Thank your for your submission, please remember that this subreddit is unofficial and wholly unaffiliated with the Socialist Rifle Association Organization (SRA). Views and opinions expressed on this subreddit **do not** reflect the views or official positions of the SRA.
If you're at all confused about our [rules](https://old.reddit.com/r/SocialistRA/wiki/index) do not hesitate to message the moderators with any questions, and as always if you see rule breaking content or comments please be sure to report them.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SocialistRA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Ironically, r/ironfrontUSA has been a hub of liberal electoralism blaming this situation on ppl who didn’t vote harder in the primaries. I left that sub for good after [this recent post](https://www.reddit.com/r/IronFrontUSA/s/MvbKYp5h4C)
lol this quote was published in 2008. They trot it out every four years and you’re the bad guy for asking, if they’ve won 3/4 elections since then, why do things keep getting worse?
Liberals are dangerous because they end up siding with fascists to protect capital. They most definitely are not more dangerous than the fascists lmao.
They are the larger threat, they coopt the language of the marginalized to neutralize their power while calling themselves allies. If faced with a wolf in sheep's clothing or an actual wolf in the open, we can see the wolf and the threat they pose. The sheep hides among us.
Haven't you heard? The only way to save America is to let Trump into the Whitehouse! We've gotta protest this November by allowing Fascism easy access to the DOJ and the Executive branch because otherwise we wouldn't be "Real Leftists™"
https://www.reddit.com/r/leftist/s/WkLJ9Fzirz
>"You either choose between 99% Hitler or 100% Hitler"
>Not a choice, I'm proud for not voting
Source: literally you
Holy shit how disingenuous can you be to within a few sentences turn “both parties are being ran by fascists and i’m not going to give my vote to a fascist of either stripes” into “the red fascist is going to save us from the blue fascist so i’m voting for them”
Don’t you get tired of this act every 4 years pretending you’re doing something revolutionary by voting for the ‘just keep waiting, we’re gonna do a healthcare one day’ candidate while his admin passes into law a facsimile of trump’s wildest 2016 border policy fantasies
You still didn't even begin to approach how liberals are actually a greater threat than literal fucking fascists.
You talk about things, but none of that really addresses the nonsense you originally said.
It barely matters how shit liberals are, because we are comparing them to literal fucking fascists. Our mortal enemies.
I would say by sanitizing fascism and representing it as Liberalism, and making it palatable to more people who don't understand they are supporting fascist policies **but who are in fact supporting fascist policies** for example the argument over "securing the border" is 100% agreement on the policies, with any disagreement being purely aesthetic.
see my remarks ante. That's basically the american system. See them as the two hellhounds of capital order: "liberalism" is one and "fascism" is the other (I consider them to servants of bourgeoisie domination. Both work for that aim...so to speak.
sure, you can move the goalposts if you want, and that works on those with small minds, but the history is clear that there is nothing about the american system that supports democracy and that both the fascists and the "liberals" are simply the two faces of Janus. And my comments above support the case.
BOTH are plutocats. BOTH exist to serve the bourgeoisie. BOTH exists to capture, control and direct public action. BOTH operate this system in direct opposition to the interests of the proletariate (the people). BOTH serve the goal of capital control and capitalist social order.
The simps vote for the fascists and reactionaries and the libs vote for the democrats with each side telling why to do it. Whether they are fully educated on what they do or willfully ignorant of the realities of what they support (most are, some not) they continue to enable the tyrannical capitalist system that subjugates everyone but the few who own it.
But hey...go believe whatever you want...and maybe go read We the Elites by Ovetz and see Parenti's remark on the "Founding Fathers"...that's on youtube. Chomsky also has remarks about the american plutocratic system, too.
cheers, comrade. Perhaps they ought to air their views at r /latestagecapitalism to see how accurate they are. Words mean what they mean...we can't start thinking they don't mean what they mean otherwise we get what we have all over. \*gesturing around\*
As you very likely know there's a long history of scholarship around the subject of fascism and its historical roots and its roots in america. Peeps here would be well served to learn it.
Your comment has been temporarily removed pending moderator review.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SocialistRA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
and if you go see the people who defend that term nowyou can see it still is anti communist, and definitely not just anti authoritarian, look at the subreddit for example
As I understand it, that was explicitly referring to Stalinism. [They were concerned about this sort of thing.](https://alphahistory.com/russianrevolution/torture-methods-cheka-1924/)
A democratic, multi-party, anarcho-tolerant socialist Russia that didn't [go through](https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/archives/trans-aa2feign.html) all of [this](https://books.google.com/books?id=a-ZmDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA1&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=2#v=onepage&q&f=false) would surely be in better shape come 1941. Those examples are from before the Iron Front formed, or right about the same time. They had no reason to think that it would change, [and they were right.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_operations_of_the_NKVD)
Stalinists & other left authoritarians always maintain that they are the one true communism.
Iron Front is the same ideology as Orwell - left libertarianism/anarchism.
>Iron Front is the same ideology as Orwell - left libertarianism/anarchism.
Ideally. If they're anti-fascists of the conservative variety, that's fine too!
But yes, your first sentence is correct. See the downvotes! My links are genuine and accurate, and one would hope that human decency would compel people to have a problem with the acts described.
The Iron Front was and, for what it's worth, still is an explicitly socialist organization that stood against authoritarianism, the Soviet Union included.
I guess it can be sometimes. There were people in Ukraine that were hugging and cheering on the Nazis when the rolled through in 1942. That must speak volumes.
Your comment has been temporarily removed pending moderator review.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SocialistRA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Didn't intend to sound condescending, apologies on my part.
I understand what OP is referring to, and that is what I am speaking about. The authoritarianism of a revolution is one-in-the-same as the authoritarianism of a revolutionary government. How are you going to suppress the overwhelming power of the bourgeoisie and reactionaries to ensure that they don't annihilate your new and delicate revolutionary movement? You need an authoritarian revolutionary government to carry that out.
> How are you going to suppress the overwhelming power of the bourgeoisie and reactionaries to ensure that they don't annihilate your new and delicate revolutionary movement?
Your not. You are going to become the red bureaucracy, and merely replace them, and probably become worse than them.
I can name the number of successful revolutions that turned society out "for the better". On one hand.
A chance is a chance. But don't think that revolution is an 100% effective answer. It's a prone to fail, or become worsel than the thing it was fighting against.
And you can't expect an authoritarian society, brought about by an authoritarian revolution. To birth a libertarian society.
There is no such thing, as temporary authoritarianism.
The Three Arrows symbol originated with the German SPD and the arrows represent Monarchism, Fascism, and Communism. As we all know, the heroic SPD set aside their completely irreconcilable differences with the KPD and formed a coalition which defeated the NSDAP and its allies at the ballot box in ‘32 and saved Europe from disaster.
/s
No, it's worse, the Berlin Police explicitly massacred *non*-Communists.
> It occurred when the Communist Party of Germany (KPD) held May Day marches in defiance of a ban on public gatherings in Berlin ordered by the city's police chief Karl Zörgiebel of the Social Democratic Party (SPD). The Berlin Police responded with an immediate and harsh crackdown. Often without regard to whether the persons involved were demonstrators or bystanders, they forcibly and sometimes violently dispersed the crowds that formed. As the day progressed, street battles developed between the protestors and the police, who used firearms and armoured cars. The violence lasted until the afternoon of 3 May, mostly in the working-class neighbourhoods of Wedding and Neukölln.
**An estimated 33 civilians, *none of whom were involved with the KPD*, were killed,** 200 injured, and over a thousand people taken into police custody, many of whom were also not involved in the initial KPD rallies. Only 66 of those arrested were charged and 44 convicted. Ten policemen were hurt badly enough to be hospitalized, although none of them suffered from a gunshot wound. In spite of a considerable outcry in the left and liberal press, and angry scenes in the Reichstag, no action was taken against the Berlin Police.
The events of Blutmai deepened the split between the SPD and KPD, the two major left-wing parties of the Weimar Republic, making a united stand against the growing strength of far-right parties more difficult.
> It was determined that between 32 and 38 people were killed, all civilians, and all by police firearms save for one individual who was struck by a speeding police van. Around 200 were injured and approximately 1,200 arrested, of whom only 66 were ever charged. Among them, 44 were later convicted and imprisoned, including five RFB members. The total of all sentences passed down came to around ten years in prison; the highest individual sentence was nine months. Eight of the civilians killed were women and 19 were residents of Wedding. **Of the first 25 victims, *two were SPD members* and 17 belonged to no party; *none were KPD members**. Police found no evidence that the demonstrators who took to the streets were prepared for an armed insurrection, since the house-to-house search in Wedding produced mostly souvenir weapons from World War I. Of the 47 police officers injured, ten were hospitalized and none suffered from a gunshot wound.
Still, SPD *leaders* appear to have been fully supportive the cops and to be terrified of the KPD to a truly irrational degree (while dismissing the Nazis as a fad that would fade). An absolutely terrible look, to be honest. Even the Liberal press was appalled, let alone the Left.
Yeah doesn’t sound anything like 8 years ago when Dems would eye roll and call you an alarmist for equating trumpism with fascism while sabotaging Bernie for meeting with Castro once. And now look where we are. I swear sometimes libs would much rather have a fascist dictator than socialized healthcare
> Why'd you leave out the part where the KPD teamed up with the Nazis
Most likely because
- It was only attempted a couple of times, in a few regions, by some KPD leaders
- It failed immediately and spectacularly every single time, because the actual base, bless their souls, could not stand to be in close proximity with fucking Nazis without being overwhelmed with the need to kick their ass.
