every comment that says she should have died is relevant as it likely means the person saying it doesn't have their head up their ass and thinks, rightfully, that communists should be destroyed.
Relevant comment: Rosa Luxemburg was a communist scumbag who deserved to die young for promoting an ideology which led to the deaths of 100 million people.
@@STaLLoNe86 all Right Wing Reactionaries can Piss Off and See Their Way The Hell Off of this Thread; that said all Right Wing Genocidal Totalitarians deserve to be Destroyed👿👿👿👿👿
Such an enlightening talk. Thank you Marie Ma'am. I read about Rosa a few days ago, and was impressed. This is what brought me to a youtube search and then, this video. Most leftists forget that leftism is also about liberty, free speech, rationale, discussion, and they end up being devotees of philosophers and leaders almost in a spirit of the right-wing. Such a talk is rare, which is so objective and constructive in its approach. I read that Rosa was against the January uprising and was in favour of contesting the elections. With the revolutionary ideas of revolutionary Spartacist (KPD) but the patience of USPD, she was pragmatic, but I feel that this kind of left her in a lonely spot. So, the takeaway for me was that do the groundwork, build the organization, power from the bottom. Lead struggles for reforms, and then the struggling workers could be educated and led towards socialism. So wonderful to see the picture of Bhagat Singh on the poster in the background. His party HSRA was the revolutionary party, but with his other party Naujawan Bharat Sabha, he sought to mobilize the peasants and workers.
You have no idea what you are talking about. You clearly don’t know anything about Rosa. You clearly didn’t listen to the speech. You’re the ideologue, stop listening to Jordan Peterson like people listen to the Pope.
Pee Bay first, trotsky killed people because of the russian *CIVIL WAR*. Secondly, people were killed inder mao because of 2 years of non stop natural disasters. Thirdly, if you consider pol pot and stalin actual communists, I am sorry but you are brain dead.
We do not have to equate anti-communism with pro-nazi. Absolutely a propagandist tool attempting to cheapen any dissent! All dictatorial regimes will do that! always allow free expression. I how many millions of fellow country men have Communists, bolsheviks and Nazis murdered?All in the name of consolidating a regimen?Putting the country under their heel!
The old Trotskyist "jail" excuse. She had been to the left of Lenin on matters of organization (party vs council) for 2 decades. Her notes on the Bolsheviks were completely in line with her political views and previously written works. The claims made after her death by a couple of her pro-Lenin comrades that she changed her opinions in the last months or weeks of her life are unconvincing hearsay.
As much as the Spartacists may have lacked patience.. Lenin lacked any true understanding regarding the power of social democracy to subvert workers' revolutionary potential in Germany. The lessons from the revolution in authoritarian semi-feudal Czarist Russia, where there were neither unions or a social democratic tradition, were ill suited for Germany or the West. Something no Leninist has ever seemed to grasp
And yet the first thing Luxemburg did on being released from prison was to set about organising a Communist Party modelled on the lines of the Bolshevik Party. Hmm hmm...
@@redherring1337 The Spartakusbund? Read Luxemburg's statements like "What Does the Spartacus League Want?". It was not a Leninist vanguard party. What the organization was turned into after the death Luxemburg and Liebknecht is not their responsibility.
