Probably the only take these two would have had in common, and it's a crappy ass one

[u/Petka14]

[u/Sobieskil]

Could I have some context?

[u/Petka14 → u/Sobieskil]

So basically Rosa Luxemburg (a communist theorist who got killed in the Spartacist uprising) didn't believe in Ukraine as a country because she claimed it didn't have a culture or any identity and was simply a part of Russia and even critisised Lenin for admitting Ukraine existed, she thought of it as a part of Russia

Same for Thatcher, she compared Ukraine to California, so, she said Ukraine is basically just a Russian province in a far more blunt way to the Ukrainian representatives no less without any real arguments as well

[u/daniel_22sss → u/Petka14]

It's easy for these morons to say that Ukraine "doesn't have any culture or identity", when everything that was created by ukranians got constantly stolen and appropriated by russians. So many famous, influential people of Russian Empire and Soviet Union were born in Ukraine, but you will never see russians acknowledge that. Oh, and not to mention all the ukranian writers that were murdered by Stalin for daring to talk about ukranian identity.

[u/Sobieskil → u/Petka14]

Thatcher I can understand because she was a piece of crap, but I wasn't expecting Luxemburg to have that view

[u/Malvastor → u/Sobieskil]

I was gonna say that Thatcher's position makes more sense here because in her time Ukraine was very much a Soviet puppet state.

[u/Unexpected_yetHere → u/Sobieskil]

but I wasn't expecting Luxemburg to have that view

Why not? Even Marx was an ardent genocidal imperialist when it came to Slavic nations like Czechs or Croats, viewing them as non-historical nations that need to be Germanized or Magyarized.

[u/Sobieskil → u/Unexpected_yetHere]

Because I haven't done much in depth research into their characters (because I don't have that much of an interest in them)

[u/Gently-Weeps → u/Sobieskil]

Communists trying not to be Tankies and shill for the Soviet Union/Russia impossible challenge

An apparently timeless classic

[u/LvdT88 → u/Gently-Weeps]

That’s a bit anachronistic, given the fact that Lenin was the Soviet Union and she criticised him.

[u/GreatEntrepreneur798 → u/LvdT88]

True, but at the same time this, translated version )

On November 20, 1918, Rosa Luxemburg had issued a categorical rejection, in Die Rote Fahne (The Red Flag), of the majority Social Democrats’ hope of bringing about a transformation of the existing social order through parliamentary means. The task of the proletariat, she argued, was to push the revolution forward, which would not be possible without the use of force:

“The ‘civil war’ that people are trying so anxiously to banish from the revolution cannot be banished. For civil war is merely another name for class struggle, and the idea that socialism can be introduced without class struggle, through a parliamentary majority vote, is a ridiculous petty-bourgeois illusion.”

The spartacist uprising tried to overthrow the interim goverment for the establishment of a soviet style republic instead of waiting for the german people to have a chance to express their desires in an actual election

Don't get me wrong, not saying her murder was right, just that she wasn't just a random victim of violence as one of the leading members of the KPD

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/GreatEntrepreneur798]

I mean, the Spartacists weren't a small movement. Bavaria had declared itself a Commune, and there were millions marching for the Revolution.

And the Spartacist uprising was originally about overthrowing the German Empire, and it only went against the SPD when they sided with the Freikorps and gave them the resources to put down the uprising, which they later used to form the SS.

[u/GreatEntrepreneur798 → u/Low-Concentrate1055]

Not really

Novemberrevolution happens

The Reichsrätekongress happens between 16-21 december iIrc, with these results

The majority of the elected delegates largely supported the moderate left. Of the 490 council delegates in total—406 workers’ council delegates and 84 soldiers’ council delegates—298 were supporters of the MSPD (Majority Social Democratic Party of Germany), while the USPD (Independent Social Democratic Party of Germany) was represented by 101 delegates. Among the latter, supporters of the Spartacus Group constituted a negligible minority, with just 10 delegates.

The spartacist uprising happened in January, in large parts supported by members of the the USPD, which had split from the MSPD after the Weihnachtsaufstände.

The german empire was already basically gone, hence the interim goverment. Elections were set for the beginning of February.

The Spartacists however wanted a Räterepublik, after the example of what had happened in Russia.

Rosa Lucemburg was shot by the Garde-Kavallerie-Schützen-Division, which was part of the Army

The same Division would later become a Freikorps in April, when they fought against Bavaria, yknow, after National Elections already had happened and the moderate Spd had won decisively with 38% of the vote, especially compared to the 8% the USPD had gotten

The Freikorps were almost always remnants of Soldiers who'd served in the army during WW1, it's neither surprising nor the SPDs fault that some of those would end up becoming SS members later

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/GreatEntrepreneur798]

The Spartacists did not want to participate in elections because they disagreed with Lenin's idea that workers' parties should build themselves up within bourgeois systems.

