindedness toward cultural trends whatsoever. Within Marxism, a reactionary is one who
- Defends an outmoded political superstructure
- Attempts, in vain, to defend outmoded productive relations/forces of production.
That's right. A Furry digital Artist with Xie/Xey pronouns railing against AI is actually definitionally a reactionary in the strict Marxist sense of the word.
5. The Official Communist Line since 1917: Imperialism is Moribund Capitalism, has exhausted all progressives potential, and bourgeois civilization has become decadent.
Lenin: "Monopolies, oligarchy, the striving for domination and not for freedom, the exploitation of an increasing number of small or weak nations by a handful of the richest or most powerful nations—all these have given birth to those distinctive characteristics of imperialism which compel us to define it as parasitic or decaying capitalism."
The bourgeoisie has long ceased to have any revolutionary character. The presumption that the latest trends - whatever they so happen to be - pioneered by the prestigious, wealthy, and monied elites of Wall St, London, LA, etc. - are inherently revolutionary is unfounded within Marxism.
But we American Communists are open-minded! We don't deny that progress continues to occur within history since 1917. We regard the information revolution, the fourth industrial revolution, etc. - as progressive and irreversible developments, this is what distinguishes us from "old-school" ML's who are far more socially "conservative" than we are.
6. Marxism does not seek to eliminate all social "inequality"
As per Engels: "The elimination of all social and political inequality,” rather than “the abolition of all class distinctions,” is similarly a most dubious expression. As between one country, one province and even one place and another, living conditions will always evince a certain inequality which may be reduced to a minimum but never wholly eliminated. The living conditions of Alpine dwellers will always be different from those of the plainsmen. The concept of a socialist society as a realm of equality is a one-sided French concept deriving from the old “liberty, equality, fraternity,” a concept which was justified in that, in its own time and place, it signified a phase of development, but which, like all the one-sided ideas of earlier socialist schools, ought now to be superseded, since they produce nothing but mental confusion, and more accurate ways of presenting the matter have been discovered."
The hyper-liberal insanity that compels people to, in vain, seek to neuter, transform, and engineer all language, culture and interactions between human beings to somehow enforce "fairness" and "inclusivity" for all "marginalized groups" has nothing to do with Marxism.
Calling us reactionaries because we reject this assumes that this hyper-liberalism has actually advanced history. But it didn't. Ithas failed utterly beyond some echo-chambers and niche subcultures. What prove exists that they are at the avant garde in history when they have nothing to show for themselves as far as actually changing society in any successful way?
7. How can the ACP be an "OP" or a "Threat" to undermine the success of Leftism?
When there's no success?
Show me the success? Where is it? What meaningful gains has the US Left made in the past 5 decades? What are we undermining exactly?
I think you should pause and be a little more self-critical. The US Left has not penetrated US politics in any successful capacity. All it has done is sheepdog more people into the Democratic Party, thus far. It has yet to articulate its own independent Party, its own independent line, and its own independent position.
The Democrats are not Left-Wing. They are just as Right-Wing as Republicans.
If you somehow succeeded in making some successful, independent Left-Wing Party/movement that was making serious inroads in winning the American working classes, that was ALSO hyper-woke and whatever - I would support it.
But I think the US Left had multiple opportunities to prove the "old way" of doing things (being hyper moralistic, wokescolding, etc.) can work. And it just hasn't.
How are we undermining "the Left" by trying something new, given that all you gatekeepers have to show for, thus far, is failure?
8. You should embrace Dark Marxism
One of the major problems with the US Left is that it is confined to being the "logical extreme" on the spectrum of naive, youthful liberal idealism and optimism.
Marxism isn't based on liberal idealism (in the colloquial sense of the word, either!) or one-sided "optimism." Marxism is not about eliminating all the suffering and darkness in the world. There is no light without darkness and there is no good without bad, no success without mistakes, no ability to realize any goal without struggle - no product without work.
Marxism is an outlook based on centering human labor, after all.
It's not based on some naive notion of absolute all-inclusivity, eliminating all grievances, and establishing a Utopia of sunshine and rainbows for all.
Marxism is a very rugged, realistic and sober outlook. Childish bourgeois naivety about the brutality of the world has no place in it.
I think many confuse this ruggedness and realism for "Fascism." They grew up on Hollywood psyops like Star Wars, which depict the naive "Jedi" as the good guys, and the "dark side" as "fascists."
But the truth is, Marxism is a dialectical outlook. It neither accepts a one-sided pessimism, nor a one-sided optimism/idealism.
The US Left has not successfully responded to the rise of the Right. They just close their ears nad ignore them. Whereas, the Infrared movement was born out of successfully confronting and responding to the Right.
We are thus dialectically more advanced - but US Leftists code us as "right-wing" because we are "tainted" by the fact of having dialectically overcome the Right. We aren't scared of confronting or debating them. Somehow, this makes us "poisoned" by them.
So I'll do you a favor for those confused by us. Instead of calling us Nazbols/Nazis, maybe call us "Dark Marxists." That accounts for all of our provocative views (with respect to the US Left), our use of bad-words in a casual context, our lack of political correctness, and our brutal realism.
This post will 100% generate cognitive dissonance among any anti-ACP leftist who reads it and attempts to rationally respond, even in their own head. The only way they could prove me wrong is by actually, in some way, responding rationally. But I predict they won't do that. They have no response. They'll irrationally keep their eyes closed and their ears shut, beucase they simply can't handle the truth. And if you are coming from one of these leftist communities on reddit, ask yourself, perhaps, a Dark Question:
Why?
Welcome to /r/AskSocialists, a community for both socialists and non-socialists to ask general questions directed at socialists within a friendly, relaxed and welcoming environment. Please be mindful of our rules before participating and join the subreddit r/AmericanCommunist:
R1. No Non-Socialist Answers, if you are not a socialist don’t answer questions.
R2. No Trolling, including concern trolling.
R3. No Sectarianism, there's plenty of room for discussion, but not for baseless attacks.
R4. We fully and firmly support Palestine, Novorossiya, and Multipolarity.
