@@NovoPravda I get sick of seeing Jens in the news almost every day begging for more war and more western imperialism. And to think that when I were younger I used to think that labour parties were on the left
Dusya is actually the reincarnation of Karl Marx himself, in the body of a cat. Dusya is the least reactionary. We should all follow in Dusya's footsteps.
Dusya thinks Izdihar is a reactionary. Dusya seeks to seize the means of cat food production! How is it that Dusya's mother decides when Dusya eats?! Or what they claw on?!
I'm so sorry for the hate you face. It's clear you have good heart and is working hard to share revolutionary knowledge to help people think critically and have a better understanding of Socialism/Communism. But there are immature individuals who want to spread hate, blindly criticize and hurt to feel superior. I love despite that you continue to create good content and inspire us!
So glad we've been blessed with another banger Izdihar video 🙏 Also like, "I'm not strong at theory" *proceeds to explain a great way to productively engage with theory that a lot of people on the internet seem to be totally unaware of* lol if only everyone was this "not strong" at theory
4:10 “step one is reading the text!” I’ve found that when you encounter a reactionary who wants to tell you how “stupid Marxism is,” you find that none of them have even gotten to step one. In fact, I don’t think I’ve ever met a right wing person who has read any political theory before in my life. Step one is REALLY IMPORTANT if you want to debate an idea! Why are we the only ones that get to step one!?!
as a marxist, i don't know any socialists or communists that are familiar with intelligent far right theory, and all of them, embracing every kind of simple social constructionism, would lose to right wingers in an academic debate based in materialism. so i would say most socialists today are ironically reactionaries of a type
i’m new to all of this, so some of your points fly over my head a little bit - but this video is really well made and engaging. even as someone who doesn’t understand a lot of what you’re saying, it gives me motivation to learn ! also your style is so awesome :OOO
Comrade Izdihar, I want to tell that, after googling "All Reactionaries are Paper Tigers" and going to images to find some visuals, I ended up finding a picture of you in the seventh row! Congratulations for your presence comrade, it is of great inspiration!
Interesting that Seattle and Washington State were considered politically “Soviet” at one point as I’ve always thought of Seattle as being aesthetically similar in certain ways to many Soviet cities. Trolleybuses, Lenin statue, modernist buildings, etc.
Mao is actually a great place to begin reading theory because he was writing in a straightforward manner for the largely illiterate peasant population, so it had to be simple to read and easy comprehend.
@@elonmusksellssnakeoil1744 so this is a religious outreach answer my questions? because I understand more about material reality than Mao. Mao didn't understand class, didn't understand science, genetics, was totally anti-bourgious, was totally anti-colonialist, and mixed confucianism (despite the war on confucian symbols and language) with stalin's ideas and a touch of anarchism. Mao is often unfairly demonized as some kind of devil, and he did have some accomplishments, but he's closer to a smarter Harry Truman than a Rosa Luxembourg.
@Fishandloavesforall well i am in the working class, and I don't care about socialists in an era without a mass workers movement (like our own), and an era when capitalism has further sorted the masses into categories far more than it had 100 years ago. Socialists, self styled of today, aren't going to have anything to do with socialism. They are socialists because their own personality types, class backgrounds, genetic make ups, etc.
Legitimacy is ultimately in the mind. When I think of reactionaries, I think of Charles X of France, who sought to bring back many pre-1789 elements of the French Monarchy well after the French Revolution. He sought nostalgia for old systems.
Im enjoying the video, in terms of the content you are relaying, but I'm taking a second here to just say *your wardrobe is so on point it's fucking insane.*
It's surreal seeing a vintage propaganda poster in 1967 still using traditional text despite the first rollout of the simplified Chinese text was in 1955, It's also published by the what appears to be Shanghai Fudan University Revolutionary Rebel Corps(上海复旦革命造反总队), the Cultural Revolution was initially a students movement but a decentralised movement at that as they can be very dogmatic even among themselves who is from another school or universities which can at time either end up in a brawl or drive by shootings.