@@redherring1337 That is incorrect. She didn't set up a party modeled after the Bolshevik party. Nor did the Spartacists become that kind of party under her leadership. But the party did gradually yield to the USSR Bolshevik model afterwards, after the death of Rosa Luxemburg
@@SagesseNoir "they yielded to democratic socialism in other words".....disgusting Why all the conjecture, when Rosa is more than capable of speaking for herself Rosa Luxemburg The Russian Revolution Written: 1918. Rosa had a number of criticism of the bolsheviks that she covered , and her conclusion was: "Everything that happens in Russia is comprehensible and represents an inevitable chain of causes and effects, the starting point and end term of which are: the failure of the German proletariat and the occupation of Russia by German imperialism. It would be demanding something superhuman from Lenin and his comrades if we should expect of them that under such circumstances they should conjure forth the finest democracy, the most exemplary dictatorship of the proletariat and a flourishing socialist economy. By their determined revolutionary stand, their exemplary strength in action, and their unbreakable loyalty to international socialism, they have contributed whatever could possibly be contributed under such devilishly hard conditions. The danger begins only when they make a virtue of necessity and want to freeze into a complete theoretical system all the tactics forced upon them by these fatal circumstances, and want to recommend them to the international proletariat as a model of socialist tactics. When they get in there own light in this way, and hide their genuine, unquestionable historical service under the bushel of false steps forced on them by necessity, they render a poor service to international socialism for the sake of which they have fought and suffered; for they want to place in its storehouse as new discoveries all the distortions prescribed in Russia by necessity and compulsion - in the last analysis only by-products of the bankruptcy of international socialism in the present world war. Let the German Government Socialists cry that the rule of the Bolsheviks in Russia is a distorted expression of the dictatorship of the proletariat. If it was or is such, that is only because it is a product of the behavior of the German proletariat, in itself a distorted expression of the socialist class struggle. All of us are subject to the laws of history, and it is only internationally that the socialist order of society can be realized. The Bolsheviks have shown that they are capable of everything that a genuine revolutionary party can contribute within the limits of historical possibilities. They are not supposed to perform miracles. For a model and faultless proletarian revolution in an isolated land, exhausted by world war, strangled by imperialism, betrayed by the international proletariat, would be a miracle. What is in order is to distinguish the essential from the non-essential, the kernel from the accidental excrescences in the politics of the Bolsheviks. In the present period, when we face decisive final struggles in all the world, the most important problem of socialism was and is the burning question of our time. It is not a matter of this or that secondary question of tactics, but of the capacity for action of the proletariat, the strength to act, the will to power of socialism as such. In this, Lenin and Trotsky and their friends were the first, those who went ahead as an example to the proletariat of the world; they are still the only ones up to now who can cry with Hutten: “I have dared!” This is the essential and enduring in Bolshevik policy. In this sense theirs is the immortal historical service of having marched at the head of the international proletariat with the conquest of political power and the practical placing of the problem of the realization of socialism, and of having advanced mightily the settlement of the score between capital and labor in the entire world. In Russia, the problem could only be posed. It could not be solved in Russia. And in this sense, the future everywhere belongs to “Bolshevism.”
@@syvadcram I don't know what you are talking about but how about the US destabilizing latin america and the middle east and doing regime change wars? Thereby helping to put in governments that privatize their industries, opening them up to foreign markets and inviting in US multinationals. How about multinationals paying people peanuts for producing goods in Mexico and bangladesh? While CEOs rake in billions? WHILE also destroying the planet by the continued use of fossil fuels that will eventually render many places uninhabitable to live in the future?
Great example of courage and dedication. Great resource for a hallucinated Europe that destroyed Nazism, communism, fascism and racism all the principles of humanity, which has given honor to Europe and the whole world.
The USSR was really a failed experiment, if anything. Leninism was a more right-wing variation of socialism, which emphasized authoritarianism and nationalism, which rosa opposed.
The USSR was an example of what Marx called "Bonapartism". It was a dictatorship OVER the proletariat, featuring a police state. Hitler, Mussolini and Juan Peron also are examples of "Bonapartism" 👎
Kinda funny hear this Trot talking about Zimmerwald. “Trotsky arrived, and this scoundrel at once came to an understanding with the Right-wing of Novy Mir against the Left Zimmerwaldians! Just so! That is just like Trotsky! He is always equal to himself-twists, swindles, poses as a Left, helps the Right, so long as he can.” -Lenin to Inessa Armand, Feb. 1917
TheFinnishBolshevik and this proves what? the doings of lenin and trotsky, their common struggle against bureaucracy in lenins last days bashes this idealistic construct about trotsky stalinist have. trotsky did not stood for antimarxist idea of socialism in one state, trotsky did not stood for antimarxist idea of party bureaucracy, he, together with lenin, clearly stood for democratic workers control and international workers movement, which stalin from the beginning sabotaged and destroyed in purges and assasinations of marxist representatives in other countries.
You realize that you undermine all your work by creating unnecessary friction over what happened 100 years ago and are serving the interests of the capitalists as, we are going down for the 3rd time? Anarchists do the same slandering Lenin day in day out. Are we children that have to be right over nothing....or men?