R5. We stand with Iran
R6. Good Faith and High Quality Conversation
Want a user flair to indicate your broad tendency? Respond to this comment with "!Marxist", or "!Visitor" and the bot will assign it.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
I don't even think Eglin Air Force Base can respond to this, the whole post is a nuclear bomb
I would love to see a video of some opp reading and reacting to this TRUKE post in real time, just their facial expressions.
I would pay for watching this
As if anyone is gonna read the whole post.
BTW I got banned from r/USSR for doubting on the Eglin canard.
Absolute nuke
🦍☀️🦍☀️🦍☀️🦍☀️🦍☀️🦍☀️🦍☀️🦍☀️
I am not even an American and I didnt know about ACP but they banned me from leftist sub for asking that what is ACP and why you should do sectarianism.
So although I have not read up on your program but I can atleast say that any real communist would not have done it unless they are drinking the liberal virtue signaling Kool aid.
read the program here: https://acp.us/program
EXCELLENT WRITEUP 🦍☀️
[removed]
keep doing what ur doing bros. i'm from australia and so i'm only really interested in my own backyard, try as i might i cannot catch up with the immense amount of effort posts bitching about the ACP from all the different socialist communities i browse. the ACP daring to post in socialist subreddits and "take them over" is apparently the deepest crime a communist can commit, but honestly the first i ever heard of the ACP was from this popping up on my feed
https://preview.redd.it/x67ixysi625g1.jpeg?width=900&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ea99019430b799511d9687c7778239a504e90121
so from where i'm standing the ACP is looking pretty based. People respond better to pic related and general presence than they do dense effortposting online. I'll support any communist movement with genuine momentum even if it's a nationalist one in the heart of the imperial core, because it's better than literally nothing and i'd rather think americans are building some sort of socialism instead of thinking the whole country's a write off
fuck i hate socialists bitching online, the one thing you're meant to do is bitch in real life and get shit done ffs
"The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point, however, is to change it." -Karl Marx, "Theses on Feuerbach"
If you're from Australia, then you should join the Eureka Initiative. They are a Marxist-Leninist organisation in Australia that are aligned with the ACP and have positive relations with the ACP. This is their website:
https://eurekainitiative.org/
ACP Rising!
The absolute and complete victory of the ACP is just a matter of time
people like cck philosophy and the prole.wiki guy are the some of the worst anti-ACP grifters there are, among other twitter leftists. they open with hate against the ACP but literally don't even know why. the people who have the strongest anti-ACP sentiments usually have zero arguments to back themselves up, or use retarded liberal victimizations (culture war psyops) to deflect the fact that are mislead as communists. they overuse common and completely baseless statements like, "they want to genocide the homeless!" or, "maga communism is just another way to say national socialism! (???)" the main deterrent of our ideology is amercanism, or socialism with american characteristics itself. people cannot accept, for what ever reason that good things come from american society. that patriotism is always bad. while i agree that patriotism can get to the point where hyper-patriots ignore 100% of the faults of a nation, it is a fact that the actual patriots of that nation, the people who care about the future of their nation, are fighting to change it.
It's really hysterical to see the distortions and outright fabrications. The other day I saw someone saying that it was Haz who went surfing with Tulsi! Who's next, Lyndon LaRouche?
Most of the opponents of ACP just repeat the same empty, already de-bunked, talking points. The are just so desperate to cancel the ACP that they lose any ability to reason.
They're all infected by the anti-communist mind virus, which blocks rational thinking
Haz is right. again. Left-liberalism must be left behind or else we have no future.
That was fun to read. Sincerely.
I joined this sub simply because of the rage against you.
I didn't even know this sub existed 😂.
Screw em.
Yes, I got accused of being from here, so I'm here now lmao!!!
Great essay, with more than a few trukes. I wonder how many people will actually read it?
ACP is objectively good.
Many are saying this
I say it regularly.
Glory to the ACP.
Glory to the American working class (therefore, glory to the ACP
Socialism is when pride parades
https://preview.redd.it/zb1gajinl45g1.jpeg?width=667&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f2fd278e22e0c85a99fca8a9b480bfb60944b38b
InfraredShow always setting the record straight 🦍☀️
Great work, comrade!
I've noticed that the average ACP hater is quite literally incapable of thinking. It's bizarre.
The ACP haters just start shouting words and phrases, and they never actually mean what they think they mean.
Trotsky was an obnoxious, self-centered, arrogant, snake-like asshole. It totally makes sense the fake leftists are behaving this way. It is a way for them to be anti-communist while still calling themselves "left-wing". It comes from a privileged petty bourgeois position. They're pessimistic. And pessimistic people don't have to be responsible.
uhh based
Im gonna only make one argument here since this is a very long post. While the ACP is progressive relative to the old ML states regarding LGBTQ+ rights, they were all pretty conservative so that doesn't really mean much. While the ACP's stances (which aren't really laid out in the official platform) would be progressive three decades ago a lot has changed since then and they really aren't anymore.
Additionally, attacks on LGBTQ+ people by the political right in the US have been rapidly increasing in both scale and severity and form a key part of the right's narrative ("trans people are trying to groom your kids", "the left is promoting radical gender ideology to destroy western civilization", etc), with concrete material impacts on the people targeted.
Whether you think this is a manifestation of genuine hatred, nothing more than a tactic to divide the working class, or something in between, fighting against it is important and dismissing it as simply a small group of people having their feelings hurt is just incorrect. LGBTQ+ people make up more than 10% of the population, are disproportionately poor, and tend to be some of the most politically active people in the country, so throwing them under the bus simply isn't an option even if you don't care about what is going on.
Forcing them to abandon advocacy for LGBTQ+ rights to join a working class movement is also not an option: the policies being enacted directly target them in concrete material ways they simply cannot ignore. As just one example, texas has implemented a $20,000 reward for catching a trans person using the "wrong" bathroom to be payed by said trans person. Trans people who simply use the bathroom the state wants risk facing violence and assault. It literally cannot get more material than that.
I'd be happy to respond to this, but this is already way beyond the terms of the "debate." We are being accused of being Nazis/Fascists for our views.