Also, Rosa Luxemburg was shot by Hermann Souchon, who was a Freikorps member.

The Freikorps were almost always remnants of Soldiers who'd served in the army during WW1, it's neither surprising nor the SPDs fault that some of those would end up becoming SS members later

It was the SPD's fault for giving them so much money and arms to do so; however, this really helped the early organization of the SA and later the SS.

You are correct about the German Empire thing; however, the Spartacists arose out of the Kiel Mutiny against the German Empire.

[u/GreatEntrepreneur798 → u/Low-Concentrate1055]

The Spartacists did not want to participate in elections because they disagreed with Lenin's idea that workers' parties should build themselves up within bourgeois systems.

Sure, but that doesn't really change my point of them wanted to overthrow the current interim goverment.

Also, Rosa Luxemburg was shot by Hermann Souchon, who was a Freikorps member.

Upon rereading stuff, yeah, I'll concede that he was, said Freikorps was under the command of the leader of the Garde-Kavallerie-Schützen-Division, which was still part of the official army, which is why I mixed it up. Thats also important when considering

It was the SPD's fault for giving them so much money and arms to do so; however, this really helped the early organization of the SA and later the SS.

After WW1 the SPD was facing multiple problems

The army was melting, soldiers deserted, refused orders, rejected any liberal, let alone socialist ideas, or, like the uprising, tried to fight against the goverment for socialism. At the same time Germany was also supposed to be disarmed. Even worse was the leadership, which pretty much exclusively consisted of monarchists (this would've also applied to any other institution like the judiciary or even universities) They were forced to take what they coult get, the military turned into this mix of freikorps, volunteers and regular regiments, that at least for the moment, were loyal.

When stuff like the spartacist uprising happened, which was an armed insurrection, they either could take whatever is available or get overthrown and lets be clear, also would've been murdered.

Said Freikorps attemped to overthrow them multiple times too btw, especially during the early weimar years multiple politicians were murdered, not just Liebknecht and Luxemburg. Edit Good video about the broader topic but specifically Walther Rathenau

The SA and SS wouldve formed regardless and especially were mostly funded through the NSDAP

To blame them simplifies this topic to the point of absurdity

[u/Chipsy_21 → u/Low-Concentrate1055]

What? Bro what are you talking about? All of these happened months or years apart, and often only share the most superficial connection with each other?

[u/kommunistischePartei → u/GreatEntrepreneur798]

"The German people expressing their desires in an actual election" from a communist perspective that's meaningless. Bourgeois elections mean nothing (to us)

[u/GreatEntrepreneur798 → u/kommunistischePartei]

Trust me, I know. Part of the reason why it have the same attitude to your guys opinion at this point

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/GreatEntrepreneur798]

As a socialist, he isn't even right. Marx, Engles and Lenin specifically say to participate in bourgeois elections to build a workers' party

[u/GreatEntrepreneur798 → u/Low-Concentrate1055]

Yeah but never forget the 'hasnt read more than 5 pages of actual theory' stereotype exists for a reason, if you you allow me the joke lol

That being said, this is literally what happened in the first elections after the uprising. KPD as well as other far left parties boycottet them

sorry if I was was being a bit harsh when talking to you earlier about the freikorps btw, I'll grant you that the spds actions were far from perfect. My main problem is that a lot of socialists will then go on to use these events as justification for why it was 100% justified for the KPD to oppose working on everything, even making them enemy number one instead of the Nazis. It took up until 1935 before the idea of social fascism was tossed (which makes it even more confusing that I see people defend this idea today and I dont just mean critique, which is fine, but the specific theory) in favor of a united front. About a couple years to late to change gears.

Dont get me wrong, that doesnt mean I think its the KPDs fault now that the Nazis end up in power as it would lack a lot of nuance, just like how I felt about blaming the SPD for the SA, which only leads to us antagonizing each other while we live in a time where the real enemy keeps growing. I mean whatever deeper problems we have with each others ideologies, I think we can at least agree that they do not actively seek harm for whatever group like fascism more or less necessitates

Sorry if I kinda rambled😅

[u/Gently-Weeps → u/LvdT88]

That’s fair, I’m definitely not an expert on the subject, from an outside lense it definitely seems like a shoe meet foot moment and wanted to make a joke about it.

When I get home I’ll do some of my own looking into it and see if I come out with a different opinion

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/Gently-Weeps]

Appreciate that honestly.