@@mydarlinggirlrachae I was a bit sectarian 3 years ago. The difference between Trotskyism and Leninism is not entirely pointless or unnecessary, but we can and should try to work together if possible
@@thefinnishbolshevik2404 Also Lenin, on his supposed hatred of Trotsky: "How they lie about us! Show me another man who can create and lead professional army from scratch as Trotsky did!"
I would argue that that 1918 "revolution" actually paved the way for Hitler: The attempt to imitiate the Bolshevik Revolution caused a powerful counter movement: Featuring the Freicorps and the German Workers Party (which because the Nazis). This counterrevolution actually had working class support, as the Nazis ended up out polling both the SDP and KPD. Had Germany had a version of England's Glorious Revolution - a coup just to replace the Kaiser - there might have been no serious counterrevolution and no Nazi success. 👎
Did you not listen to the lecture? I agree that the *failed* revolution paved the way for nazism, but that's just because it failed. In the talk Marie expresses the late formation of the Communist Party as one of the big reasons the revolution failed, so if you actually want to stop nazis, you should commit 100% to the revolution and the most effective organization of the working class, the party. If the revolution had succeeded, there is no way nazism would have risen, just imagine a Communist Belgium, Germany (highly industrialized), Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, and Russia united against the capitalist world order, how much better would the world not be today! ✊🚩
@@umbreonstop-motion5780 Total BS. The present economic success of China and Vietnam is because they have RESTORED capitalism! Putin is emerging as a major world player because Russia itself has ALSO RESTORED capitalism! There has never been the utopian socialist state envisioned by Màrx and Engels because a MARKET ECONOMY coexists even in planned economies. In the former Soviet Union, there WAS capitalism - in the form of black markets and bribery. E.g. if there was a 10 year waiting list to buy a car, one would bribe a commissar to get one. Marxism is based on an irrational religious faith that a future utopian society is possible. This is also the false claim of Christianity and Islam: Promises of false future utopia after appearance of a fictional Second Coming of Jesus or a Madhi. I don't believe in Socialist utopia for the same reason I don't believe in Santa Claus: Both are lies. Another myth: That a "workers revolution" will inevitably lead to socialism: Donald Trump's and Hitler's political success was the result of working class people turning Right, rather than Left, as a result of economic insecurity. A "workers revolution" in America would be a Trump dictatorship, not a Communist revolution. This tendency was actually recognized by Marx in the case of Napoleon III and labeled "Bonapartism". I would argue that the defunct Soviet Union really was "Bonapartist", not "Communist". 👎
SagesseNoir The nordic countries would be called commie socialist countries by republicans. Even our right winged parties are even more left winged than the democrats in the US.
I Know. I wish we could have something like Scandinavian social democracy. I guess with socialism you would go further and actually have working people in control of production organized on a cooperative basis. But social democracy would would be ok with me right now. My community needs it badly.
SagesseNoir Personally im a democratic socialist but i live under social democracy and its fine and very good living standards were the people is united and everyone help eachother, We have equal rights in education and healthcare and the list goes on. I personally dont understand why so many Americans think that we live in hell and that we pay 70% taxes. That is not true. Persobally i pay 23% taxes every month. And those taxes goes to the people and i happily pay them so that other people can have good life. Taxes are based on your income so its fair that everyone contributes equally.
The worst part is :while all socialists like to gather up in one big familly against capitalism and everybody else who refuses to agree with them is an enemy, none of them as individuals can claim that capitalism failed them. They failed themselves...and that will always be an open wound, very deep, that requires lots of honesty and strenght to deal with
Easy to say when you live in the west bro. (socialists are so splintered and few relatively, due to purges by the US admin that has succeeded in making them ineffectual and pretty toothless organizations)
@@arthurmorgan1550 oh yeah? How so? Are you guys that stupid to call poor african coutries as capitalism? Eyes back to gulags, 110 mil dead bodies, totalitarian regimes while the highest competence was to be a party member. I am not pretty sure , I know what it ment because I am from East Europe. So blw me with your ideals and pseudo political science and chopped off history
@@AdamantSeraph Poor African countries are capitalist bud. You can point at gulags all you want but capitalist countries has labor camps and literal slavery so... and communism did not kill 110 million. That’s pure nonsense.