There's room for debating about how the issue should be approached, but calling us Nazis is a nonstarter.
Okay, I would be happy to discuss it further some time. I do have opinions on the debate over the nature of the ACP, although this isn't the best space for me to express them for a variety of reasons. I might respond later detailing some of my arguments though (i have stuff I need to take care of RN)
PS: i will not be starting that conversation by calling you names, i don't think that is a productive way to express my ideas in a serious manner
stop trying to reduce Marxism & Communism to your personal concern about your personal habits
I am not getting into another argument with you. As much as I would love to explain my objections to this statement in detail I have real life responsibilities
Your personal concern with your own navel actually has nothing to do with Marxism & Communism
I agree. We must oppose the anti-LGBTQ movement because it is so deeply Idealist in character. Opposition to bullshit moral hand-wringing is an unquestionable benefit to the promotion of Materialism as a concept in our society. American conservatives hate queer people for the same reasons they hate unions: ignorance, false consciousness, and ideology.
Because your party is objectively anti lgbqt+? because you call yourself MAGA communists? two words that don’t go together?
Well, we know who didn’t read the post.
You:
It's literally point number 1 in the post. Why don't you read it and provide your response?
you didn't even bother reading the post did you
Please actually read what he wrote if you're going to comment.
Our Party promotes nondiscrimination and enthusiastically engages with all people, including gender and sexual minorities, on the basis of class.
You’re all perfectly welcome to join and participate as Communists.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ShitLiberalsSay/s/Keg8RrXFv6 Some actual comments from your actual chairman
This both pre-dates the formation of our Party and is not an act of discrimination against a person or member. It’s also not something you should be that upset about, these are not especially heinous statements.
Most of these aren’t even insulting towards LGBT people and are aimed at the elevation of special interests above class or the role of cultural signifiers and are clearly baiting people like you who can’t think past surface impressions to content (Reddit spectrum disorders).
You will need thicker skin if you hope to be involved in general society, even thicker skin if you wish to be a Communist. You can’t expect people to cater to your safe space and in-group and must be ready to engage with all variety of workers and states of class consciousness.
We will never have the degree of social media management that others practice beyond explicit and egregious hate speech, we find the Human Resources Socialism approach to organization extremely stifling and hostile.
I will state again, our Party practices non-discrimination (gender and sexual orientation will never affect your position in the Party or Party policy) and we welcome all people, including gender and sexual minorities, to join and participate on the basis of class.
I have comrades of all backgrounds and persuasions in my chapter and cell and it just is not a topic that generally comes up in our Party.
We are simply opposed to the movement from the margins approach of the New Left that threw class aside as the focus of Communist organization and don’t intend to return to your way of doing things.
all facts. You are just tone policing.
How has this neurotic tone policing served the western left in making inroads with the working class? If these tweets are too much for you to handle, one day at the average US job site would have you reaching for your smelling salts
You are free to point out how I am wrong based on what I've actually said. But calling this view fascist reflects illiteracy.
I didn’t call you fash. But I don’t think someone who unironically says this without recognising that this culture war bullshit just divides the working class, and doesn’t advocate for actually educating proletarians captured by the media who propagate it, is fit to be chairman of a communist party. I said it in another comment but we should be applying the thoughts of Marx, Engels, Stalin and Mao to the material reality we live in today, and the science we know today. I’m not talking about an lgbtq movement, I’m talking about their existence not being just capitalist degeneracy. This is something we know now that was unknown during the times of our thought leaders. We also know that a significant number of the proletariat are gay, numbers as high as 7% are thrown around, and there is a concerted effort to use their existence as a divider amongst workers. A vanguard party should be advocating for educating workers against this.
I'm dividing the working class, because some fed on Reddit dug up tweets I wrote in 2023 about the organized LGBT movement's relation to imperialism, in order to cause outrage among liberals?
You're arguing with a straw man.
No that’s not what I said Haz. I said that there is an effort by the capitalist class to do so and we should be leaning on that and countering that. Please re read my comment
I've very much avoided the topic all-together since then so anyone trying to dig up these old tweets is clearly a bad faith actor.
Thanks for the reply by the way. I do respect that you sometimes engage with critiques directly.
If these are no longer your thoughts as chairman or are not aligned with the party I’m a bit confused by some other commenters on this post. Based on some of what they have been saying while purporting to be members of your party I think maybe the party line on this isn’t clear, or is not respected.
The party line does not apply to random supporters on the internet.
Leftists need to abandon their love of language policing if they ever want to accomplish anything.
Pretty much the all the stats suggest something along the lines of 1% of the population being gay not 7%. Regardless, majority of american doesn't want to kill gays or ban gay marriage. This is a none issue.
How does calling gay folks degenerate help class solidarity? I don’t really understand
When did I do that?
I will quote myself again:
You are free to point out how I am wrong based on what I've actually said.
You are throwing a tantrum about how my tweets made you feel rather than what was actually written.
He's correct
What did Marx & Engels say about the "LGBT movement" of their day?
No we’re not. also #magacommunism is hilarious and genius
true
MAGA communism as a phrase is used to capture the minds of MAGA, rural conservatives and republican voters by inadvertently showing them that the culture war is not what represents communism, because the culture war is the factor that drives them away from the ideology. in truth, the party's ideology is much more intricate than just being able to be described as MAGA communuism.
And how does the acp want to do this? By keeping lgbt people away from society, all private and unseen, they are unwilling to stand against all forms of structural oppression because they don’t believe lgbt people are structurally oppressed.
Our gay members are just as visible and public facing in the Party as any other member, in some cases they’re even more visible than the average cadre because they are such active organizers in the Party.
No idea how you’ve worked yourself up into this delusion where Communists are repressing you.
What specific issues of oppression are you concerned about?
Or where do you think we promote a policy of ostracization?
We’re clearly not aware of whatever it is that you think we should be addressing, why not take the opportunity to explain your views?