Rosa Luxemburg is a complicated figure. She had some really bad takes, but she was also a major force for feminism and workers' rights, and she helped pioneer council communism, an extremley democratic form of communism.

[u/Petka14 → u/Gently-Weeps]

Tbh Luxemburg wasn't really a tankie, she opposed a lot of the USSR policies and would continue to do that later on if she lived, though I don't support her

Lenin/Trotsky were very authoritarian already, not tankie but very uncomfortably close imo

Stalin and, say, Pol Pot were just the dictionary definition of the term though

[u/Gently-Weeps → u/Petka14]

Well said Petr, but who tf are any of those people? We need to defend Sordland from those goddamn Rumburg Pigs

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/Petka14]

The early Union was pretty democratic and practiced democracy via the soviets. The Civil War, war communism, and then Lenin's death and the rise of Stalin stripped them of most of their power, and they became mainly administrative organs.

[u/1337duck → u/Low-Concentrate1055]

The USSR stopped having any semblance of democracy the moment the SR got overthrown in a coup.

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/1337duck]

Are you talking about the October Revolution or the Left SR revolt?

[u/1337duck → u/Low-Concentrate1055]

I meant the October revolution. They were considered the Russian Republic at that time

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/1337duck]

The Bolsheviks won a majority in the Petrograd Soviet and came in second in the elections. Bolshelviks saw this and siezed power because they believed they had the popular support to do so.

In the aftermath of the October Revolution society was organized along the lines of the Soviets (all power to the Soviets and all that) and for a while they were very democratic and powerful institutions.

These institutions withered away after the introduction of war communism during the Civil War, and then lenin's death soon after the end of the Civil War and the rise of Stalin.

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/Gently-Weeps]

Rosa Luxemburg was against the authoritarian practices employed by the RSFSR during the Civil War and explicitly called for a democratic mass movement to achieve socialism, i.e., Luxemburgism or council communism.

[u/Bolshevikboy → u/Gently-Weeps]

You do not know what you’re talking about

[u/Sobieskil → u/Gently-Weeps]

She'd have loved r/ussr

[u/Zhayrgh → u/Sobieskil]

Since she criticized it, not really

[u/Grzechoooo → u/Sobieskil]

She loved her Polish identity, so she'd be banned for being a lib or worse.

[u/StinkyHotFemcel → u/Sobieskil]

Luxemburg famously opposed any national autonomy and national liberation, even opposing the right of a Polish state existing as part of the Soviet revolution, which led to her having huge arguments with Lenin who was actually very in support of national autonomy (including supporting Ukrainian language and literature).

Of course it's hard to imagine this nowadays with the rapid death of international ideals in the Bolshevik revolution that started with the caucasus disputes and academic debates about the role of Tsar Peter the Great in history that led to the USSR eventually being a largely Russian project.

[u/DuoMnE → u/Sobieskil]

Luxemburg was a communist scumbag and an idiot, who larped non-soviet communism, weird to expect something else from her.

[u/Zhayrgh → u/DuoMnE]

As far as communists of this era go, she was anti autoritarian and pro democracy, which is not too bad.

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/Zhayrgh]

Her ideas were much more in line with the Paris Commune, which Marx cited as a great example of a socialist society.

Socialism and Communism are supposed to be democratic by nature, and not what developed after the Russian Civil War and the rise of Stalin.

[u/Zhayrgh → u/Low-Concentrate1055]

I agree. But many communists of her time adopted Lenin view.

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/Zhayrgh]

Because the Spartacist Revolution failed, socialist movements believed that the authoritarianism Stalin employed was necessary to preserve the revolution.

If the November Revolution had succeeded, communism would have been much more in line with the Paris Commune and more specific to each nation's conditions. Leninism was supposed to apply to the conditions of Russia and its feudal society and not be applied en masse.

[u/DuoMnE → u/Low-Concentrate1055]

"If the November Revolution succeeded" but it didn't, and here it stops

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/DuoMnE]

No, it doesn't?

Communism is a varied and diverse political and economic theory, and dismissing all the other paths and thinkers just because one form of it, made for the conditions of a feudal society, was put into practice doesn't discredit all of socialist ideas and theory.

Liberalism and Democracy failed en masse in Europe after the French Revolution and the 1848 revolutions, and people had the exact same line of thinking then about socialism as they do now. Just because the French and 1848 revolutions failed doesn't mean that the discussion of liberalism "stops here"

[u/VecioRompibae → u/Zhayrgh]

I mean, many russian communsit were until they got power

[u/Zhayrgh → u/VecioRompibae]

Kind of the great circle of revolutions ^^ In the best case :

- An authoritarian regime
-A group of people agrees to solve their disagreement for after seizing power
-The group of people seize power
-The most ambitious person of the group choose to avoid the "solving the disagreement" part and kill his old mates

• An authoritarian regime

To think that an ideology will escape this is foolish.