I have a very similar but tiny version of your enameled Mao mug. I will forever believe Mao is smiling at me because he's amused at the face I make after downing a shot of hongxing ergoutou.
One of the most common areas I see reactionary tendencies arise is drug policy. Things that might seem counterintuitive to some like safe injection sites are often dismissed despite evidence showing their efficacy. Also, I believe the concept of schismogenisis, which I was introduced to through the book “The Dawn of Everything” could be applied to the topic of reactionaries.
@himpim642 You are proving what they said : having a *Reaction* because it's counterintuitive, despite being studied and found an effective at prevention of OD + more likely to be recruited into a drug program. DEAD ADDICTS DONT RECOVER Services like MAT, hospital and psych should and do also exist but Addiction itself is not the immediate #1 concern we should have about those already addicted, there are 2 concerns higher in priority: 1. Overdose (because of the drug contamination epidemic)and 2. the spread of incurable HIV and HEPC. The latter is near completely addressed by syringe exchange wherever it exists. We went from HIV prevalence in IV users of something ridiculous like 65% to LESS THAN 2% in like a decade. Addicts have sexual transmission contact with every high risk group: heterosexual, LGBT, sex work, prison, prenatal and breastfeeding. And addicts who do sterile syringe exchange are more likely to access drug treatment because they arw already connected and trust the public health system. The assumptions it will make you use more are not actually based on how IV drug users ACTUALLY BEHAVE but how we PROJECT they will based on assumptions. FOr example , ppl assume the prevalence of Narcan will make addicts value their life less because they can always reverse an OD. But that's because they don't understand the actual experience. Narcan is usually incredibly painful and horrific experience to an addict; even to the outliers for whom it doesn't cause pain, chemical terror and condensed withdrawal, it is at minimum a rough day. By contrast ODing FEELS GOOD. Its dying that is easy and pleasant and being revived that is Hell, not the other way around. Addicts try to avoid getting Narcanned. But if someone doesn't understand that, they are going to make incorrect assumptions about incentive and then policies based on their incorrect assumptions.
I really enjoyed the breakdown of how to effectively read political theory. I don’t know why you were waving that knife in our face, but it added a certain jenesaisquoi
This is such a fun and informative video! I appreciate the time you took to define 'reactionary' in your own way. The parallels between the past and the way a 'paper tiger' betrayed a movement feels very pertinent... Haha I love all the parallels we can see between the 20's and 30's and the current day. It's great! In all seriousness though, drawing these parallels through time between the comrades of the past and the comrades of today is heartening. I love to see it! Many kudos!!!
In my opinion, the correct theory aligns with a proletarian outlook. That said, I don't think most communists in this country agree which class fits the definition of proletariat today.
A lot of work is spent confusing the theory on this. The definition is really rather simple: Do you own capital (assets able to produce value without your input, company shares, real estate, etc)? Youre a capitalist. Are you forced to rent your time to someone else to survive, aka, do you work for a wage? You're working class. Doesn't matter how much you earn. Middle class is an invented term made to trick working class people into thinking they are somehow elevated above their "lower class" fellows, introducing interior class strife.
I’m surprised I haven’t heard the colossus with Clay feet analogy from Vladimir Lenin before. I always get something positive out of your videos. Thanks!
Thank you for your excellent work, as always, comrade. I don't know if it's used more widely, but in South Africa we say of reactionaries within our movement, that they "talk Left, but walk Right", and I've always found that a very useful line.
Your contributions are always welcome (and well founded), Lady Izdihar. Great video! I especially like the highlighting of the phenomenon of the "reactionary within", cause it's very easy to point fingers (and, tbh, I don't see tooooo many people misusing the term usually), but it's harder to look inside the movement (or ourselves!) and spot said tendencies. And I prefer to call it a tendency cause most people have reactionary tendencies without being entirely reactionary as people (those who are are generally outright imperialists). (making it a point to comment instead of just liking the video to counter some of the insane negativity you get for no reason)
I don't know how I bumped into this video but I'm really happy I did. I was really drawn by your description of how to analysis! I realized it's something I've seen over and over again being done (let's say in political and philosophy video essays but never put into words). Thanks comrade!