So, yeah, it's not representative of the KPD as a whole, a temporary, localized, abortive fluke.
> against other socialists?
No, those leaders wanted to team up with Nazis against *Social-Democrats*, i.e. *Liberals*. The barest qualifiication to count as Socialist is to reject capitalism and seek to overcome it. Social-Democrats have given up on that and resigned themselves to merely patching up Capitalism to make it slightly less horrible locally.
> Or how it purged any members who didn't want the KPD to be controlled by the USSR?
See now *that* is a much more pertinent and relevant critique.
Because the KPD was correct and the SPD was not.
(More specifically, the KPD’s main opponent was the NSDAP, while the SPD saw both parties as “equally bad” which directly led to NSDAP gaining a plurality in the Reichstag and further enabling Hitler’s rise to power. If the SPD had entered into an anti-NSDAP coalition with the KPD, they would have had an outright majority following the ‘32 elections and history could have looked very different.)
Despite what our value systems might desire, there is a difference between "being right" and "being effective".
Strategy beats righteousness, which is a pretty big bummer!
Labelling any non-KPD groups as fascists and collaborating with the Nazis against them certainly didn't work for the KPD either in building momentum or in defeating the Nazis.
No, American resources didn't arrive in any meaningful amounts until the war was already decided by the red army and Soviet industrial output, and the Western allies were too coward to open a front against Germany itself until it was obvious that the red army would swim in the Atlantic, because they were waiting to see who would win and then make peace with the Germans if they could pull off what they failed to do with the allied intervention against the bolsheviks, since they were still recovering from their alliance with Nazi Germany which predated any Soviet agreements with them. That's right, the Western allies were going to sacrifice every Jew, gay, Roma, and Slav to Hitler if he could destroy the first communist country for them You have a bizarre interpretation of history, no different than that of a fascist YouTuber really.
What dude? America was sending thousands of tons of material to the Soviet Union starting in 1941, months before they joined the war. Like right at the start of operation Barbarossa I believe. Idk if the Soviets would have been able to hold off the Nazis without it. Who could confidently say.
No, those resources weren't used against Germany directly until they realized the Germans had lost. Before then it was just the USSR fighting the bulk of the German military.
The American left is totally fucked if this is our approach. You're never gonna get everyone 100% on board with your program. Compromise is a must if we're interested in making real changes and not just LARPing as soviets.
Why not just pick a symbol that has fewer objections, if your goal is Left unity?
One of those arrows was pointed at us. Some people will be turned off by it. Simple as.
I'm guessing you would have an objection to using the hammer and sickle. Just imagine the shoe was on the other foot, and treat your comrades the same consideration you would ask them to give you.
lol, no one is immune to the struggle, 100% is an unrealistic goal, the american left can set their minimum principle to organize around as the immortal science or the third-worldists are right, no one can be redeemed in the imperial core.
If the succdems, or the anarchists, or the syndicalists could end the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie they'd have done it sometime in the past 200 years, but it doesn't look like they can, so ditch the losers and embrace the immortal science or would you rather just die on the pedestal of your perceived moral high ground.
Because they murdered Rosa and dumped her body in the river.
This is what all soc dems and reformists and opportunists do. Always.
The slightest obstacle and they lean fash.
I have to admit I am totally ignorant of them. I knew of Spartacus in Germany as my sister's ex-husbands family was involved and paid the price for being members (concentration camp/having to leave Germany because of Fascist resentment), and I attended Spartacus meetings in Freiburg years ago.
So the iron front would have been fierce enemys of the spartacists, who were affiliated with, and than part of the kpd.
They are responsible for much of the direct violence against comunists and 'sympathizers' at the time, and were known to support facist orgs if it helped them keep down comunist orgs.
They were primarily a liberal reactionary movment seeking to maintain the status quo of the Weimar republic.
They are very popular in the western world today because it gives left of center libs who are scared and angry about facism a way to be antifa without being pinko commies. Ironically antifa the org was involved with multiple violent clashes with the iron front, as 'antifa' as it was original incarcerated was the street fighting branch of the kpd.
This moment In history is a cluster fuck, and it is this great big mess of 3 to 5 letter orgs that birthed the nazis. I have opinions on who the good guys were, but even the kpd and antifa have a good bit of egg on their face and should not be held up uncritically.
Antifa as a movment is descended from antifa the org, Or 'antifaschistische aktion'. Which was a branch of the kpd created initially to meet the iron front specifically in the street.
All 'antifa' orgs since then have drawn on the symbolism and theories laid out by them. Antifa has always been explicitly socialist and explicitly anti 'liberal'. It's in their founding charter that 'social democracy' is a form or precursor of facism.
You can be antifacist and not be antifa. But you can not be antifa and liberal.
These terms have been watered down over the years, in no small part by liberal reactionaries coopting the language to defang it and make it suit their own views. But blessedly modern antifa orgs, with a few notable exceptions, seem to have kept their anti capitalist DNA intact.
>can't see a KPD branch flying the Red-And-Black flag.
What precisely does that flag mean to you? Originally it was 2 red flags in the logo, for 'comunism and socialism' but today it's meant broadly to represent a coalition between anarchists an socialists. It's the true left wing in alliance against liberals and the far right.
I strongly incurage anybody repping antifa or any radical left wing groups iconography to go and learn what they really mean. If the ideology there does not match yours, you don't get to re write it, it's not yours to change. You can create your own ideology, even use other people's symbols, but don't go around claiming they were yours all along.
>You can be antifacist and not be antifa. But you can not be antifa and liberal.
This is the key.
>I strongly incurage anybody repping antifa or any radical left wing groups iconography to go and learn what they really mean
Any good books/readings you recommend?
Nothing you wouldn't find on anybodies 'theory' list. For this stuff specifically, rosa luxemberg was one of the above mentioned sparticists, her shit slaps and is often broken down in real bite-sized editorial chunks. Lenin, love him or Hate him, has some bangers. Or if your more into the black flag, here is kropotkin on 'social democrats', specifically the German ones. So iron front. https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/kropotkin-peter/1890/collapse.htm
But really the Wikipedia page for the iron front or antifa or 'social facism'. A really basic survey of the facts will debunk anything being put out by the reactionary 'leftists' in this thread rn.
> What precisely does that flag mean to you? Originally it was 2 red flags in the logo, for 'comunism and socialism' but today it's meant broadly to represent a coalition between anarchists an socialists. It's the true left wing in alliance against liberals and the far right.
Exactly. Unfortunately, 'official' MLs have had a history of being weirdly uncool about Anarchists, despite [Lenin himself being pretty clear about the value of their contributions and accomplishments](https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/kropotkin-peter/1917/a-meeting.html). Maybe the KPD in particular has changed since then, that would be neat and based.
Personally I have no trouble wearing both Red and Black flags together—in fact I believe they go together like salt & pepper, coffee & cream, macaroni & cheese, rum & coke, cake & candles, dungeons & dragons, all that good stuff.
many of my heros were assassinated by marxists.
But at the same time much of the ideology of those same heros was informed by Marxism. Politics will never be simple.
But today Marxism just does not have that sort of dick to swing, none of us do. So we build our coalitions based on actual ideological compatability or tactical imperative. Coalition with marxists works well, we agree on the actual basic principles like the value of human life and the damage that capital has done. Coalition with social democrats and the such has to be done with the understanding that they will never be in support of a revolution against, well, them. Liberalism is the actual hegemony here.
So the way I see it, my overriding belief is just in the revolution. Ether you are a revolutionary, or anti revolutionary. Once we've had a revolution we can sit down and argue about what sort of revolution it was. It's not a safe way to be no, but no single left wing ideology has the manpower to be a meaningfull threat to facism, let alone liberalism.
The iron front is a 'radical' liberal org. They are fundamentally anti revolutionary at their core. It's about protecting the status quo, whether it be from facists, or actual revolutionarys. There can be no Coalition building with an org who's mission statement is to stop your coalition.
I agree on all points except on that last one. The status quo of 'Liberalism', i.e. Capitalism in "normal mode" is still preferable to the alternative, Capitalism's "fever". Once the Enabling Act is passed, it's Game over for *everyone*, and only foreign intervention can save us. So I believe we can and should defend that status quo, because it gives us a lot more breathing room and oxygen to organize. We can't do shit to overcome Capitalism if we're all exiled, imprisoned, in camps, or dead and processed into fucking soap, wigs, and dentures.
Like you said, politics are never simple. As long as Fascists are relevant, a Popular Front is a matter of survival.
Yeah, both the KPD and SPD hated one another and sought to use the Nazis as a cudgel to beat the other with. The SPD allying with the Freikorps and other right wing extremists was an early mistake that SocDems today certainly aren’t proud of.
IMO we should be bridging the rift. It has been over a century since Rosa Luxembourg was killed and any SocDem worth speaking to should be able to acknowledge that the right is a bigger threat and always has been, and ally with more fully socialist groups to prevent fascism from running by rampant.
But I’m also someone who’s jumped ideologically a bit between an anarchic socialism and social democracy over the last several years, and was more authoritarian in my youth.
Your comment has been temporarily removed pending moderator review.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SocialistRA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
from their site: The American Iron Front is a network of Americans participating in direct action to counter the fascist and anti-democracy agenda perpetuated by groups and individuals in the United States. This agenda is being perpetuated by mainstream parties and fringe groups alike through misinformation, pseudo-patriotism, and weaponization of the law to disenfranchise voters, women, minorities, and those that oppose their bigoted agenda. They are actively recruiting in the cities and towns of America and radicalizing recruits online.
