201
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2026
201 points (98.6% liked)
Memes
54380 readers
559 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
I don't know why you're continuing to double and triple-down. We agree that Marx believed Russia could have sidestepped capitalist development and gone straight from feudalism to the communalist movement to socialism to communism. However, he did not think this was more likely than revolution in western Europe. He simply saw it as it was, a great but likely squandered opportinity.
In other words, if Marx believed there was a 75% chance the revolution would first come to western Europe, and a 25% chance it would come to Russia, it is correct to say that he believed it would most likely come first to western Europe. It is, therefore, equally incorrect to say that he believed it could only happen in western Europe, as you allege I say (but I have disproven this), as it would be to say that Marx believed it would happen in Russia first (as you appear to be saying).
Because you keep repeating something which is not true.
This is directly contradicted by his letters and actions. He and Engels were directly corresponding with Russian revolutionaries, and literally surmised a Russian revolution could in fact be the first to set off a world revolution and was actively interested in aiding it. You're just refusing to take in new information.
Marx thought Russia had a unique opportunity to sidestep capitalist development, and kick off revolution in the west. He made it clear that if conditions continued as they had, however, that this opportunity would never materialize. I've read Capital and its post-scripts, I've read his letters to Russian revolutionaries. I used to be an anarchist, and these get thrown around all the time to make it seem like Marx was supportive of anarchism at the end of his life (which he wasn't). This isn't new information to me, you're just confusing Marx saying Russia had a great opportunity to skip capitalism with Marx saying he thought Russia would in fact do so.
Marx did not merely say they had an opportunity in the abstract, he was directly involved with them and actively seeking to aid them. That is not the action of someone who merely once on the side referenced it as a vague possibility then effectively rejected it, which is what you now have to claim to deny the actual history and Marx's own words on the topic to maintain the idea that Marx effectively only thought a revolution would happen in the west. Just stop going in circles.
Marx also aided and worked with western revolutionaries. He didn't make a complete pivot, he saw new opportunity where he previously thought there was none. I have never said that Marx only thought a revolution would happen in the west, this is nonsense. Touch grass, comrade.
Dawg I feel like I need to let you know that you're allowed to say you made a simple misunderstanding instead of getting stuck in to a pedantic debate on the internet. Seems like maybe you don't know this or something. Like, you can just say "ah yeah, my bad" and walk away from your keyboard and everything will be chill as hell afterwards.
Oh my God, how awful there was a back and forth discussion on a forum. God forbid.
There was no misunderstanding, thanks.
There absolutely was, no matter how many times I explain that I never said Marx believed revolution would only happen in the west you keep insisting that I did. Either you misunderstand, or you deliberately lie. This is wrecker bullshit.
I'm telling you that you can for real just walk away from your device and whatever ego charged anger you've got building here will fade in like 15 minutes tops. This is not a healthy response to having a misunderstanding on an obscure message board.
You're a real live wire aren't ya lol
Just don't like seeing comrades getting all stressed about the internet. My suggestions were sincere advice.
I am when people decide to be annoying. I can have a back and forth with someone without you feeling the need to pretend this is some major issue.
The only thing that has happened here is you misunderstood Cowbee and have proceeded to talk past them for several exchanges while refusing to acknowledge the misunderstanding.
Maybe take a look back at this thread in its entirety a few days from now when you've cooled off to try to understand why this has all gone down the way it has.
What else would you call repeatedly misframing what a comrade is saying? We are both presumably communists, and we've both read the literature. If I am telling you that I never once said Marx thought revolution was only possible in the west, and you continue to quadruple-down on that, what possibly could be your goal?
Yes, we indeed had a minor back-and-forth, yet you can't for some reason admit to misunderstanding my original claim, no matter how much I explain that to you. Now that you're getting called out on it, you retreat to insult.
lol ok
Y'all, as a baby leftist who still has All The Reading still to do. This whole back and forth has been fascinating to read. Also, kind of disheartening.
A billion offshoots of Christianity killing each other over how/whether they dunk their babies. Liberals/Lefties in the US pissing each other off and leaving a nice opening for the fascists.
What is with us as a species that we almost seem to prefer arguing fine points with people who we largely agree with while the actual enemies of a common cause laugh and win.
Like I said, fascinating read. Just... "more unites us than divides us" and all that?
This kind of behavior really isn't common, especially not in real-life organizing. Don't be disheartened! Also, if you want a place to start with reading theory, I made an intro Marxist-Leninist reading list you can check out!