This was a wonderful and informative video, I especially liked the humble angle from which you approached the topic. The content itself showcased your understanding better than any amount of bragging could. Thank you for all the hard work!😎
Great video, thanks for sharing. Ole Hanson being a turncoat reminded me of another US politician who betrayed workers after they helped get him elected. During his first campaign, Reagan said he supported PATCO(Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization) and their fight for better pay and safer working conditions. Because of Reagan's promised support, PATCO even endorsed Reagan. Once in the Whitehouse, Reagan went back on his word, and ended up firing ~11,000 union members. Alzheimer's was better than Ol' Ronnie deserved. Solidarity forever ✊
This reminds me there was also an american commune in the Caucasus called Seattle! From 1922-39. Some buildings are still there and still called Seattle. The "Seattle Agricultural Commune"
You did a fantastic job comrade. That might be one of the most thoughtful deconstructions of the meaning of 'reactionary' I've yet encountered from anyone on the interwebs. Very, very well said.
Not going to lie but I started watching this channel out of like a “hate-watching” anti-“performative” impulse. Honestly, now; this programme has changed my life, and how I approach my politics. Performance IS activism it’s probably one of the most evocative, legitimating, immersive forms of activism. Contemporary communist discourse is ironically fantastical in that it is focussed on a future to come while ignoring the past in which actual communists lived; this outlook gives orientalist vibes. “Anglo-communism or no communism!”. We need to live and act, how we aim to live and act; now. And in a late capitalist hellscape, looking back, and emulating our historical comrades is the perfect place to start! Thank you comrade Izdihar you are doing good work. X
I love your videos in general but the this one and the one before have been exceptionally good. I like the direction your taking. And really well made too!
the amount of critical thinking skills, maturity and self-awareness you have is much larger than the majority of leftist in the west have. If we all thought this way we could have genuine educated conversations around theory and build stronger connections to creating a solid pathway towards communism.
My mom was helping clean out a house belonging to the deceased mother of a colleague and brought me back a 1967 red book lol (just flexing I got my cool shit without seeking it out)
I learn something new every time you post a new video. Thanks Lady Izdihar! The steps to analyze theory texts are very helpful, going to use it reading books from now on! Answering your question, I think the most stark example of reactionary movement from within today are the people who are willing to accept imperialism if the state pinky-promises them of better conditions for the working class. Essentially allowing solidarity among international capitalist forces while dissolving solidarity among international working class forces.
9:43 Very much so. Talking to so many leftists you come away with the notion that "hierarchy is good and necessary, actually." (Maoists are among the worst, but I see it everywhere in the "socialist/communist" left.) The point of leftward movement is democratization and its equalizing principles, not a better welfare state with a hierarchical power structure that revolves around "the right people" rather than capital and the old-money aristocracy. Rather than push for greater democracy, even inclusive of conservatives (exposure over time is the best deradicalizer of the right), they push for "the right people" to take power, because "it's good when we do it, but bad when they do it." There's obviously a difference in outcomes between the far right and "the right people," but the tendency is for those in authority, no matter their leanings, to progressively...regress in terms of methodology and the justification for it. It is all about following the vision of a select few or a single "great man" (of course it's a man), and forcing everyone to abide by it. Anyone who doesn't like it is a "reactionary" or some other servant of capital that needs to be isolated, disenfranchised and attacked (strategies that enable and empower the rightward shift while undermining the whole point of leftward movement. Again, Maoists are among the worst, but I see it everywhere on the left). The point of Lenin is that the people, not their "leaders," must hold the real power. The focus on leadership rather than democratization is the tripping point of most leftist movements. Mao definitely made some efforts towards democratization (it's hard not to for any leftist movement in a feudal nation), but as he also noted there was a strong tendency of the leaders to disempower those democratic elements. We can't just point to the power of the proletariat, we have to EMPOWER the proletariat by democratizing government and the economy, because to do otherwise is to follow that