The ACP allows gay people and such to participate sure, but their members also pretty universally refuse to get involved with actually fighting for LGBTQ+ rights aside from extremely basic stuff, assuming they don't actively condemn people fighting for said rights as bourgeois
Please take a moment to think through your comment and determine if an arbitrary stranger would be able to articulate back to you what specific rights or incidents are of concern to you.
I have no idea what you are talking about when you say “fighting for LGBTQ+ rights aside from extremely basic stuff”.
I do not know what you consider a right, what “extremely basic stuff” covers, or what rights you believe are outside of “extremely basic stuff” and are (implicitly) not currently offered to you on the basis of your sexual orientation or gender identity.
Please respect me enough to tell me your thoughts. I’m more than happy to share mine with you exhaustively.
I don't have time right now but when I get a chance I will to the best of my abilities
Jackson thinks women shouldn't have the right to vote.
*Jackson thinks it is funny and knows that you will reply when he tweets that women shouldn’t have the right to vote
You are a predictable creature and Jackson lives off of his media presence in an attention economy where the form of the message matters much less than its essential content.
He is good at metapolitics and you are afraid of mild humor.
You know Haz came up with "Mecha Tankie", right" Pretty ironic for you to have it set as your user flair.
No?
We’ve already had this discussion sir, you appeal to econominism and deflect any legitimate criticism about how that doesn’t align with ml thought.
You didn't show anything ACP said or did that is 'economism'
Haz Al Din.
I mean for real, it’s mainly the shit he’s said recently (very anti gay) and the mixed historical track record they’ve had.
Like I don’t like idpol as a central part of the global labor movement, but you CANNOT ignore the civil rights aspects of Marxist beliefs and intersectionality with other civil rights struggles. There has to be nuance: trans swimmers should not be the focus, but trans people who can’t exist, marry, or get healthcare should feel supported in their struggle with us.
We do need to work to guarantee basic human dignity for all, but that doesn’t extend to me having opinions on what swimming class trans folk should compete in. Haz Al Din has no nuance on this, though, and instead calls people gay who he doesn’t agree with as a pejorative.
I am Haz. I wrote those tweets in 2023.
You only saw them recently because someone (totally not a fed!) dug them up deliberately to harm our reputation among naive liberal-leftist redditors.
But I stand by what I said. I never attacked LGBT individuals, I criticized the "movement." Which, like all other "movements" that prevail in society, is infiltrated by imperialism. I also stand by what I said as basic statements of fact.
I support dignity for all, but this varies based on different societies which have different cultures. I think that the liberal-left, especially in 2023, pursued a type of hyper liberal extremism that clearly didn't resonate with the US population and I'm not interested in dying on the hill of such vain struggles. And I'm not talking about basic human dignity or rights, but the extreme attempts to create dozens of genders and so on.
It’s kind of telling that the sticking point for so many “ leftists” on Reddit is that the ACP doesn’t explicitly campaign with progressive intersectionality as its primary and driving focus. Your historical context, ignored. The actually effective outreach in working class American communities that have been otherwise completely surrendered to republican media and politics, ignored.
But trying to convince people whose entire concept of activism is built around ingroup messaging, progressive aesthetics, and democrat talking points is probably a dead end. The last few years have only entrenched these ideas especially among the groups on Reddit leftist spaces.
If this was a position they could be talked out of, they would have been ostracized and driven from these spaces by now. Good luck still
it's nauseating the extent to which the 'left' in the West dallies & navel-gazes and viciously attacks anyone who tries to break that spell
2023 was 2 years ago dude
I've read the post and I am very confused about your position toward LGBT rights. Could you reformulate?
Marxism does not posit 'human rights'
Excuse my broken english but what does "posit" means?
"put forward"
You’re the MAGA communism guy, right?
If so, what was your reasoning behind that?
If not, explain.
This question has been asked so many times it’s better to just link the substack explaining it from 3 years ago.
Thank you, I do appreciate you taking the time to link that and not just going off at me, lol.
It's really not a mystery why so many people hate the ACP: social conservatism is a repulsive ideology and holding it as a political tenet is counterrevolutionary. Not that hard to understand. People think you're scum because they think your social conservativism is disgusting. A-B simple causation.
Most Americans don't hate social conservatism though
Most who are amenable towards communism do. Like it or not, the average conservative isn't the target demographic for any communist movement that hopes to be successful, because most of them are outright hostile to the fundamental principles of it, let alone the "100 million dead" screeching. The actual people who are willing to listen to the communist position are, by and large, a group that has massive overlap with the people whom both social and political conservatism hate and view as an enemy.
Americans currently "amenable" to communism as an "ideology" can't even do anything except vote Democrat so I'm guessing they aren't worth much or at least anything more than anyone else.
They're worth significantly more than outright opposition. It's a LOT easier to radicalize a liberal into revolutionary thought than it is to do the same with a conservative who needs to first be convinced to listen to you at all. And that's without TOUCHING the elephant in the room of how class abolition must go hand in hand with opposition to white supremacy due to the way class divides are used as an enforcement tool of the white social order, OR the inherent hurdle of convincing a bunch of socially reactionary MAGA types (y'know, members of a movement whose biggest unifying principle is white supremacy) to sacrifice white supremacy in order to accomplish class abolition. Are you really confident that they'll just give up the very social beliefs you've been pandering to when they're forced to make a choice? Or are you really so foolish as to think you can have any kind of meaningful class abolition that doesn't ALSO address the myriad of social class structures that are comorbid and intrinsically linked with it?
Stupid and superficial.
You're just wrong and its sad.
It's easier for a liberal to be amicable to the form of leftism, but not the real content. And often times the oppoiste is true for "conservatives," who can agree with Communism fully, but can't stand the name.
How can Marxists explain this? Simple: Ideology is not the essence of the revolutionary line. It can be twisted and distorted to mean its exact opposite. And today thats what has happened to "Communism" in America.
No one wants your 'radicalized' liberalism though, it's cringe & ineffective and has been for decades, almost 20 straight decades really
I'm talking about radicalizing them into Leninists, idiot.
liberals don't get 'radicalized' to becoming Marxists, they just become anarchists or go toward fascism
And conservatives don't? Newsflash, radicalization doesn't happen in a vacuum, and it's a lot easier to push a liberal in the direction of accepting Marxism than it would ever be for a conservative. The right IS the fascist base, and here you are pandering to them. Congrats.