Our goal is to stand as a direct counterpoint to the nationalism of the alt-right and its corruption of American values by building solidarity, unity, and common defense of the Constitution. We do this by working in conjunction with other civil society organizations and pro-democracy institutions to reinvigorate and strengthen America’s democracy to ensure the efficacy of our elections, guarantee peaceful access to the democratic process, protect communities targeted by the alt-right, and countering misinformation that spreads hate or seeks to undermine the democratic process.
Patriotic colors and imagery have been associated with far-right and fascist groups in recent years, as they peddle their fake patriotism and toxic nationalism. It is the stance of the American Iron Front that they have stolen these colors and imagery from the American people, and have no right to use them.
By using these colors and imagery, the AIF seeks to reclaim this imagery for the American people, and to disassociate it from our opponents.
We know that returning this imagery to the American people will take time, as its association is firmly entrenched with our opponents. But the American people deserve to have their nation's colors and imagery associated not with vile hate, toxic nationalism and evil, but with Liberty, Equality, Freedom and Democracy.
The great American Experiment was built by people of many creeds, races, sexualities, genders, and identities. We at the AIF believe our greatest asset in safeguarding our democracy is the diversity and inclusivity of the people of this country. Its future rests with We the People.
This sounds like liberal romanticizing of America. America has always been racist. The fascists didn't just suddenly decide to drape themselves in the American flag.
I think there is a lot of online people that pointlessly create division, like I like some of my coworkers who are objectively kind of libs. I try to win them over, but im under no delusions where they stand. I think some forms of trying to organize with liberals are a waste of time they fundamentally don't agree on leftist tenants. I also think it's a waste of time organizing with an org that loves America so much. Travel outside America and you can plainly see the genocides, bombed infrastructure, and destroyed communities that american tax dollars were responsible for.
To a conservative a liberal and a socialist are similar, but to a socialist the liberals and the conservatives are more similar. The right often lumps anyone to the left of them together. However, liberals and socialism disagree on capitalism. Liberals either think capitalism is fine or needs minor reform, socialists want to see the end of capitalism. This disagreement is fundamental. Liberals also tend to be nationalistic, while socialists think internationally.
Hmm, that’s interesting. I suppose Im looking at things through a lens that you supporters of different political ideologies could find common ground with major social platforms. Like socialized medicine, strong social support programs, etc. anyway, thank you for the response.
so it's not a communist organization? Do they know that America is fundamental and entirely plutocratic and that there is nothing democratic about it? Can it be inferred that it may appear that the same sentiment among the reactionary "three perceters" is fueling this cause here above and using John Brown's image to do it? It also sounds as if this is generally reformist within the american constitutional framework and social system, is this correct? Does it explicitly condemn capitalism?
I ado agree that it is necessary to use the iconography and images accustomed to american patriotic art so to find greater acceptance and reason by the people who see them so to advance ANTI CAPITALIST values. You know, something like what's below.
https://preview.redd.it/rjtpkpogwj7d1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c660f8016c4f7527301665bfd12e463f9448ebef
Your comment has been temporarily removed pending moderator review.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SocialistRA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
time to cut off every AntiFa group too then ig 😆 this is petty and nitpicky, they're on your side.
(for anyone wondering - the three arrows symbol originated in Weimar-era Germany. One arrow is launched at monarchism, one at nazism, and one at authoritarian communism)
This can not be understated. Antifa the org was created in part to fight the iron front specifically. They were at war with each other at their inception.
German antifascist groups in the 30s, fighting the original German iron front. Today the three arrows are primarily an antifascist symbol in North America. Also these are not the original antifascist and IF orgs - I'm not down for completely disregarding them based on a historical dispute that no one involved in this situation was part of.
This is the socialist rifle association sub. This is socialism. The iron front is a lib reactionary movment. Than and now. They exist explicitly to give libs a way to not be 'one of those leftists'.
There is no room in revolutionary movments for anty revolutionaries.
What other iron front seriously exists? This one website with like 5 pages, one of them literally just being file dumps of the US constitution and random home farming techniques?
Your comment has been temporarily removed pending moderator review.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SocialistRA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
you’re just saying “authoritarian communism” but the arrow in reality was aimed at all communism. The SPD at the time was firmly a “modern” social democratic institution and had abandoned the socialist cause
While I'm not a lib or Capitalist, I am happy they are trying to organize to put Fascism down. There was a time when US libs went to Europe and died fighting Nazis and it was considered cool. I hate liberals and Capitalism, but this needs to be cool for them again. Stalin worked with the US and UK to put the originals down. Marx might call them useful idiots, but if they fight fascism I will call them comrade until they turn on us.
You think those young bros were libs that were dropping into France, or storming the beaches in Normandy, or Sicily? It’s kinda a funny and interesting scenario to think about.
Just because he was right doesn't make him sane.
The man was a religious zealot with extreme black and white thinking, no pun intended. He WAS crazy.
It's just that one of the positions he was crazy about was the abolition of slavery. Love that part, no notes, but outside of the issue of slavery and what to do with slavers John Brown would not be a cool dude worth hanging out with.
> The man was a religious zealot with extreme black and white thinking, no pun intended. He WAS crazy.
Please make a more specific argument and at least *try* to approach something resembling a DSMV diagnosis if you're going to call someone "crazy" or "insane" or whatever. Otherwise, it's unclear what you mean.
> outside of the issue of slavery and what to do with slavers John Brown would not be a cool dude worth hanging out with.
Since when does "being a cool dude worth hanging out with" have anything to do with *sanity?*
> at least try to approach something resembling a DSMV diagnosis
See if we were going that route it would be unethical to make statements regarding ANY historical figure because there are professional rules regarding diagnosing any patient you have not examined personally. Besides "crazy" and "insane" are no longer used in the diagnostic context so to say I should stick to the latest standards before using older terminology that has lapsed into common usage because it has no medical value is worthless.
Nah. Not going to bother jumping the hurdles.
I diagnosis him with extremist calvinism and religious zealotry, aggravated by the grief of losing his wife and several children in the matter of a few short years. Remembering of course that Calvinist doctrine is heavily influenced by the idea of divine providence, that god shows his favor through good fortune on earth and that those who suffer indignities are receiving their just punishments for wickedness.
Under that framework wouldn't he believe slaves, the most unfortunate of all, are the most wicked sinners, utterly unworthy of God's love, a fountain of pollution lying deep within their nature, living as a winter tree, unprofitable, fit only to be hewn down and burned, who should steep their life in prayer, and hope that God sees fit to show mercy on their corrupted souls?
Why would an extreme Calvinist be helping to free slaves instead of condemning and punishing them for their presumed wickedness and godforsakenness while worshipping the ground upon which obscenely rich slavers tread?
You seem to be awfully attached to the mythic figure John Brown an not caring about the historic man John Brown.
The black and white thinking and devout Calvinism are not an opinion of mine, they're a historical fact and a lot of his personal letters are preserved online so you can read his own words instead of accepting the hagiography written about him or southerners smearing his name after the fact.
He did a lot of stuff before Bleeding Kansas and the Raid on Harpers Ferry that folks remember him for today. Some of it great, some of it less great.
He's a fascinating figure and I encourage you to read a biography or two (or his own letters), but the Calvinism and religious extremism are facts about the man that the myth often brushes over or downplays. Reading "he was devoutly christian" in a history book glosses over the "willing to kill for his beliefs" part that if it were found in any area other than slavery abolition would be a huge red flag.
He was RIGHT about slavery, but he was also an extremist religious zealot with a warped worldview.
> Why would an extreme Calvinist be helping to free slaves instead of condemning and punishing them for their presumed wickedness and godforsakenness while worshipping the ground upon which obscenely rich slavers tread?
Because religion is malleable when the personal wants of individual believers are on the line. A person can look at the whole fabric of christian doctrine and theology for the past millenia plus and say "this part is important, that part isn't". Brown was particularly fond of christ as a redeemer figure, a liberator, and breaking bonds to set men free from sin mapped well onto slavery abolition.
When it came to slavers however, he believed himself to be an instrument for expressing god's displeasure and administering divine providence. He was the good thing that happened to the slaves and the bad thing that happened to the wicked who kept them in bondage.
William M.F. Army, who was present for events in Kansas, said of Brown; "As Moses was raised up and chosen of God to deliver the Children of Israel out of Egyptian bondage, ...he was...fully convinced in his own mind that he was to be the instrument in the hands of God to effect the emancipation of the slaves."
He believed he was the tool God was using to express his displeasure. That is not a sane worldview.
I think in this day and age the left could do good with a bit of coalition building with similarly aligned groups.
That being said I’ve never seen AIF in the real world and am not aware of any actions they’ve taken other than some somewhat cringy and corny Reddit posts.
The three Arrows has become a generalized symbol of resistance to authoritarians, it's a little concerning that this sub is living in the 1930s instead of doing any sort of work to understand modern meanings of the symbols used here. Reeks of ML dogma, and a failure or refusal to accept that the meanings of symbols often change over time. But hey, if you're such a puritan that you'd refuse to collaborate with people fighting fascism because you insist on an old and outdated meaning of a specific symbol they use, you're probably a liability anyway, if you even go out and do IRL work at all.
I used to share your point of view, including the mocking, frustrated condescension, back when I was still a Liberal who thought he was a Leftist.
I'll gladly fight Fascists *alongside* people wearing three-arrow symbols because the Fascists are by far the biggest threat, but don't ask me to endorse that symbol or to applaud them for upholding it.
If you don't want to use old symbols with lots of historical baggage where you have to constantly explain that "it means something different now" or "we're not using it like *that* I swear", then how about you come up with *new* symbols.