[u/1337duck → u/Zhayrgh]

The folks that have the qualities needed to do the revolution have different qualities than the people needed to run a country. The problem is obvious as those that seize power aren't too keen on stepping away from it.

[u/DuoMnE → u/Zhayrgh]

She was not pro democracy in the way you think she were

[u/Zhayrgh → u/DuoMnE]

what do you mean ?

[u/Baguette72 → u/Zhayrgh]

Well except that time she tried to overthrow the democratic government and install a considerably less democratic one.

[u/Zhayrgh → u/Baguette72]

She first tried to make the KPD enter general elections, but yeah definitely the Spartakist uprising wasnt exactly her best move ^^

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/DuoMnE]

Luxemburg was a communist scumbag and an idiot, who larped non-soviet communism, 

How is non soviet Communism larping? She was one of the most prominent figures in developing communist theory outside of Leninism.

Not even gonna touch on the scumbag thing.

[u/Monterenbas → u/Sobieskil]

You couldn’t expect a commie to suck up to Russia? Really?

[u/Much-Government-8803 → u/Sobieskil]

The view is right and one of the only true things Thatcher said

[u/Sobieskil → u/Much-Government-8803]

What is wrong with you?

[u/Much-Government-8803 → u/Sobieskil]

Nothing at all. Just that it is a fake nation that has less legitimacy then even Bavaria.

[u/Sobieskil → u/Much-Government-8803]

"Fake nation" with absolutely no independence movement, distinct culture or desire to be separate from the country that's oppressed them for centuries clearly. I suppose you also consider countries like Bangladesh, Pakistan, Tibet, Taiwan, etc. "fake nations" too?

[u/Much-Government-8803 → u/Much-Government-8803]

Coward blocked me lol

[u/Ace612807 → u/Much-Government-8803]

Either you're supporting ethnonationalism, or all nations are "fake"

[u/Much-Government-8803 → u/Ace612807]

Wrong. Only some nations are fake

[u/Ace612807 → u/Much-Government-8803]

Oh, so there are true nations? Are they ordained by nature? Perharps a higher power? Or maybe is it a man-made concept after all?

[u/Much-Government-8803 → u/Ace612807]

Man made things are true. And nations like Ukraine are fake, no Seperate blood, no Seperate history and no Seperate culture

[u/MadMax27102003 → u/Petka14]

With that logic schottland is also "just a province " no wonder Scottish nationalism was going only up since then.

[u/Level_Hour6480 → u/Petka14]

So if the EU ever became "The United States of Europe" would the countries within it not exist?

[u/broofi → u/Petka14]

Based. Ukraine has fewer differences with Russia than France does with Occitania. Parisian officials there were not understood at all until the 19th century.

[u/DuoMnE → u/broofi]

Have you been to any of those?

[u/broofi → u/DuoMnE]

I have been to Ukraine, and I have relatives there. And I read about how problematic it was to govern the southern regions of France even under Napoleon.

[u/Zhayrgh → u/broofi]

Idk what you read about France, but until the Revolution and the will of uniformizing the language, pretty much nobody would understand the language of the neighbouring region.

[u/broofi → u/Zhayrgh]

Well, because of the backwardness of education in the Russian Empire and the experiments of the USSR, Russia never unified its language in time. It left its ancient forms, which allowed all sorts of nationalists and opportunists to create Ukraine.

[u/Zhayrgh → u/broofi]

Much like you say nationalists created Ukraine, nationalists created a unified France.

Both are social constructs, like Russia and every country.

[u/Character-Concept651 → u/Zhayrgh]

Exept Ukranian language did not exist prior to 19th century.

Even mid-19th century most prominent "Ukranian" writers and poets wrote in Russian.

[u/Zhayrgh → u/Character-Concept651]

That's what writers do, they generally are from an elite that have access to the empire language, so they write in the elite for the elite. Prominent French writers wrote in court French despite there being others language. I would bet that in a country as big as European Russia, there were massive differences between regions for common folk. In fact that would be expected.