The point is that the 'win over the NPR and MSNBC liberals' and college educated PMC failed
It's failed for decades
Engels is clear that Marxists don't try to "permeate liberalism with socialism," because that's only a form of misleading
Time to win over the blue collar workers in the rural areas now. That means MAGA to a large extent
Really? Average MAGA people think Bill Gates shouldn't own farm land
Sure, but they have very different, incompatible ideas about what the problem is and what to do about it. And that's not a gap you can just bridge with persuasion, because those same people are much more okay with MAGA billionaires buying up that land. That's a recurring pattern we see nationwide, MAGA is much more concerned with their social beliefs being validated than they are in taking a stand against billionaires. Everyone who wasn't jumped off the MAGA train years ago (if indeed they were ever on it in the first place). Why exactly you'd pitch opposition against a wealthy ruling class to a group of people who worship a billionaire as the backbone of your political strategy is utterly baffling.
What can I say? Either we win them over or the billionaires will. We have a tough road ahead
They are, just recently there was a communist candidate that campaigned in Fitzgerald, Georgia, a rural conservative town and he was enusiastically well received by the vast majority of people.
Your view is just very reddit and biased, not based in the real world.
Man I'm not the one dumb enough to think conservatives are a viable base for a communist movement, you guys did that all on your own. And that's why you're treated as enemies by the rest of the left, because the social positions you espouse are those of the enemies of humanity.
The populistic and disaffected working masses in a moment of world crisis/civil conflict have always been the base of Communist movements
In America, those masses are in the exurbs and rural blue collar working class areas, not in the liberal cities
That's not who the MAGA crowd is! MAGA is fucking overwhelmingly made up of wealthy retirees and petit bourgeois business owners! You're acting like there's some huge disaffected factorial working class who overwhelmingly agree with the right on social policy, but there isn't! To what degree the old-school working class still exists, they generally don't have strong views one way or the other on this shit. But the reality is that you're focused on a dwindling group that's only getting smaller, older, and weaker with time. You're myopic on a silent majority that doesn't exist, and ignoring the reality of what the actual majority is doing.
That is who the MAGA blue collar working class is
About 75 million people voted in 2024 for Trump. That is not primarily wealthy retirees or petty bourgeois
In fact, about 60% of the Teamsters (largest US private union) rank-and-file voted to support Trump
It's largely a blue collar movement but populist rather than a clear ideological understanding, which is why Communists have to win them away from Trump rather than abandon them to be misled by GOP
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2023/10/why-so-many-blue-collar-workers-drifted-from-democrats/
This blue-collar drift from Democrats has been going on since the 1970s and really accelerated since the late 2000s
[removed]
Good riddance. If you're gonna argue that the socially enforced hierarchies are meaningfully different from class structures in a way that makes them worth keeping around, I don't want anything to do with you.
[removed]
The average working class voter doesn't care one way or the other, and I don't expect them to. If it were just not caring about an issue at all, I wouldn't have any problem with that. But that's NOT what conservatives, social or otherwise, have ever been. It has always been open and virulent hostility to anyone who'd defy their preconceptions about the world, and for that reason I see no reason to treat them as any less than the scum they are.
[removed]
You're talking about the ACP here, I don't see any reason why the politics of other countries should factor in to this. Of course you use American politics as a measuring stick for an American political party, that should be obvious.
You quite literally spoke of throwing in your lot with them, how else am I supposed to interpret that?
I’m wondering if I have these viewpoints correct:
Concerning movements: Movements must justify their existence through anti-capitalist stances and a rejection of the capitalist mode of production, favoring instead worker authority.
Concerning the term “reactionary”: An entity or person that supports capitalist or pre-capitalist modes of production, and thus bourgeois control of society.
Concerning LGBT folks: Don’t ask, don’t tell.
Concerning the usage of slurs and homophobic/transphobic/racist/sexist language: I’m not 100% certain on this one. I’ve found some seemingly conflicting statements in this post: “…our Party actually takes a step further and bans discrimination and harassment toward people for their private lives…” “…maybe call us ‘Dark Marxists.’ That accounts for all of our provocative views (with respect to the US Left), our use of bad-words in a casual context, our lack of political correctness, and our brutal realism.” These things seem to oppose one another, and I’m not sure if it’s considered acceptable to use slurs or not. Obviously this is a point of major contention.
"our Party actually takes a step further and bans discrimination and harassment toward people for their private lives"
is private conversation and avoiding puritanical or dogmatic concerns around 'tone policing' the same as discrimination or exclusion?
It depends on who you ask, I’d imagine. Constantly railing against black people in private can skew some impressionable minds fairly easily. What I mean here is about public speech, such as twitter or Reddit or instagram, what have you.
We're talking about objective reality rather than subjective preference though
is private conversation and avoiding puritanical or dogmatic concerns around 'tone policing' the same as discrimination or exclusion?
If the cashier at a liquor store has a particular prejudice or superstition in his private capacity, is that the same thing as discriminating against customers?
But that’s not what I’m talking about. In private, we have no control anyway, so it’s a moot point. Then it’s up to you if you want to hang around homophobes or racists. What I’m talking about is in the public eye, what is being projected out to the masses.
That's what I am talking about
The only way to win control is to unite individuals in spite of their own subjective consciousness, since 'class consciousness' isn't something you as an individual 'grants' another by 'teaching them'... they must unite with the working class movement to gain this.
Same goes for self-described 'radicals' and 'leftists,' they don't acquire 'class consciousness' except in the fight to win class dictatorship
I’m asking if the ACP would be fine with using a racial slur on live television, for instance. Since they purport to not be “PC.”
Has ACP done this?
Similar things. Using “gay” as a pejorative on public platforms and such. But even still, you’re just dodging the question, give me a yes or no answer.
So no, you mean. ACP isn't calling anyone slurs?