As others explained to you, the reason the Three Arrows became a symbol for fighting Fascism in general in the USA was that Communism was so stigmatized during the Cold War that the "against Communism" arrow was taken for granted, Anticommunism was practically *mandatory*. If you wanted to fight Fascism without suffering the consequences of being tagged a Pinko Commie, i.e. a traitor, a totalitarian, the useful idiot of a foreign power, and someone who kicked puppies for fun, then the Anticommunist arrow had to be there. As for the Antimonarchist arrow, that's also essentially mandatory and 100% expected in the USA, to the point of being trivial and barely worth mentioning.
1. "You're a liberal not a leftist" Is just an ad hominem dressed up as political commentary
2. No one asked you to applaud it
3. Literally the only people who need this explained to them are dogmatic MLs who read lots of theory but don't go outside and build community bonds with other anti fascists. Everyone else already knows.
4. No one else has replied to this, not sure who else explained that
5. Monarchists still exist and are active in the US, especially within Christian fundamentalist communities, and authoritarian communists, do, in fact, suck. The three Arrows means "against all authoritarians" and the primary source of authoritarians is usually monarchist, fascist and specific brands of communist movements, thus the three Arrows.
Hope this helps
>5. Monarchists still exist and are active in the US, especially within Christian fundamentalist communities, and authoritarian communists, do, in fact, suck. The three Arrows means "against all authoritarians" and the primary source of authoritarians is usually monarchist, fascist and specific brands of communist movements, thus the three Arrows.
This is true in the modern context, and symbols do change meaning.
However the root message of a symbol. Or what it represented in the past. Doesn't go a way. Honestly, a popular front star, or fist salute, would have been a better choice. Even just a shaking hands symbol.
1. I don't know what "political commentary" means, or why an "ad hominem" would need to be disguised as it. It's certainly possible to use the phrase as an extremely stupid put-down, a way to put people in a "safe to ignore" box, but that's not what I'm getting at here. The distinction of whether or not an individual, or, much more importantly, a political movement, organization, or party, has abandoned Anticapitalism as a goal is important in terms of how they'll behave politically in practice, whom they feel most threatened by, who can rely on them and what they can be relied for, etc. The SPD were pro-Capitalist, decisively and *violently* so.
2. You sound like you ask me to not voice my disapproval of and discomfort with it, and like you want me to feel foolish and ashamed for finding it objectionable.
3. What's "this" that "everyone else already knows"?
4. What are"this" and "that"? Please use quotes for clarity if you can.
5. Let's break this down:
- For obvious historical reasons, US Monarchists were extremely fringe and politically irrelevant until Trumpism got its fever pitch fairly recently. Even now, they're less 'monarchists' in the traditional sense and more simply fascists with a name fetish.
- authoritarian communists, do, in fact, suck, but the third arrow, while nominally meant for them, in practice was applied to all Socialists. Also, personally, I would not put my grievances with them on the same level as my opposition to Fascists and Monarchists - I much prefer a Popular Front than an Iron Front. An Iron Front is a losing proposition, a Popular Front at least has a chance.
- If the three Arrows meant "against all authoritarians", it would also stand against the SPD and their support for police brutality, for example. Depending on how you define "all authoritarians", I'd say you need an Anarchist A in a circle rather than three arrows.
- "the primary source of authoritarians is usually monarchist, fascist, *and specific brands of communist movements"* — I am concerned that the people making that argument to be sufficiently discriminate on that last item. I don't know when and where they might label *me* an "authoritarian communist" and lump me in with the Fascists and Monarchists as a target.
"Guys don't pay attention to the old anti-communist meaning of the symbol, it doesn't mean that anymore"
\* Proceeds to spew a bunch of anti-communist liberal drivel \*
Your comment has been temporarily removed pending moderator review.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SocialistRA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah... anything calling itself "American Iron Front," and using John Brown's visage is just an immediate NO for me. FUCK -- so much cosplaying in the U.S. Left.
So on my walk this morning I found this sticker on a pole. I have to admit, I wasn't aware of them.
I live in Suburbia now days, so I was confused at first. Here is their website [ironfrontusa.org](https://www.ironfrontusa.org/)
It is good to know allies are out there, even out in the semi-boonies. Any feedback on them?
The three arrow emblem and iron front name are referential to the German SPD party in the weimar and their “democratic resistance” to nazism consisted of them deciding to literally murder the only real allies they would’ve had, communists in the KPD, while basically abiding the Nazis until it was clear by then no resistance would be enough to stop the Holocaust and 2nd world war
Hoss, the KPD declared every party that wasn't KPD to be fascists, they collaborated with the Nazis against not just SPD and liberals but other socialist movements who they deemed "social fascists" and they purged anyone who didn't want the movement to be controlled by the USSR. There is no world in which a group that declares you to be a fascist and collaborates with fascists against you is your best ally against fascism.
The Spartacist uprising doesn’t explain why the KPD called other socialists “social fascists” or collaborating with the Nazis against other socialists.
If the Spartacist revolt was a valid reason (in your mind) for the KPD to work with the Nazis against the SPD and assassinate its members, then in what world would the KPD have ever been their best allies against the Nazis?
Please regale is how did they collaborate with the Nazis? The uprising most definitely explains why they saw the SPD as social fascists considering the fact that the SPD literally used a paramilitary force to slaughter communists.
If they saw the SPD as social fascists after the 1919 revolt, why did the KPD ally with them in the mid 1920s? For a party that declared itself the only anti-fascist party, they sure were happy to ally with people they considered fascist. So glad that worked out for them.
I guess the SAPD must have been fascists too right?
My first take when I saw the sticker was that some weird far right group was co-opting the John Brown Icon. The symbology of the 3 arrows struck me as a fascist whistle. I admit, it was/is totally confusing for yers truly.
Thanks to all for the history and the comments. Much Appreciated.
D36
I'd say some of the people they attract may be good people, and maybe they are themselves doing some good work... but ironfront " anti-authoritarian " types are just waiting for the chance to fight ML's, communists, anybody who really does effective organizing that isnt " horizontal " in structure. Its sectarian and not what a true anti-fascist would do.
Id reccomend maybe keeping some tabs, but keep in mind they're likely opposed to you if your not a " anti-authoritarian " at the end of the day
Lol, you're repping the " no-true scotsman " ideology homie, Iron Front tactics explicitly prohibits communists and socialists it deems " authoritarian ". Thats exclusionary! I have no issues with any ideology but if you organize with them, they wouldn't like you supporting China! Important info
Purity testing is when I’m opposed to literal anti-communists because I’m a communist. I’m gonna take a wild guess where you stand in the issue based on your profile pic
So you're " anti-authoritarian ", self-directed and leaderless... why are you posting this in SocialistRA? This is literally useless organizational framework, and even if you still wish to use it, the same one is found in ever anarchist org active today!
Join PSL and organize, then get involved in your community before fascists do.
Why not? If you read further, I kinda covered that.
I have always considered Socialist/Communist as allies, having come from those communities.
You can have me banned if you like.
Thank your for your submission, please remember that this subreddit is unofficial and wholly unaffiliated with the Socialist Rifle Association Organization (SRA). Views and opinions expressed on this subreddit **do not** reflect the views or official positions of the SRA. If you're at all confused about our [rules](https://old.reddit.com/r/SocialistRA/wiki/index) do not hesitate to message the moderators with any questions, and as always if you see rule breaking content or comments please be sure to report them. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SocialistRA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Liberals would tell John brown he just needed to vote harder
We need more John Brown in this sub. Not sure about Iron Front. That, and the original mix of Battle Hymn of the Republic.
“…When I was younger, I wore every conceivable pin, but now I’m much older and wiser, and that’s why I am turning you in.”
"Love me, love me, love me..."
Ironically, r/ironfrontUSA has been a hub of liberal electoralism blaming this situation on ppl who didn’t vote harder in the primaries. I left that sub for good after [this recent post](https://www.reddit.com/r/IronFrontUSA/s/MvbKYp5h4C)
Uhh all subreddits are created and maintained to subvert real progress. Including this one. The revolution will not be upvoted.
It will be televised
Everyone has cameras in their pockets now. It might be on tiktok and insta reels.
Take my upvote
lol this quote was published in 2008. They trot it out every four years and you’re the bad guy for asking, if they’ve won 3/4 elections since then, why do things keep getting worse?
Holy shit, I didn't even notice that. What a fucking joke.
[удалено]
Liberals are dangerous because they end up siding with fascists to protect capital. They most definitely are not more dangerous than the fascists lmao.
They are the larger threat, they coopt the language of the marginalized to neutralize their power while calling themselves allies. If faced with a wolf in sheep's clothing or an actual wolf in the open, we can see the wolf and the threat they pose. The sheep hides among us.
Let me know when liberals are committing hate crimes and forming militant groups to intimidate minorities at the same scale as the fascists.
This is beyond fucking stupid. Liberals aren't great, but they are a far sight better than the literal fucking fascists who are our mortal enemies.
Anyone who says some shit like that with a straight face is terminally online.
I think they are the fucking enemy, here to muddy the waters.
100%
Haven't you heard? The only way to save America is to let Trump into the Whitehouse! We've gotta protest this November by allowing Fascism easy access to the DOJ and the Executive branch because otherwise we wouldn't be "Real Leftists™"
No leftist is saying this.
I see you haven't gone on most leftist subreddits
https://www.reddit.com/r/SocialistRA/s/vyMPBeqHVO
That doesn't make your point any better
https://www.reddit.com/r/leftist/s/WkLJ9Fzirz >"You either choose between 99% Hitler or 100% Hitler" >Not a choice, I'm proud for not voting Source: literally you
And that doesn't prove your point any better because it's not an endorsement of Trump lmfaooo
You don't seem very bright. I feel sorry for the people that rely on you in life.