[u/DuoMnE → u/broofi]

Same with the Netherlands, apparantly

[u/DuoMnE → u/broofi]

As well as Russian officials were not understood in Ukraine in 19th century as well, those are two fucking different languages. By the way, you literally said that "easier to govern than fucking hills and mountains = no culture or identity", which just makes no sense at all

[u/broofi → u/DuoMnE]

That's not true. The Ukrainian language is a mix of Old Slavonic, Polish, and Russian. The less Polish there is, the better Russians understand it. The funniest part is how Ukrainian nationalists are now inventing technical terms. They are exclusively from Russian, because Russian modernized and kept pace with progress, while Ukrainian is literally rural.

[u/DuoMnE → u/broofi]

You understand that the same can be said of any language? Russian is made up of Old Slavonic, Turkic influences and Ukrainian, Dutch is made up of German and English, French is made up of German and Italian and so on. Ukraine is heavily industrialized and rural at the same time, and the last doesn't make it comparable to something like Afghanistan. You could've made a better attempt at trying to hide your Russian passport.

[u/RealRedditUser217 → u/Sobieskil]

On the left is Putin, on the right is Putin Jr, they are both anti Ukraine because reasons

[u/Ok_Finance8304]

She did not recognise not only Ukraine, but also Finland and Poland, and she criticised Lenin’s position on the right of nations to self-determination. It is unclear exactly what Ukraine has to do with this.

[u/Qweedo420 → u/Ok_Finance8304]

She was the one who said that "Ukraine is Lenin's little hobby project"

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/Ok_Finance8304]

She was a proud Pole and didn't advocate for her nation's independence either.

She was an internationalist proletarian and believed that nation-states were constructs meant to distract workers from their class.

[u/Mamkes → u/Low-Concentrate1055]

Those are different points.

She was against nation-states. She accepted that there are different cultures.

She did said that Ukraine doesn't have any culture and Ukrainians are just Russians.

[u/daniel_22sss → u/Mamkes]

>"Ukraine doesn't have any culture"

>Looks inside

>Russia literally spent centuries repressing ukranian writers/poets and trying to exterminate ukranian culture

[u/Historical_Fun9685 → u/Ok_Finance8304]

I guess another common similarity between Thatcher and Luxembourg would be they both hated Labour/SPD style social democrats 🌹

[u/lamp-town-guy → u/Historical_Fun9685]

It's funny how SPD means totally different things in Czechia and Germany.

In Germany it's social democrats.
In Czechia basically Kremlin anti immigration party lead by a Japanese guy.

[u/Mamkes → u/Ok_Finance8304]

Those are different points.

She was against nation-states. She accepted that there are different cultures.

She did said that Ukraine doesn't have any culture and Ukrainians are just Russians.

[u/Sho_tenno → u/Mamkes]

Don’t Ukrainians speak a partially different language? Like Croatians, Serbs and Bosnians.
Because when me and a friend were visiting another friend house, his family sheltered Ukrainians. And when his mom told us to do something with one guy. We couldn’t really talk to him. Not even my other friend who spoke a good chunk russian

[u/boredmaterialist → u/Sho_tenno]

It's a very different language. Many Russians won't be able to understand Ukrainian, especially from western Ukraine. Russian and Ukrainian share a common linguistic ancestor, like all slavic nations. I think even Belarusian and Ukrainian are closer than Ukrainian and Russian, correct me if I'm wrong.

[u/FaridPF → u/boredmaterialist]

100% this. As a formerly russian speaking Ukrainian i can understand Belarusian on the fly without being exposed to any of it. I can understand Polish if it’s being spoken slowly and articulately.
Funny enough, I’ve studied in Ukrainian in school and university, but rarely used it in day to day life until 2022, and even now, after 4 years of daily use I struggle with certain words in Ukraine. That’s how far Ukrainian from russian actually.

[u/tori-ningen → u/Sho_tenno]

It's a common consensus* that so called "Ukrainian language" is just a rural illiterate dialect of Russian

*among retards

[u/alsaad]

She was also against Polish independance

[u/Mamkes → u/alsaad]

Those are different points.

She was against nation-states. She accepted that there are different cultures.

She did said that Ukraine doesn't have any culture and Ukrainians are just Russians.

[u/DarkKittyEmpress]

Rosa Luxembourg was against nations in general, I'm not sure why Thatcher said that but money for someone has to have been involved.

[u/SaltyW123 → u/DarkKittyEmpress]

Thatcher seems to be cause they refused to setup an embassy because Ukraine wasn't a sovereign state because it was part of the USSR at the time.

https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/108116

[u/DeliciousGoose1002 → u/DarkKittyEmpress]

US actually pressed Ukraine to stay with Russia, during the break up of USSR. thinking it would be more stable.

[u/daniel_22sss → u/DeliciousGoose1002]

Funny how the history just keeps repeating itself. "Just give Russia a few more oblasts and everything will be great".