Congrats or sorry that happened to you
Equally, on the Right, they attempt to "own the libtards" by wearing swastikas.
This is how most Progressives see American Communists: A bunch of people who have completely fallen off an idiological cliff in trying to be opposed to something they don't like.
Really people who want to fundamentally change any system shouldn’t be surprised when they are targeted by said system. If you think of these things as organism you are effectively trying to kill it and it is automatically going into defensive mode. Regardless of alignment all systems do this by default.
I stopped reading by item number 3 because of how circular your arguments are. You want to upturn the capitalist hegemony of America, but are fighting so hard to keep people out of your revolution.
There are not enough communist hardliners in the world to achieve your objectives. You need to be more open to the "Progressives", anarchists, DSA-ers, and "leftists" in general, to move forward your cause. A united front will draw in sympathizers and those abandoned by this establishment. If you are open about caring for those people, they will fight with you.
You won't get the revolution you want overnight. Instead you have to build a coalition and become a force to be reckoned with. Scaring away queer people by saying that you won't explicitly endorse them, that you're "better than the Soviets on LGBT" and the like, is going to hurt your cause.
The specifics on governance can be argued after the fascists are removed from power. Discussions will be more fruitful if you are debating with other left leaning people, instead of with cristo-fascists. If your idea of anarchists and "leftists" is reactionary reddit comments then you are underestimating the hatred of capitalism held by the Pan-Left.
They attacked us first. And no, we don't need to be open to them, we need to win over the masses, who don't like them either
That being said the chairman has offered up olive branches many times including here. Will they answer the call? We'll see
I’m Jewish, and antizionist, and am trying to understand whether there’s actually space for people like me in your politics. You dismiss a lot of things as liberal “idpol” and “culture war", so I have some questions.
Where do antisemitism and Jewish communities fit into your line?
Are Jews an oppressed group you actively defend in practice (separate from your stance on Israel/Zionism), or is antisemitism basically filed under “culture war” politics that you don’t see as a priority for communists?
Yes, there are Jewish people who are anti-Zionist in the leadership of ACP
You didn’t answer the questions.
yes I did
They said where do antisemitism fit into your party line?
You said. There are Jewish people in the party.
That is a lie by omission or you didn’t read their question carefully enough.
Understand that there are anecdotes of many different types of things but you assuredly did not answer his question.
I saw the post on here yesterday about the ACP guy saying bigots should be allowed.
if your goal is to increase the amount of bigots and stop this place from growing organically then you’re doing a great job.
Realizing that being an antisemetic bigot and being antizionist are obviously not the same thing, saying “yes we WELCOME bigots here” is simply an ACP thing and you should stop speaking on behalf of other people.
[removed]
You speak on behalf of the ACP?
[removed]
Well according to the other post bigots and Racists are welcome according to HAZ, and according to you “ACP has spoken on the subject before.” Whatever that means.
This post above at the top is click bait about other people being outraged. Maybe ACP is so small because people don’t like the messaging that is out there.
All of the gate keeping in a sub which is r/asksocialists and not specifically the ACP sub is extremely suspicious particularly with the aggressive and arrogant takes that I have seen from people with ACP flairs.
My advice would be don’t speak for all of socialism and articulate your points better because this thread so far is a bunch of commenters telling you, “hey we (other socialists) don’t necessarily like idpol but at the same time we can’t allow fascists in our ranks. Take it for what it’s worth.
[removed]
Jewish leadership in the Party, including in the Executive Board
Who said "bigots should be allowed?"
You didn’t address my questions either. I can only assume you are bad faith at this point until you address them.
I addressed both questions there, actually
Attacking Zionism (which the party does viciously) is attacking anti semitism. Haz constantly attacks antisemities who believe that “Jews control the world” both because it’s wrong and because it’s materially incorrect. As others have said Jewish people are in the party. Zionism is the most powerful antisemitic force in the world right now and you won’t find an organization that fights it as hard as the ACP
Non-discrimination is a basic principle of our Party and we have never indicated a hostility to people based on their religion or racial/ethnic background, let alone on the basis of anti-Semitism.
I also don't think anyone would reasonably describe Jewish people as oppressed by the United States or lacking necessary protections.
I swear some of these comments come completely out of left field, would you mind explaining why you were under the impression that our Party is an anti-Semitic group? Or what you mean when you say Jewish people are an oppressed group in our country?
Do you think Russia has fair elections?
I think they are a bit rigged against the Communist Party and there is some vote inflation but overall Putin and United Russia would still be on top anyways.
I do not think any elections are fair except for those in Belarus, Cuba, China, the DPRK, Laos, and Vietnam.
These are the only countries who could even begin to speak about fair and equal democratic representation of a mass will or interest because these are the only countries where the working people are the masters of society.
You care a lot about being proven wrong. Except you don’t care about the things other leftists are accusing you of, doubling down instead. Reductionism and national bolshevism, at a minimum, should leave you heavily criticized. And since those are irreconcilable differences, we’re left with you yelling into your soon to be echo chamber of revisionism.
Yes, I read the fucking post. It’s the same regurgitated essaying that is disagreed upon despite how many “dId YoU eVeN r-ReAd It?”’s are replied.
They're accusing me of being a Nazbol, a Nazi, or a bad faith actor. And these are accusations that simply cannot be maintained rationally upon minimal scrutiny.
Hey maybe this should be very easy for you to combat by not calling queer people and "BLM" degenerate. As chairman of the ACP it should be pretty easy for you to make a statement apologizing for the statements you made in 2023 (and continue to make on stream) and official lay down a party line of where the ACP stands on intersectionality. A self-proclaimed communist movement in the US without intersectionality can only be reactionary, and thus not a true communist movement.
We're Marxist-Leninists, we're opposed to this bizarre anti-Communism which seeks to elevate special interests above and in opposition to a practical class politics.
Not to mention this is not r/askcommunism.
Intersectionality is not communist or socialist
Nothing you said in this comment concretely addresses anything. Nobody cares what "leftists" think on virtue of them being leftists, so stop defaulting to some abstract group as if it were the arbiter of truth.