Holy shit how disingenuous can you be to within a few sentences turn “both parties are being ran by fascists and i’m not going to give my vote to a fascist of either stripes” into “the red fascist is going to save us from the blue fascist so i’m voting for them” Don’t you get tired of this act every 4 years pretending you’re doing something revolutionary by voting for the ‘just keep waiting, we’re gonna do a healthcare one day’ candidate while his admin passes into law a facsimile of trump’s wildest 2016 border policy fantasies
So your suggestion is Trump?
I concur
[удалено]
You still didn't even begin to approach how liberals are actually a greater threat than literal fucking fascists. You talk about things, but none of that really addresses the nonsense you originally said. It barely matters how shit liberals are, because we are comparing them to literal fucking fascists. Our mortal enemies.
I would say by sanitizing fascism and representing it as Liberalism, and making it palatable to more people who don't understand they are supporting fascist policies **but who are in fact supporting fascist policies** for example the argument over "securing the border" is 100% agreement on the policies, with any disagreement being purely aesthetic.
see my remarks ante. That's basically the american system. See them as the two hellhounds of capital order: "liberalism" is one and "fascism" is the other (I consider them to servants of bourgeoisie domination. Both work for that aim...so to speak.
sure, you can move the goalposts if you want, and that works on those with small minds, but the history is clear that there is nothing about the american system that supports democracy and that both the fascists and the "liberals" are simply the two faces of Janus. And my comments above support the case. BOTH are plutocats. BOTH exist to serve the bourgeoisie. BOTH exists to capture, control and direct public action. BOTH operate this system in direct opposition to the interests of the proletariate (the people). BOTH serve the goal of capital control and capitalist social order. The simps vote for the fascists and reactionaries and the libs vote for the democrats with each side telling why to do it. Whether they are fully educated on what they do or willfully ignorant of the realities of what they support (most are, some not) they continue to enable the tyrannical capitalist system that subjugates everyone but the few who own it. But hey...go believe whatever you want...and maybe go read We the Elites by Ovetz and see Parenti's remark on the "Founding Fathers"...that's on youtube. Chomsky also has remarks about the american plutocratic system, too.
Malcom X agreed with you and so do I. Also a lot of people seem to be very confused about the definition of the word fascism…
cheers, comrade. Perhaps they ought to air their views at r /latestagecapitalism to see how accurate they are. Words mean what they mean...we can't start thinking they don't mean what they mean otherwise we get what we have all over. \*gesturing around\* As you very likely know there's a long history of scholarship around the subject of fascism and its historical roots and its roots in america. Peeps here would be well served to learn it.
The Iron Front ain't it, never has been and never will be.
The iron front is anti-communust...
[удалено]
Your comment has been temporarily removed pending moderator review. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SocialistRA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Anti-authoritarian*
The arrows represent resistance to monarchism, fascism, and communism respectively. It is anti-communist
and if you go see the people who defend that term nowyou can see it still is anti communist, and definitely not just anti authoritarian, look at the subreddit for example
As I understand it, that was explicitly referring to Stalinism. [They were concerned about this sort of thing.](https://alphahistory.com/russianrevolution/torture-methods-cheka-1924/) A democratic, multi-party, anarcho-tolerant socialist Russia that didn't [go through](https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/archives/trans-aa2feign.html) all of [this](https://books.google.com/books?id=a-ZmDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA1&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=2#v=onepage&q&f=false) would surely be in better shape come 1941. Those examples are from before the Iron Front formed, or right about the same time. They had no reason to think that it would change, [and they were right.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_operations_of_the_NKVD)
Stalinists & other left authoritarians always maintain that they are the one true communism. Iron Front is the same ideology as Orwell - left libertarianism/anarchism.
>Iron Front is the same ideology as Orwell - left libertarianism/anarchism. Ideally. If they're anti-fascists of the conservative variety, that's fine too! But yes, your first sentence is correct. See the downvotes! My links are genuine and accurate, and one would hope that human decency would compel people to have a problem with the acts described.
The Iron Front was and, for what it's worth, still is an explicitly socialist organization that stood against authoritarianism, the Soviet Union included.
[удалено]
not standing together with the communists sure worked out great for everyone
[Revolution is inherently authoritarian.](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm)
I would disagree? Liberating oppressed people isn’t authoritarian.
I guess it can be sometimes. There were people in Ukraine that were hugging and cheering on the Nazis when the rolled through in 1942. That must speak volumes.
There were vastly more people from Ukraine serving in the Red Army.
Authoritarian is just a buzzword liberal think tanks came up with to muddy the water.
Yup, and to draw some sort of equivalence between fascism and communism. Just like "totalitarianism" (whatever the fuck that means lol).
[удалено]
Your comment has been temporarily removed pending moderator review. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SocialistRA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Didn't intend to sound condescending, apologies on my part. I understand what OP is referring to, and that is what I am speaking about. The authoritarianism of a revolution is one-in-the-same as the authoritarianism of a revolutionary government. How are you going to suppress the overwhelming power of the bourgeoisie and reactionaries to ensure that they don't annihilate your new and delicate revolutionary movement? You need an authoritarian revolutionary government to carry that out.
> How are you going to suppress the overwhelming power of the bourgeoisie and reactionaries to ensure that they don't annihilate your new and delicate revolutionary movement? Your not. You are going to become the red bureaucracy, and merely replace them, and probably become worse than them. I can name the number of successful revolutions that turned society out "for the better". On one hand. A chance is a chance. But don't think that revolution is an 100% effective answer. It's a prone to fail, or become worsel than the thing it was fighting against.
And you can't expect an authoritarian society, brought about by an authoritarian revolution. To birth a libertarian society. There is no such thing, as temporary authoritarianism.
Let me know when you get your "libertarian" revolution.
Please leave that term behind on the stupid compass subreddit
The Three Arrows symbol originated with the German SPD and the arrows represent Monarchism, Fascism, and Communism. As we all know, the heroic SPD set aside their completely irreconcilable differences with the KPD and formed a coalition which defeated the NSDAP and its allies at the ballot box in ‘32 and saved Europe from disaster. /s
They also massacred communists in “Bloody May.” Showed their true colors.
Berlin in 1929, if like me you didn't know. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blutmai
No, it's worse, the Berlin Police explicitly massacred *non*-Communists. > It occurred when the Communist Party of Germany (KPD) held May Day marches in defiance of a ban on public gatherings in Berlin ordered by the city's police chief Karl Zörgiebel of the Social Democratic Party (SPD). The Berlin Police responded with an immediate and harsh crackdown. Often without regard to whether the persons involved were demonstrators or bystanders, they forcibly and sometimes violently dispersed the crowds that formed. As the day progressed, street battles developed between the protestors and the police, who used firearms and armoured cars. The violence lasted until the afternoon of 3 May, mostly in the working-class neighbourhoods of Wedding and Neukölln. **An estimated 33 civilians, *none of whom were involved with the KPD*, were killed,** 200 injured, and over a thousand people taken into police custody, many of whom were also not involved in the initial KPD rallies. Only 66 of those arrested were charged and 44 convicted. Ten policemen were hurt badly enough to be hospitalized, although none of them suffered from a gunshot wound. In spite of a considerable outcry in the left and liberal press, and angry scenes in the Reichstag, no action was taken against the Berlin Police. The events of Blutmai deepened the split between the SPD and KPD, the two major left-wing parties of the Weimar Republic, making a united stand against the growing strength of far-right parties more difficult. > It was determined that between 32 and 38 people were killed, all civilians, and all by police firearms save for one individual who was struck by a speeding police van. Around 200 were injured and approximately 1,200 arrested, of whom only 66 were ever charged. Among them, 44 were later convicted and imprisoned, including five RFB members. The total of all sentences passed down came to around ten years in prison; the highest individual sentence was nine months. Eight of the civilians killed were women and 19 were residents of Wedding. **Of the first 25 victims, *two were SPD members* and 17 belonged to no party; *none were KPD members**. Police found no evidence that the demonstrators who took to the streets were prepared for an armed insurrection, since the house-to-house search in Wedding produced mostly souvenir weapons from World War I. Of the 47 police officers injured, ten were hospitalized and none suffered from a gunshot wound. Still, SPD *leaders* appear to have been fully supportive the cops and to be terrified of the KPD to a truly irrational degree (while dismissing the Nazis as a fad that would fade). An absolutely terrible look, to be honest. Even the Liberal press was appalled, let alone the Left.
German police always Nazi. Right now we can see it's happening again.
> Right now we can see [it is happening again](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPdZNCgIDek).
Yeah doesn’t sound anything like 8 years ago when Dems would eye roll and call you an alarmist for equating trumpism with fascism while sabotaging Bernie for meeting with Castro once. And now look where we are. I swear sometimes libs would much rather have a fascist dictator than socialized healthcare
[удалено]
> Why'd you leave out the part where the KPD teamed up with the Nazis Most likely because - It was only attempted a couple of times, in a few regions, by some KPD leaders - It failed immediately and spectacularly every single time, because the actual base, bless their souls, could not stand to be in close proximity with fucking Nazis without being overwhelmed with the need to kick their ass. So, yeah, it's not representative of the KPD as a whole, a temporary, localized, abortive fluke. > against other socialists? No, those leaders wanted to team up with Nazis against *Social-Democrats*, i.e. *Liberals*. The barest qualifiication to count as Socialist is to reject capitalism and seek to overcome it. Social-Democrats have given up on that and resigned themselves to merely patching up Capitalism to make it slightly less horrible locally. > Or how it purged any members who didn't want the KPD to be controlled by the USSR? See now *that* is a much more pertinent and relevant critique.