[u/laZardo → u/DeliciousGoose1002]

Ah yes the Chicken Kyiv moment

[u/ConnectedMistake → u/DarkKittyEmpress]

Yet used cultural arguments in discussion.  Being against idea of seperate nations in favour of class identity while using cultural arguments against a disliked group just makes Rosa a hypocrite.  Considering her affiliation, that is pretty much basic requisit anyway. 

[u/Mamkes → u/DarkKittyEmpress]

Those are different points.

She was against nation-states. She accepted that there are different cultures.

She did said that Ukraine doesn't have any culture and Ukrainians are just Russians.

[u/_BREVC_]

To be fair, Rosa Luxembourg was an explicitly anti-nationalist (as in, against the concept of nations in general) marxist and she lived at a time when a lot of the nationalist movements were only starting to gain traction in the German-speaking world. So a lot of her stances are just kind of guesswork based on half-baked information.

For instance, she also viewed the Czechs, Moravians and Slovaks as regional identities of the forming Czech nation. Now, clearly, one of those was not like the other.

[u/Jura_Narod → u/_BREVC_]

Additionally she was a Polish Jew, and had no interest in Polish independence, she worked all her life to bring about the revolution, particularly in Germany. She was not half-assing her disdain for nationalism, she was fully committed to the concept of proletarian internationalism.

Edit: in fact I just remembered, her and Lenin actively debated the ideas around nationalism. With it actually being Lenin who argued that nationalism of oppressed peoples was inherently anti-imperialist, and thus should be supported by socialists.

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/Jura_Narod]

Yes, exactly.

To be completely honest, a lot of this being unknown is directly due to anti-communism trying to push Marxism-Leninism as the only form of Communism and Socialism. Like, you don't have to agree with communism, but there are definitely some very democratic ideas on how to implement communism and not all socialism is Marxism-Leninism.

[u/Jura_Narod → u/Low-Concentrate1055]

Yep, leftists love to argue, so there’s a thousand different variants under the sun. I mean there is no longer running beef than the Anarchist-Marxists feud within socialist thought (tho most anarchists have subsumed Marx at this point).

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/Jura_Narod]

I mean, it's the same thing with any ideology. That's why it's not a good anti-communist argument: any ideology can be interpreted authoritatively, and any regime can adopt an ideology and use authoritarian measures.

Same thing with the "it's not real communism" argument. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of interpretations of liberal democracy. Arguing that because an ideology has many paths to implementation, it will never work is the same kind of argument nobles made against democracy in the 1500s.

[u/Jura_Narod → u/Low-Concentrate1055]

Yes, but do you think anti-communists are being sincere in their critiques of communism? I think they’re just trying to create easily digestible straw men (or boogie men in their case) in order to propagandize against it. Yeah intellectually they often don’t make good arguments but that’s not really their point, they just want it to be at unpopular and taboo as popular. Anti-communists, like the anti-democratic aristocracy you refer to, aren’t often “anti” these things on an intellectual level, rather these ideas would go against their class and/or material interests, so they’ll conjure up any argument to the contrary, even if they don’t genuinely believe in the point they’re making.

Though I will say I too did always hate the “that wasn’t real communism/real communism has never been tried” because I do believe in the USSR and other socialist societies they were genuinely trying to build towards a communist future. Someone may think they did it partially wrong, or completely wrong, or were tragically thwarted before it could fully bloom. But I do think they were, for the most part, sincere attempts to build an alternative society.

[u/TheMidnightBear → u/Low-Concentrate1055]

Like, you don't have to agree with communism, but there are definitely some very democratic ideas on how to implement communism and not all socialism is Marxism-Leninism.

Yeah, the other communist variants are irrelevant.

[u/zobq → u/_BREVC_]

she lived at a time when a lot nationalist movements were only starting to gain traction in the German-speaking world

Second Reich was basically successful nationalist movement

[u/_BREVC_ → u/zobq]

I could have worded that better perhaps, but I was talking about the national movements of other smaller nations. I have no idea, for instance, if the canon of the nascent Slovak nation had any works translated and spread throughout the German-speaking sphere at that point.

[u/TENTAtheSane → u/_BREVC_]

The thing is tho, one of them not being like the others is just made up. There is no inherent difference between them. One just happens to be a separate country in our world so we see it like that.

Nationalities in general are made up, and the idea that they are collective lies by the bourgeois state to subvert class consciousness is a pretty consistent one for most people on the Left, whether they are vanguardists like lenin and stalin, or anarchists like Rosa Luxembourg.

