You're viewing part of a thread.
Yes, the Spanish anarchists were unsuccessful because Stalin
Yes. That's why, tankie. And no... they didn't lose because they decided not to take orders from your outrageously incompetent and cynical two-faced realpolitking fetish object Stalin.
Okay?
Okay so how much did you actually study the Spanish civil war because this comes off as really ignorant? Like, what books have you read on the subject that have led you to the conclusion that Stalin was controlling all of the Spanish Republicans except for the anarchists? You seem to deify Stalin much more than me, who generally considers him a very flawed leader who was a better revolutionary, but doesn't consider him some octopus with his tentacles in literally everything.
I'm not the one demonstrating weaponized ignorance on the subject, tankie - you are.
But hey... bring it on.
But hey… bring it on.
It is a self dunk to get combative when someone asks you what books you've read on a subject you're opining about
Why would I compare books with you, tankie? You've already claimed to have read things you so obviously haven't.
Hey, just cause I disagree with their analysis doesn't mean I haven't read it.
For example, forming a secret vanguard party isn't the way to anarchism, and the Kronstadt rebellion wasn't the pinnacle of revolution, even though the Soviets fucked up their response to it.
And you would know what I'm referring to if you've read some of their main works.
forming a secret vanguard party isn’t the way to anarchism
Gee, you needed a book to tell you why nobody except your ilk gives a flying fuck about your precious vanguardism, eh? Most people don't need a book to see the obvious.
Well, except bakunin, who did the secret vanguard party thing. That is what I'm referring to, which you would know if you knew anything about bakunin or his writings. And you said tankies haven't read enough Goldman or Bakunin.
And you're also accusing me of being a tankie, when I do not uncritically support any AES.