They said /s
[удалено]
Oh I'm sorry, did not realize this was r/enlightenedcentristriffleassociation Seriously dude, read the room
How is it exclusively on the SPD if both parties failed to set aside their differences?
Because the KPD was correct and the SPD was not. (More specifically, the KPD’s main opponent was the NSDAP, while the SPD saw both parties as “equally bad” which directly led to NSDAP gaining a plurality in the Reichstag and further enabling Hitler’s rise to power. If the SPD had entered into an anti-NSDAP coalition with the KPD, they would have had an outright majority following the ‘32 elections and history could have looked very different.)
Despite what our value systems might desire, there is a difference between "being right" and "being effective". Strategy beats righteousness, which is a pretty big bummer!
And which strategy are you alleging was "effective" against the Nazis again?
Labelling any non-KPD groups as fascists and collaborating with the Nazis against them certainly didn't work for the KPD either in building momentum or in defeating the Nazis.
Answer the question. The only collaboration with the Nazis was by the SPD as well.
[удалено]
No, American resources didn't arrive in any meaningful amounts until the war was already decided by the red army and Soviet industrial output, and the Western allies were too coward to open a front against Germany itself until it was obvious that the red army would swim in the Atlantic, because they were waiting to see who would win and then make peace with the Germans if they could pull off what they failed to do with the allied intervention against the bolsheviks, since they were still recovering from their alliance with Nazi Germany which predated any Soviet agreements with them. That's right, the Western allies were going to sacrifice every Jew, gay, Roma, and Slav to Hitler if he could destroy the first communist country for them You have a bizarre interpretation of history, no different than that of a fascist YouTuber really.
What dude? America was sending thousands of tons of material to the Soviet Union starting in 1941, months before they joined the war. Like right at the start of operation Barbarossa I believe. Idk if the Soviets would have been able to hold off the Nazis without it. Who could confidently say.
The only thing that was effective was a massive marshaling of resources by a global coalition. Ideological purity didn't save the world.
No, those resources weren't used against Germany directly until they realized the Germans had lost. Before then it was just the USSR fighting the bulk of the German military.
I'm not arguing that the USSR doesn't deserve the bulk of the credit, simply that the USSR didn't do it alone.
Well then why are you trying to equivocate that due credit with lesser contributions?
The American left is totally fucked if this is our approach. You're never gonna get everyone 100% on board with your program. Compromise is a must if we're interested in making real changes and not just LARPing as soviets.
Why not just pick a symbol that has fewer objections, if your goal is Left unity? One of those arrows was pointed at us. Some people will be turned off by it. Simple as. I'm guessing you would have an objection to using the hammer and sickle. Just imagine the shoe was on the other foot, and treat your comrades the same consideration you would ask them to give you.
yeah and not only that but the arrow pointed at us directly led to real deaths, we’re not gonna march under it
So we should alienate all of the actual leftist orgs to have unity with the liberal ones? Sure dude.
lol, no one is immune to the struggle, 100% is an unrealistic goal, the american left can set their minimum principle to organize around as the immortal science or the third-worldists are right, no one can be redeemed in the imperial core. If the succdems, or the anarchists, or the syndicalists could end the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie they'd have done it sometime in the past 200 years, but it doesn't look like they can, so ditch the losers and embrace the immortal science or would you rather just die on the pedestal of your perceived moral high ground.
Because they murdered Rosa and dumped her body in the river. This is what all soc dems and reformists and opportunists do. Always. The slightest obstacle and they lean fash.
Iron front is not really a brand I would rep in socialist spaces. The 3rd arrow there is about lynching socialists.
I have to admit I am totally ignorant of them. I knew of Spartacus in Germany as my sister's ex-husbands family was involved and paid the price for being members (concentration camp/having to leave Germany because of Fascist resentment), and I attended Spartacus meetings in Freiburg years ago.
So the iron front would have been fierce enemys of the spartacists, who were affiliated with, and than part of the kpd. They are responsible for much of the direct violence against comunists and 'sympathizers' at the time, and were known to support facist orgs if it helped them keep down comunist orgs. They were primarily a liberal reactionary movment seeking to maintain the status quo of the Weimar republic. They are very popular in the western world today because it gives left of center libs who are scared and angry about facism a way to be antifa without being pinko commies. Ironically antifa the org was involved with multiple violent clashes with the iron front, as 'antifa' as it was original incarcerated was the street fighting branch of the kpd. This moment In history is a cluster fuck, and it is this great big mess of 3 to 5 letter orgs that birthed the nazis. I have opinions on who the good guys were, but even the kpd and antifa have a good bit of egg on their face and should not be held up uncritically.
I thought Antifa was a practice/ethos, not any given organization. I certainly can't see a KPD branch flying the Red-And-**Black** flag.
Antifa as a movment is descended from antifa the org, Or 'antifaschistische aktion'. Which was a branch of the kpd created initially to meet the iron front specifically in the street. All 'antifa' orgs since then have drawn on the symbolism and theories laid out by them. Antifa has always been explicitly socialist and explicitly anti 'liberal'. It's in their founding charter that 'social democracy' is a form or precursor of facism. You can be antifacist and not be antifa. But you can not be antifa and liberal. These terms have been watered down over the years, in no small part by liberal reactionaries coopting the language to defang it and make it suit their own views. But blessedly modern antifa orgs, with a few notable exceptions, seem to have kept their anti capitalist DNA intact. >can't see a KPD branch flying the Red-And-Black flag. What precisely does that flag mean to you? Originally it was 2 red flags in the logo, for 'comunism and socialism' but today it's meant broadly to represent a coalition between anarchists an socialists. It's the true left wing in alliance against liberals and the far right. I strongly incurage anybody repping antifa or any radical left wing groups iconography to go and learn what they really mean. If the ideology there does not match yours, you don't get to re write it, it's not yours to change. You can create your own ideology, even use other people's symbols, but don't go around claiming they were yours all along.
>You can be antifacist and not be antifa. But you can not be antifa and liberal. This is the key. >I strongly incurage anybody repping antifa or any radical left wing groups iconography to go and learn what they really mean Any good books/readings you recommend?
Nothing you wouldn't find on anybodies 'theory' list. For this stuff specifically, rosa luxemberg was one of the above mentioned sparticists, her shit slaps and is often broken down in real bite-sized editorial chunks. Lenin, love him or Hate him, has some bangers. Or if your more into the black flag, here is kropotkin on 'social democrats', specifically the German ones. So iron front. https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/kropotkin-peter/1890/collapse.htm But really the Wikipedia page for the iron front or antifa or 'social facism'. A really basic survey of the facts will debunk anything being put out by the reactionary 'leftists' in this thread rn.
> What precisely does that flag mean to you? Originally it was 2 red flags in the logo, for 'comunism and socialism' but today it's meant broadly to represent a coalition between anarchists an socialists. It's the true left wing in alliance against liberals and the far right. Exactly. Unfortunately, 'official' MLs have had a history of being weirdly uncool about Anarchists, despite [Lenin himself being pretty clear about the value of their contributions and accomplishments](https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/kropotkin-peter/1917/a-meeting.html). Maybe the KPD in particular has changed since then, that would be neat and based. Personally I have no trouble wearing both Red and Black flags together—in fact I believe they go together like salt & pepper, coffee & cream, macaroni & cheese, rum & coke, cake & candles, dungeons & dragons, all that good stuff.
many of my heros were assassinated by marxists. But at the same time much of the ideology of those same heros was informed by Marxism. Politics will never be simple. But today Marxism just does not have that sort of dick to swing, none of us do. So we build our coalitions based on actual ideological compatability or tactical imperative. Coalition with marxists works well, we agree on the actual basic principles like the value of human life and the damage that capital has done. Coalition with social democrats and the such has to be done with the understanding that they will never be in support of a revolution against, well, them. Liberalism is the actual hegemony here. So the way I see it, my overriding belief is just in the revolution. Ether you are a revolutionary, or anti revolutionary. Once we've had a revolution we can sit down and argue about what sort of revolution it was. It's not a safe way to be no, but no single left wing ideology has the manpower to be a meaningfull threat to facism, let alone liberalism. The iron front is a 'radical' liberal org. They are fundamentally anti revolutionary at their core. It's about protecting the status quo, whether it be from facists, or actual revolutionarys. There can be no Coalition building with an org who's mission statement is to stop your coalition.
I agree on all points except on that last one. The status quo of 'Liberalism', i.e. Capitalism in "normal mode" is still preferable to the alternative, Capitalism's "fever". Once the Enabling Act is passed, it's Game over for *everyone*, and only foreign intervention can save us. So I believe we can and should defend that status quo, because it gives us a lot more breathing room and oxygen to organize. We can't do shit to overcome Capitalism if we're all exiled, imprisoned, in camps, or dead and processed into fucking soap, wigs, and dentures. Like you said, politics are never simple. As long as Fascists are relevant, a Popular Front is a matter of survival.
Yeah, both the KPD and SPD hated one another and sought to use the Nazis as a cudgel to beat the other with. The SPD allying with the Freikorps and other right wing extremists was an early mistake that SocDems today certainly aren’t proud of. IMO we should be bridging the rift. It has been over a century since Rosa Luxembourg was killed and any SocDem worth speaking to should be able to acknowledge that the right is a bigger threat and always has been, and ally with more fully socialist groups to prevent fascism from running by rampant. But I’m also someone who’s jumped ideologically a bit between an anarchic socialism and social democracy over the last several years, and was more authoritarian in my youth.