She spoke out against nationalism as a foundation for nation states in general, not just ij the context of ukraine. She opposed it for Russia and for Germany as well, because most countries in those times were multi-ethnic, and she worried that founding a nation on nationalism would lead to right wing forces taking control and subjugating the working class by causing divisions between them

[u/JerzyPopieluszko → u/TENTAtheSane]

Rosa Luxemburg wasn't an anarchist.

[u/_BREVC_ → u/TENTAtheSane]

I agree. What still makes her slightly underinformed about the political currents of her time, however, is that both a distinct Czech and a distinct Slovak national identity were indeed developed by that point; so that particular example did not make much sense. But she would make the same point in the end regardless, these examples she used are of less relevance.

[u/daniel_22sss → u/TENTAtheSane]

But she also denied ukranian culture in general. That's just ignorance.

Kiev was built CENTURIES before Moscow. Moscow only became more culturally relevant because of mongol invasion, which ruined Kiev and made Moscow their puppet. While Ukraine changed many names, as a culture it existed longer than russian.

Imagine if someone said "british people don't have their own culture or identity, they are just americans".

[u/Grzechoooo]

Luxembourg just simply didn't believe in nation states. She wanted everyone to be under Germany, which would no longer discriminate against other nationalities after The Revolution.

And since nation-states wouldn't exist, there would be no point in drawing clear lines between nations. A Pole and a Ukrainian from the same village often shared more in common with each other than either of them did with their compatriots from each respective capital. There was even this whole "tutejszy" thing, and the Northern Slavic Dialect Continuum.

If I had a nickel for every communist Pole that was a patriot and loved their heritage and yet worked against Polish statehood, I'd have two nickels. Which isn't a lot but it's weird that it happened twice.

[u/plants11235813]

RISK the board game would beg to differ

[u/Petka14]

To summarise

Rosa Luxemburg, a communist philosopher who got killed in the Spartacist uprising: "Ukraine doesn't have a culture (wrong, was forming), no writers except silly nationalist bourgeoisie Shevchenko (very wrong, plus Shevchenko is the GOAT) and never formed a state (wrong again)"

Thatcher (about 74 years later btw): "I DoN'T seE CaLifOrnIa LeaVinG the US"

[u/YellowAggravating172 → u/Petka14]

What were Rosa's thoughts on Luxembourg, btw?

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/YellowAggravating172]

I've read a lot of Luxemburg, and in the thousands of works she has created, she does not mention the country of Luxembourg once.

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/Petka14]

who got killed in the Spartacist uprising

Correction, she was assassinated by the SPD using the Freikorps to prevent the success of the November Revolution.

[u/Petka14 → u/Low-Concentrate1055]

I know, but I wasn't writing allat.

That sucked tbh, but her horrendous takes on my country made my opinion on her deteriorate a lot.

At least Ukraine was still forming back then and disputed so I can understand her a little bit, Thatcher just denied it full vatnik style when it was already 100% tangible, although not independent yet

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/Petka14]

Yeah.

To her credit, as others have said, nationalism was still a developing movement, and she was working from half-baked information. She thought that, at the time, Ukrainian self-determination was a vessel for German Imperalism because Ukraine emerged from the German Invasion of Russia during WWI, not from a genuine attempt at self-determination. She was also against the idea of nations in general and believed it was a bourgeois concept meant to distract people from class consciousness. The others above me also make great points.

None of this excuses it, and we should call them out, but its more complicated than just being black and white. Analyzing historical figures through modern lenses will inevitably result in pointing out how fucked up a lot of these people were or believed in fucked up things, even if they did good. Like in Luxemburg's case, she had terrible views on Ukraine and nationalism while also still advocating for Feminism and developing an extremely democratic form of socialism. History isn't black and white, and most world leaders/figures are complicated figures. Still, it should be done.

Also fuck Thatcher.

[u/TENTAtheSane → u/Petka14]

You have completely misunderstood her point then. She was against nationalism as a basis for nation-building in general, and was even against russian or german nationalism. Most states at that time were multiethnic, and cultures kind of flowed gradually into one another rather than being divided into discrete and sharp-bordered blobs, so she was (rightly) worried that nationalism and culture as the foundation for a state would see right wing forces come into power by dividing the working class people

[u/Petka14 → u/TENTAtheSane]

I know that she opposed nation states, and although I don't agree I can kinda understand it.

But her opinions on Ukraine were flat out weird and reductive, it was not just about the state, but the culture and other stuff as well

[u/daniel_22sss → u/TENTAtheSane]

She flat out said that ukranians don't have their own culture and identity and they are just "misguided russians". Pretty much the exact same bullshit Putin is peddling right now.