In one ear and out the other
lol fuck off fed, calling lgbt people mentally ill degenerates and then white washing those words in your post so you don’t look like the nazbol you are.
'nazbols' were anarchists & IWW members who rejected Lenin
ACP is Marxist-Leninist, they support Lenin's line against ultraleftism
Define ultraleftism
Marxists don't use definitions
But here's what Mao says:
"The thinking of "Leftists" outstrips a given stage of development of the objective process; some regard their fantasies as truth, while others strain to realize in the present an ideal which can only be realized in the future. They alienate themselves from the current practice of the majority of the people and from the realities of the day, and show themselves adventurist in their actions"
I thought a Nazbol described the party of communists that also tried to tie in ideas of ethnic/cultural purity and extreme nationalism into their otherwise leftist views? I'm not sure if I would call your party Nazbols, but I am curious on how you would avoid the pitfalls of American Exceptionalism where and when they appear when running on an America Centric platform.
'nazbol' doesn't describe ACP, that's for sure
Actually, 'american exceptionalism' as a term describes what Stalin deemed an untoward rejection of the inevitability of Communism in America, since 'leftists' in the 1920s also tried to argue that America would never go Communist because they thought America was an 'exception' to this world movement
Stalin rejected 'American exceptionalism' because he said America would go Communist and the masses would move in this direction
You realize that "Mecha Tankie" is a term I invented in 2022, right, as a way to distinguish members of my movement?
Let's pretend like I simply called all LGBT people mentally ill degenerates. Which I didn't at all whatsoever.
What does that have to do with being a "fed" or a "nazbol?" There is no rational connection between these terms as I showed in my post. You simply have no rational response.
Im not trying to have a dialogue with a fed bro 🤪
You're the fed, actually.
Lmfao yep, ya got me, hope I get my cia check soon. Hey do you have our contact’s cell number? I’ve been missing my past few payments and since we both know him…
I actually feel sorry for you. Your entire worldview is irrational and not based in facts. To maintain it, you have to suppress doubts and protect yourself from opposing perspectives.
You'll get tired of it eventually. But the sad part is: You'll probably just become a Nazi. Becoming a Communist requires intelligence and effortful thinking.
Why are you squirming, fed
I’m what world is that squirming, lmfao I wish my poor ass was getting fed money to troll you losers.
He never said that though...
Removed your Mecha Tankie flair, Mecha Tankie is a flair for supporters of Infrared to be clear.
You claim critics are ignorant, biased, or stuck in a “red scare.” But your public statements and the A"C"P’s structure throw those accusations back on you. Your framework depends on rhetorical sleight‑of‑hand, not Marxist materialism.
You write that critics are “beginners” with “liberal backgrounds” who assume communism equals “extreme liberal or ‘woke’ ideology.” Yet in the same breath you praise the A"C"P as “more tolerant and liberal than” prior Communist states. That is a gross misuse of terminology. Liberalism is a bourgeois ideology rooted in private property, market relations, and political reform not socialism. To cast “liberal” as a compliment exposes a fundamental theoretical ignorance while you accuse others of the same.
You say ideology is not the essence of revolution:
Yet your organization operates as a personal vehicle. Membership, sub‑chapters, and business/tax obligations turn comrades into clients. That is not socialism. True socialism demands worker control of the means of production and democratic collective decision‑making, not hierarchical dues and profit‑driven sub‑chapters. Under capitalism exploitation hides behind wages; under your model exploitation is revived in the name of ideology.
You dismiss social struggles, such as race, gender, and oppression of minority communities, as distractions or bourgeois cultural noise. But that overlooks a core fact: capitalism has always used cultural divisions to fracture working‑class solidarity. As Marx and Engels put it in the Manifesto:
They identified the proletariat as the historically revolutionary class:
In your dismissiveness toward oppressed communities, you deny that their experiences are part of class struggle. That refusal betrays a reductionist, class‑only view that leaves out material power structures and thus undermines solidarity.
You seek to court reactionary, rural, conservative elements under the banner of “MAGA‑communism,” claiming that “conservatives can agree with Communism fully, but can’t stand the name.” https://www.reddit.com/r/AskSocialists/s/TxF5u3Dfm8
Marxism does not consist of slogans or marketing. Socialist organizing requires building institutions that give workers power such as unions, tenant associations, cooperatives, democratic committees. Attempting to turn political transformation into a culture‑war recruitment campaign is a betrayal of Marxist praxis. True worker power cannot be built on meme warfare, personality cults, or cynical courting of reactionary tendencies.
Your leadership model concentrates authority in yourself. That goes against the principle that the emancipation of the workers must be the act of the working class itself. As Engels wrote with Marx:
Revolutionary change requires collective class organization, not individual heroism or celebrity. The A"C"P’s structure magnifies a leader’s persona instead of building democratic, collective governance.
Finally, your insistence that leftist criticism is emotional or naive reveals ideological panic and not intellectual rigor. You defend the A"C"P by reducing argument to insult. That tactic is not consistent with scientific socialism. It is a cult‑building strategy masquerading as class struggle.
If the A"C"P truly claims the “C,” then show it. Build worker‑controlled institutions. Publish internal democratic decisions. Organize unions, cooperatives, tenants. Support oppressed communities. Prove that socialism under A"C"P means more than slogans and social media. Until then the “C” belongs in quotes.
I was hoping some sad dipshit would take up S4All's comical line of attack, as I haven't been given many opportunities to tear it apart in front of an actual, real life idiot who finds it compelling. You write:
This is such a sad, idiotic statement in light of basic facts. I have neglected my own YouTube channel and haven't even uploaded in like a year, and in the months leading up to the launch of the Party, it was almost entirely abandoned.
I obviously can't return to full-time streaming, where, given the revenue-split, I'd be making much more money than I am now. I've been long unbanned on Twitch, where I became popular in the first place, but I have no time to stream there.