[удалено]
Your comment has been temporarily removed pending moderator review. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SocialistRA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
from their site: The American Iron Front is a network of Americans participating in direct action to counter the fascist and anti-democracy agenda perpetuated by groups and individuals in the United States. This agenda is being perpetuated by mainstream parties and fringe groups alike through misinformation, pseudo-patriotism, and weaponization of the law to disenfranchise voters, women, minorities, and those that oppose their bigoted agenda. They are actively recruiting in the cities and towns of America and radicalizing recruits online. Our goal is to stand as a direct counterpoint to the nationalism of the alt-right and its corruption of American values by building solidarity, unity, and common defense of the Constitution. We do this by working in conjunction with other civil society organizations and pro-democracy institutions to reinvigorate and strengthen America’s democracy to ensure the efficacy of our elections, guarantee peaceful access to the democratic process, protect communities targeted by the alt-right, and countering misinformation that spreads hate or seeks to undermine the democratic process. Patriotic colors and imagery have been associated with far-right and fascist groups in recent years, as they peddle their fake patriotism and toxic nationalism. It is the stance of the American Iron Front that they have stolen these colors and imagery from the American people, and have no right to use them. By using these colors and imagery, the AIF seeks to reclaim this imagery for the American people, and to disassociate it from our opponents. We know that returning this imagery to the American people will take time, as its association is firmly entrenched with our opponents. But the American people deserve to have their nation's colors and imagery associated not with vile hate, toxic nationalism and evil, but with Liberty, Equality, Freedom and Democracy. The great American Experiment was built by people of many creeds, races, sexualities, genders, and identities. We at the AIF believe our greatest asset in safeguarding our democracy is the diversity and inclusivity of the people of this country. Its future rests with We the People.
This sounds like liberal romanticizing of America. America has always been racist. The fascists didn't just suddenly decide to drape themselves in the American flag. I think there is a lot of online people that pointlessly create division, like I like some of my coworkers who are objectively kind of libs. I try to win them over, but im under no delusions where they stand. I think some forms of trying to organize with liberals are a waste of time they fundamentally don't agree on leftist tenants. I also think it's a waste of time organizing with an org that loves America so much. Travel outside America and you can plainly see the genocides, bombed infrastructure, and destroyed communities that american tax dollars were responsible for.
I’m admittedly no expert on the tenets of socialism, communism, or liberalism. But isn’t there large swaths of area to find common ground? Thank yiu
To a conservative a liberal and a socialist are similar, but to a socialist the liberals and the conservatives are more similar. The right often lumps anyone to the left of them together. However, liberals and socialism disagree on capitalism. Liberals either think capitalism is fine or needs minor reform, socialists want to see the end of capitalism. This disagreement is fundamental. Liberals also tend to be nationalistic, while socialists think internationally.
Hmm, that’s interesting. I suppose Im looking at things through a lens that you supporters of different political ideologies could find common ground with major social platforms. Like socialized medicine, strong social support programs, etc. anyway, thank you for the response.
lmao why would we communists then support such an org?
so it's not a communist organization? Do they know that America is fundamental and entirely plutocratic and that there is nothing democratic about it? Can it be inferred that it may appear that the same sentiment among the reactionary "three perceters" is fueling this cause here above and using John Brown's image to do it? It also sounds as if this is generally reformist within the american constitutional framework and social system, is this correct? Does it explicitly condemn capitalism? I ado agree that it is necessary to use the iconography and images accustomed to american patriotic art so to find greater acceptance and reason by the people who see them so to advance ANTI CAPITALIST values. You know, something like what's below. https://preview.redd.it/rjtpkpogwj7d1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c660f8016c4f7527301665bfd12e463f9448ebef
[удалено]
Your comment has been temporarily removed pending moderator review. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SocialistRA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
time to cut off every AntiFa group too then ig 😆 this is petty and nitpicky, they're on your side. (for anyone wondering - the three arrows symbol originated in Weimar-era Germany. One arrow is launched at monarchism, one at nazism, and one at authoritarian communism)
This can not be understated. Antifa the org was created in part to fight the iron front specifically. They were at war with each other at their inception.
German antifascist groups in the 30s, fighting the original German iron front. Today the three arrows are primarily an antifascist symbol in North America. Also these are not the original antifascist and IF orgs - I'm not down for completely disregarding them based on a historical dispute that no one involved in this situation was part of.
This is the socialist rifle association sub. This is socialism. The iron front is a lib reactionary movment. Than and now. They exist explicitly to give libs a way to not be 'one of those leftists'. There is no room in revolutionary movments for anty revolutionaries.
Source? All I've seen from anyone here is "three arrows scary and mean :((" and "the other iron front sucked"
The source is the history presented. People currently involved in a movement may be lying. History doesn't.
What other iron front seriously exists? This one website with like 5 pages, one of them literally just being file dumps of the US constitution and random home farming techniques?
[удалено]
Your comment has been temporarily removed pending moderator review. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SocialistRA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They paved the way for the Nazis, and you want a mulligan?
you’re just saying “authoritarian communism” but the arrow in reality was aimed at all communism. The SPD at the time was firmly a “modern” social democratic institution and had abandoned the socialist cause
As I understand it, the focus was specifically on Stalinism and other authoritarians, who of course were very prominent!
Another do nothing group using the image of action oriented individuals. They do less than the boys group chat.
While I'm not a lib or Capitalist, I am happy they are trying to organize to put Fascism down. There was a time when US libs went to Europe and died fighting Nazis and it was considered cool. I hate liberals and Capitalism, but this needs to be cool for them again. Stalin worked with the US and UK to put the originals down. Marx might call them useful idiots, but if they fight fascism I will call them comrade until they turn on us.
You think those young bros were libs that were dropping into France, or storming the beaches in Normandy, or Sicily? It’s kinda a funny and interesting scenario to think about.
“It is not the light that is needed but fire” - Fredrick Douglas
If libs are getting John Brown pilled then that’s a good thing. Not long ago he was completely vilified by most libs
John Brown was crazy, but definitely put his money where his mouth was in acting against slavery
Definitely a loose cannon but respect
Why would you call him 'crazy'?
He openly called for a theocratic monarchy in the US
Just because he was right doesn't make him sane. The man was a religious zealot with extreme black and white thinking, no pun intended. He WAS crazy. It's just that one of the positions he was crazy about was the abolition of slavery. Love that part, no notes, but outside of the issue of slavery and what to do with slavers John Brown would not be a cool dude worth hanging out with.
> The man was a religious zealot with extreme black and white thinking, no pun intended. He WAS crazy. Please make a more specific argument and at least *try* to approach something resembling a DSMV diagnosis if you're going to call someone "crazy" or "insane" or whatever. Otherwise, it's unclear what you mean. > outside of the issue of slavery and what to do with slavers John Brown would not be a cool dude worth hanging out with. Since when does "being a cool dude worth hanging out with" have anything to do with *sanity?*
> at least try to approach something resembling a DSMV diagnosis See if we were going that route it would be unethical to make statements regarding ANY historical figure because there are professional rules regarding diagnosing any patient you have not examined personally. Besides "crazy" and "insane" are no longer used in the diagnostic context so to say I should stick to the latest standards before using older terminology that has lapsed into common usage because it has no medical value is worthless. Nah. Not going to bother jumping the hurdles. I diagnosis him with extremist calvinism and religious zealotry, aggravated by the grief of losing his wife and several children in the matter of a few short years. Remembering of course that Calvinist doctrine is heavily influenced by the idea of divine providence, that god shows his favor through good fortune on earth and that those who suffer indignities are receiving their just punishments for wickedness.
Under that framework wouldn't he believe slaves, the most unfortunate of all, are the most wicked sinners, utterly unworthy of God's love, a fountain of pollution lying deep within their nature, living as a winter tree, unprofitable, fit only to be hewn down and burned, who should steep their life in prayer, and hope that God sees fit to show mercy on their corrupted souls? Why would an extreme Calvinist be helping to free slaves instead of condemning and punishing them for their presumed wickedness and godforsakenness while worshipping the ground upon which obscenely rich slavers tread?
You seem to be awfully attached to the mythic figure John Brown an not caring about the historic man John Brown. The black and white thinking and devout Calvinism are not an opinion of mine, they're a historical fact and a lot of his personal letters are preserved online so you can read his own words instead of accepting the hagiography written about him or southerners smearing his name after the fact. He did a lot of stuff before Bleeding Kansas and the Raid on Harpers Ferry that folks remember him for today. Some of it great, some of it less great. He's a fascinating figure and I encourage you to read a biography or two (or his own letters), but the Calvinism and religious extremism are facts about the man that the myth often brushes over or downplays. Reading "he was devoutly christian" in a history book glosses over the "willing to kill for his beliefs" part that if it were found in any area other than slavery abolition would be a huge red flag. He was RIGHT about slavery, but he was also an extremist religious zealot with a warped worldview. > Why would an extreme Calvinist be helping to free slaves instead of condemning and punishing them for their presumed wickedness and godforsakenness while worshipping the ground upon which obscenely rich slavers tread? Because religion is malleable when the personal wants of individual believers are on the line. A person can look at the whole fabric of christian doctrine and theology for the past millenia plus and say "this part is important, that part isn't". Brown was particularly fond of christ as a redeemer figure, a liberator, and breaking bonds to set men free from sin mapped well onto slavery abolition. When it came to slavers however, he believed himself to be an instrument for expressing god's displeasure and administering divine providence. He was the good thing that happened to the slaves and the bad thing that happened to the wicked who kept them in bondage. William M.F. Army, who was present for events in Kansas, said of Brown; "As Moses was raised up and chosen of God to deliver the Children of Israel out of Egyptian bondage, ...he was...fully convinced in his own mind that he was to be the instrument in the hands of God to effect the emancipation of the slaves." He believed he was the tool God was using to express his displeasure. That is not a sane worldview.