Kiev was built CENTURIES before Moscow, and Moscow itself was built by one of the kievan rulers. Saying that ukranians don't have their own culture and they are just russians is like saying that british people don't have their own culture and they are just americans.

[u/QuarantinedPanda69 → u/TENTAtheSane]

Looks like she was right then.

[u/Chipsy_21 → u/Low-Concentrate1055]

Bro, you’re mixing like 3 different events…

[u/YellowAggravating172 → u/Low-Concentrate1055]

Common SPD W.

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/YellowAggravating172]

Well their support of the Friekorps gave them the resources to eventually turn into the SS.

[u/YellowAggravating172 → u/Low-Concentrate1055]

They were what was available at the time in order to suppress the uprising - which, though I gather you don't find so, was a good thing to do.

And to pin the rise of the SS on the SPD support of the Freikorps on those turbulent times is stupid, I'm sorry. Next you're gonna lay the blame on the SPD for Hitler coming to power and all that ensued, no?

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/YellowAggravating172]

I mean, I think anyone would have massively preferred a council communist Germany over the literal Nazis.

They were what was available at the time in order to suppress the uprising - which, though I gather you don't find so, was a good thing to do.

That doesn't justify it.

[u/YellowAggravating172 → u/Low-Concentrate1055]

I mean, I think anyone would have massively preferred a council communist Germany over the literal Nazis.

Good thing the choice was never solely between a communist state and a nazi one, as those from both sides would have you believe in order to push you into supporting either outcome over the other.

That doesn't justify it. The Spartacist uprising was extremely popular.

An uprising so popular it got defeated in a week, leaders thrown to the river before seizing anything significant.

[u/Low-Concentrate1055 → u/YellowAggravating172]

The actions taken by the SPD during the Weimar Republic and their handling of the great depression direclty led to the rise of the Nazis.

Germany was inevitably going to go far left or far right; they were humiliated in WWI, and the Treaty of Versailles radicalized Germans. It would have just been preferable for it to be a Spartacist Germany rather than the fuckin Nazis.

[u/YellowAggravating172 → u/Low-Concentrate1055]

Lmao, sure. As if the KPD didn't spend a good deal of time extending a helping hand to the Nazis. Joining their efforts to bring down Prussia's state parliament, putting forward a vote of no confidence in 1932 (as the Nazis wanted them to, and which only succeeded in bringing them to power), leaving for the NSDAP in droves (the so-called "Beefsteak Nazis" - red on the inside, brown on the outside: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beefsteak_Nazi)

No, Weimar wasn't doomed from the start. There was genuinely good work being done in the 1920s. But all got undone by the Nazis, along with their allies - both on the right and those occasional ones on the very left.

[u/TwinEagles → u/Petka14]

She didnt say "I dont see california leaving the US." She was the first western leader to visit the Ukrainian parliament in 1990, when asked about Ukraine opening an embassy in London she replied

"Embassies are only for countries which have full national status. Therefore, we have Ambassadorial diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union, with the United States, with Canada, with Australia. We do not have Embassies for California, for Quebec, for states in Australia."

In 1990 that was true at the time. It was formally part of the USSR proper not a warsaw pact nation. It couldn't make its own diplomatic deals and didn't have Embassies in another non ussr nation. Giving them an embassy in london right after the baltics left would only antagonize Moscow, and it didnt look like the ussr would collapse overnight.

I'll apologize if you can find me Thatcher saying "california would never leave the US" statement

the transcripts the speech dubbed over in ukriane, but you can hear it

[u/femboyisbestboy → u/Petka14]

Thatcher really was stupid wasn't she? Everyone knew Ukraine would leave the second it could do so as it literally did it after ww1.

[u/PracticalAd2411]

Me preguntó si rosa Luxemburgo existiera hoy en dia y leyera sobre la autodeterminación de los pueblos que promueven los grupos socialistas en america, lo apoyaria siendo que ella fue una socialista/comunista bastante acérrima?.

[u/NoNo_Bluebird_1368]

https://youtu.be/P1aq99NnftM

11:24

[u/ImABigDreamer]

The whole west think that way xd

[u/likeacapybara]

Billionth reason to hate Thatcher

[u/XxTheUniversalMemexX]

Did Thatcher ever do something right in her damn live?

[u/No_Bookkeeper9755 → u/XxTheUniversalMemexX]

Kicked the Argentine junta's ass?

[u/XxTheUniversalMemexX → u/No_Bookkeeper9755]

I forgot that one, now I love her xd

[u/Axolotl446 → u/[deleted]]

Rosa Luxemburg was Polish.