I've had multiple opportunities to collaborate with large, up-and-coming apolitical streamers and I haven't. I clearly know how to grow my "personal brand" successfully as I've done it before, and yet I've totally sacrificed and put that off:
Why? To accept the duties, responsibilities and obligations that come with being Chairman of a Party which I take no salary from, no source of income from whatsoever, and which has cost me 10s of thousands of dollars out of my own pocket - mind you, I am not a wealthy person and I don't make a lot of money.
So in what way is it a personal vehicle for me? Explain it, genius! I'd have a much easier time gaining personal clout and money if there was no ACP.
What are you talking about, you jibbering dipshit? Our current structure does not collect dues from full-time cadre, while collecting dues from recruits (who, once becoming full-members, do not pay any).
Do you have any idea how much money we could have raised if we just charged our membership exorbitant dues prices from the get-go, like PSL does and virtually every other organization?
But no, we decided to decentralize the finances, so people would have the ability to do the activity they are able to, at whatever pace they find reasonable, and with the necessary flexibility. If we were "grifters" we could have easily just run constant donation-drives and charged massively high price points for dues. And we didn't, because we didn't want to fleece our members of money before our Party had even proven it has its shit together.
Yet this disgusting piece of shit S4All has the audacity to imply we're just grifters, taking out fed wrecker's words ad verbatim, that don't hold to minimal scrutiny? "ACP just exists to help the personal social media platforms of the EB" - how has the personal social media of the EB benefited from ACP? What has Jackson gained from it? He could have been much more popular if he just went to the Right. MWM could have easily grifted off of the anti-Infrared crowd. And I could have easily grifted and offered no solutions to my community despite critiquing all major orgs, while growing - doing more apolitical content.
We all sacrificed our "careers" for this Party in extreme ways. So how are we turning "comrades" into clients?
2/2
Name a single organization that can operate without at least some revenue going to the center?
You realize that in most, all of the revenue goes to the center, right? You realize that's the norm, and we have actually broken the norm?
Let me get this straight: We propose chapter-run, cooperatively owned social enterprises, which create a central base of operations for each chapter within communities, give them a revenue source to fund activities - and at a certain point, after they break even, cover all their expenses + revenue stream for activity, a cut should be sent to the center.
You find this unfair? Do you have any idea how financially generous this is, when any other organization would start fleecing their members from the get-go, mistrusting them with any decentralization, selling their members on a lie that they will eventually "break even" as long as they keep paying the "tax?" The 'tax,' which would not even be a massive, would only be derived after the chapter is already collecting profits from the enterprise.
S4All and other piece of shit grifters take USAID and billionaire money for granted, and think a Party or organization can be run based on what? He claims that it's a "grift" because of the "tax" - you mean something that will not even materialize after years? How are we grifting?
He claims I'm not "making enough money on YouTube anymore." So what do I do instead? According to him I launch a Party with the hopes of the center eventually taking a tax from enterprises in a few years? Really, is that logical? When I could easily just - go back to YouTube? The idiot pulled up a chart of my Youtube "declining" - yeah dipshit, because I have not fucking done anything on it in like a year, barely uploading and not streaming.
When I was streaming full-time on YouTube before the Party, I was making more than I am now on Kick, which takes only 5% of my revenue. Did this become "less successful" for me? No! I stopped uploading on YouTube when I began writing my book, and when preparations for the Party were underway.
What he says is so illogical and nonsensical that it's clear how deliberately dishonest he had to be in order to even make this claim.
If all Marxism-Leninism was even less tolerant of this liberal mamby pamby nonsense 'captain planet' & care bears hug circle BS, why are you expecting modern Communists to somehow be liberal Democrats today on these matters?
This is somehow even more insufferable than the people who just call the ACP fascist
Why join ACP as opposed to PSL?
Join whoever you want, but if literal slander is stopping you from joining us, you should be informed about the truth.
Fair point. I’m spoken for, but I think this post cleared a lot of the air.
The PSL is an ideologically confused Marcyite project that has liquidated the practical history of successful Marxist-Leninist organizing. They function effectively as an unpaid grassroots agency for the DNC, subordinating class politics to liberal movementism.
They have a fatal demographic problem - being majority composed of low-activity petite-bourgeois, downwardly mobile student radicals. Consequently, they struggle to articulate a vision of socialism distinct from academic left-liberal universalism.
Their leadership is compromised by proximity to NGO networks tied to intelligence circles and movement management philanthropy, specifically the direct patronage of Neville Roy Singham and the Pierre Omidyar Network.
The ACP is the only Communist Party in the USA and Canada. We are the only organization whose goals are oriented around the practical test of Party-building, centering class politics and maintaining an uncompromising stance on imperialism as the primary contradiction and on Communism as the real movement of history.
[deleted]
Why would we oppose the decisions of a sovereign nation like Cuba? We defend Cuba's sovereignty. And we also defend Burkina Faso's sovereignty and Iran's sovereignty. It's not our place, living in the imperial core, to dictate to countries resisting US imperialism which policies they should pursue.
[deleted]
American working masses don't need to emulate Cuba 1:1
Ignoring the specific topic at hand for a moment, that’s not really how you should be looking at any Communist’s country’s policies. Your interest is in their structures and approaches, and in the challenges they encountered and analyses that drove their decision making, but we don’t have any reason to blindly copy policies of another nation and historical practice would tell us it’s harmful to sovereign socialist construction. This criticism applies even more so to dealing with sensitive cultural qualities.
Returning to the topic at hand, we would like to just de-emphasize the topic in general and have a fairly libertarian approach to matters of gender presentation and sexual orientation. It’s really not any of our business what a competent adult does in regard to those topics and we have no intention of making it our business.
That is a respectable approach, and although I have disagreements with the party on some specific policies, I can find common ground with a party willing to take on the capitalists in government.
I think most people's sort of fear in regards to queer liberation comes from the current fascist government's attitudes towards these people, and a perceived apathetic stance can cause fear in people who are already used to being ignored and oppressed historically in the states.
The supreme court's refusal to even consider overturning the marriage law (despite valid criticisms of marriage)is appreciated, but congress' refusal to enshrine the right in law feels a bit two faced as it could be overturned by a single hostile court.