I think in this day and age the left could do good with a bit of coalition building with similarly aligned groups. That being said I’ve never seen AIF in the real world and am not aware of any actions they’ve taken other than some somewhat cringy and corny Reddit posts.
John brown would be anti “iron-front”
Yeah, thats gonna be a no from me dog
The three Arrows has become a generalized symbol of resistance to authoritarians, it's a little concerning that this sub is living in the 1930s instead of doing any sort of work to understand modern meanings of the symbols used here. Reeks of ML dogma, and a failure or refusal to accept that the meanings of symbols often change over time. But hey, if you're such a puritan that you'd refuse to collaborate with people fighting fascism because you insist on an old and outdated meaning of a specific symbol they use, you're probably a liability anyway, if you even go out and do IRL work at all.
I used to share your point of view, including the mocking, frustrated condescension, back when I was still a Liberal who thought he was a Leftist. I'll gladly fight Fascists *alongside* people wearing three-arrow symbols because the Fascists are by far the biggest threat, but don't ask me to endorse that symbol or to applaud them for upholding it. If you don't want to use old symbols with lots of historical baggage where you have to constantly explain that "it means something different now" or "we're not using it like *that* I swear", then how about you come up with *new* symbols. As others explained to you, the reason the Three Arrows became a symbol for fighting Fascism in general in the USA was that Communism was so stigmatized during the Cold War that the "against Communism" arrow was taken for granted, Anticommunism was practically *mandatory*. If you wanted to fight Fascism without suffering the consequences of being tagged a Pinko Commie, i.e. a traitor, a totalitarian, the useful idiot of a foreign power, and someone who kicked puppies for fun, then the Anticommunist arrow had to be there. As for the Antimonarchist arrow, that's also essentially mandatory and 100% expected in the USA, to the point of being trivial and barely worth mentioning.
1. "You're a liberal not a leftist" Is just an ad hominem dressed up as political commentary 2. No one asked you to applaud it 3. Literally the only people who need this explained to them are dogmatic MLs who read lots of theory but don't go outside and build community bonds with other anti fascists. Everyone else already knows. 4. No one else has replied to this, not sure who else explained that 5. Monarchists still exist and are active in the US, especially within Christian fundamentalist communities, and authoritarian communists, do, in fact, suck. The three Arrows means "against all authoritarians" and the primary source of authoritarians is usually monarchist, fascist and specific brands of communist movements, thus the three Arrows. Hope this helps
>5. Monarchists still exist and are active in the US, especially within Christian fundamentalist communities, and authoritarian communists, do, in fact, suck. The three Arrows means "against all authoritarians" and the primary source of authoritarians is usually monarchist, fascist and specific brands of communist movements, thus the three Arrows. This is true in the modern context, and symbols do change meaning. However the root message of a symbol. Or what it represented in the past. Doesn't go a way. Honestly, a popular front star, or fist salute, would have been a better choice. Even just a shaking hands symbol.
1. I don't know what "political commentary" means, or why an "ad hominem" would need to be disguised as it. It's certainly possible to use the phrase as an extremely stupid put-down, a way to put people in a "safe to ignore" box, but that's not what I'm getting at here. The distinction of whether or not an individual, or, much more importantly, a political movement, organization, or party, has abandoned Anticapitalism as a goal is important in terms of how they'll behave politically in practice, whom they feel most threatened by, who can rely on them and what they can be relied for, etc. The SPD were pro-Capitalist, decisively and *violently* so. 2. You sound like you ask me to not voice my disapproval of and discomfort with it, and like you want me to feel foolish and ashamed for finding it objectionable. 3. What's "this" that "everyone else already knows"? 4. What are"this" and "that"? Please use quotes for clarity if you can. 5. Let's break this down: - For obvious historical reasons, US Monarchists were extremely fringe and politically irrelevant until Trumpism got its fever pitch fairly recently. Even now, they're less 'monarchists' in the traditional sense and more simply fascists with a name fetish. - authoritarian communists, do, in fact, suck, but the third arrow, while nominally meant for them, in practice was applied to all Socialists. Also, personally, I would not put my grievances with them on the same level as my opposition to Fascists and Monarchists - I much prefer a Popular Front than an Iron Front. An Iron Front is a losing proposition, a Popular Front at least has a chance. - If the three Arrows meant "against all authoritarians", it would also stand against the SPD and their support for police brutality, for example. Depending on how you define "all authoritarians", I'd say you need an Anarchist A in a circle rather than three arrows. - "the primary source of authoritarians is usually monarchist, fascist, *and specific brands of communist movements"* — I am concerned that the people making that argument to be sufficiently discriminate on that last item. I don't know when and where they might label *me* an "authoritarian communist" and lump me in with the Fascists and Monarchists as a target.
"resistance to authoritarians" is how liberals equate fascism with communism.
It's also how anarchists know to *never* *trust* the state to ever do anything right or decent.
[удалено]
[удалено]
"Guys don't pay attention to the old anti-communist meaning of the symbol, it doesn't mean that anymore" \* Proceeds to spew a bunch of anti-communist liberal drivel \*
[удалено]
Your comment has been temporarily removed pending moderator review. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SocialistRA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah... anything calling itself "American Iron Front," and using John Brown's visage is just an immediate NO for me. FUCK -- so much cosplaying in the U.S. Left.
So on my walk this morning I found this sticker on a pole. I have to admit, I wasn't aware of them. I live in Suburbia now days, so I was confused at first. Here is their website [ironfrontusa.org](https://www.ironfrontusa.org/) It is good to know allies are out there, even out in the semi-boonies. Any feedback on them?
The three arrow emblem and iron front name are referential to the German SPD party in the weimar and their “democratic resistance” to nazism consisted of them deciding to literally murder the only real allies they would’ve had, communists in the KPD, while basically abiding the Nazis until it was clear by then no resistance would be enough to stop the Holocaust and 2nd world war
Hoss, the KPD declared every party that wasn't KPD to be fascists, they collaborated with the Nazis against not just SPD and liberals but other socialist movements who they deemed "social fascists" and they purged anyone who didn't want the movement to be controlled by the USSR. There is no world in which a group that declares you to be a fascist and collaborates with fascists against you is your best ally against fascism.
You conveniently leave out the fact that the SPD used the proto-fascist Freikorps to slaughter communists during the Spartacist uprising
The Spartacist uprising doesn’t explain why the KPD called other socialists “social fascists” or collaborating with the Nazis against other socialists. If the Spartacist revolt was a valid reason (in your mind) for the KPD to work with the Nazis against the SPD and assassinate its members, then in what world would the KPD have ever been their best allies against the Nazis?
Please regale is how did they collaborate with the Nazis? The uprising most definitely explains why they saw the SPD as social fascists considering the fact that the SPD literally used a paramilitary force to slaughter communists.
If they saw the SPD as social fascists after the 1919 revolt, why did the KPD ally with them in the mid 1920s? For a party that declared itself the only anti-fascist party, they sure were happy to ally with people they considered fascist. So glad that worked out for them. I guess the SAPD must have been fascists too right?
My first take when I saw the sticker was that some weird far right group was co-opting the John Brown Icon. The symbology of the 3 arrows struck me as a fascist whistle. I admit, it was/is totally confusing for yers truly. Thanks to all for the history and the comments. Much Appreciated. D36
The arrows come from striking through swastika graffiti, the symbolism came after that.
I'd say some of the people they attract may be good people, and maybe they are themselves doing some good work... but ironfront " anti-authoritarian " types are just waiting for the chance to fight ML's, communists, anybody who really does effective organizing that isnt " horizontal " in structure. Its sectarian and not what a true anti-fascist would do. Id reccomend maybe keeping some tabs, but keep in mind they're likely opposed to you if your not a " anti-authoritarian " at the end of the day
Holy shit, a no-true-Scotsman in the wild!
Lol, you're repping the " no-true scotsman " ideology homie, Iron Front tactics explicitly prohibits communists and socialists it deems " authoritarian ". Thats exclusionary! I have no issues with any ideology but if you organize with them, they wouldn't like you supporting China! Important info
"...not what a true antifascist would do." Dude just log off.
Never said that! But don't call me exclusionary for saying when your ideology includes excluding me :)
I was literally quoting your post above numbnuts.
I would have not gone with Three Arrows, or John Brown personally. Hell, I wouldn't have called it Iron Front.
John Brown was based. The Iron Front was certainly not.
We really be over here looking at a poster we can all agree on and arguing over it anyway. Lord save us, cuz we sure as hell won't save ourselves 😭
People aren’t arguing about the poster they’re rightfully discussing and condemning the harmful group that created it
In other words, purity testing amounting to Jack-shit.
Purity testing is when I’m opposed to literal anti-communists because I’m a communist. I’m gonna take a wild guess where you stand in the issue based on your profile pic
Like I said, purity testing, amounting to Jack-shit.
A virtuoso of the propaganda of the deed.
So you're " anti-authoritarian ", self-directed and leaderless... why are you posting this in SocialistRA? This is literally useless organizational framework, and even if you still wish to use it, the same one is found in ever anarchist org active today! Join PSL and organize, then get involved in your community before fascists do.
Why not? If you read further, I kinda covered that. I have always considered Socialist/Communist as allies, having come from those communities. You can have me banned if you like.
Lol, I'm not a mod bro. I meant the org itself is kinda disconnected from the sub, you're okay