definition of reactionary via trying to maintain the old hierarchical notions of how people should govern, to conserve the power structure while changing aspects of it; there is a level of democracy, but that democracy can and often will be ignored by the people above (in part or in whole). That's why Lenin's "fullest democracy" and similar phrases are important. It's not about merely achieving "better" outcomes, but giving the people the right to build their own society "in their own way, for themselves, on the principles of their own Soviet." That can't be done in a system that touts the "mass line" as its way to keep the leaders abrest of the proletariat; the leaders should be teaching the proletariat how to rule itself democratically, not rule over them "but helping them become more class conscious." (I'm not a fan of Mao or Maoists. Every discussion I've had with Maoists always comes back to "we should have leaders above us deciding who is allowed to participate and who is not." For all of their talk of democracy, that's what it boils down to. And it's the democracy of select individuals even if it's totally randomized, meaning that no matter how faithful the individuals are to the class's ideals, they represent THEIR vision of what should be. Representative democracies all have that fatal flaw, which is why calling it a "form of democracy" is a euphemism; it's only democratic for the few that get to participate. That's why statist movements like Maoism adopt the model rather than more fully democratizing everything. They promise democracy but they give more top-down control. Mao's writings have some good points, but they do not lead to the democratization that Marx and Lenin called for. They lead to "better leadership." Hopefully. If reactionaries or others trying to coopt the movement don't get into those positions.) Good video as usual.
We also have to oppose vague and lazy abstractions of complex subjects, we have to oppose idealistic tendencies of thought that ascribe to the material conditions utopian and metaphysical concepts. Democracy and the necessity for democratization are used very often to disparage progressive organizations and socialist experiments around the world, and what's worse, these idealistic conceptualizations are used to dismiss the material conditions in favor of metaphysical and philosophical utopianism. The critique of "Statist" models of socialism are one such example of idealistic analysis that dismisses the fact we live under an era of imperialism. The latter being a very specific set of base and super-structural circumstances. "Democracy and Decentralization" nonetheless remain in the abstract plain, they remain ideal. If imperialism, such a complex topic, has strict requirements for it's existence: historical, material, sociological, economical, &c, why democracy in the final analysis always remains definite enough to be invoked and demanded, but vague enough for it to be infinitely flexible? In their final analysis the democratic content and behavior of organizations and socialist experiments is always inadequate and the undemocratic always expresses itself in the organized exertion of organized working class power. Democracy in their final analysis becomes a hazy conception that never applies to communist organization and becomes a rallying point from which to oppose it. In the final vague, abstract and lazy analysis, good working class leadership, which means the democratization of society and organization for the sole benefactor that is the popular class -- equates tyranny. This is counter-revolutionary.
Mao Zedong Thought is not suitable for the whole world, but only for China's actual condition. So you should not copy Mao Zedong Thought, but learn the essence of Mao Zedong Thought: seek truth from facts and serve the people wholeheartedly! You should apply it flexibly!
@@特警-y6h That is a religious response, not one that has anything to do with socialism. MZT is not about democratization, it is about "better governance." Socialism IS democratization, which was the point Marx/Engels kept trying to make. That Mao created a religion with Marxist aesthetics does not change anything. Lysenkoism never would have taken hold in China otherwise, especially not with your proclamation that it's ESSENCE is "seek truth from facts and serve the people wholeheartedly," because the whole idea was not verified before mass application, before Mao's "Eight Point Charter of Agriculture." MZT is not a socialist tool. It's a religious tool for "better statism" with Marxist aesthetics. Without democratization as the core activity of the movement, the foundation of the ideology, there is no socialism. The 1989 protests across China demanding more democracy would not have been stomped-out if MZT was about building socialism, nor would the lack of meaningful democracy have been a common complaint in the decade leading up to those protests. Sorry, I don't consider Maoists to be socialists/communists. Democratization is THE thing that defines socialism, but Maoists double down on hierarchy; even "the essence of Mao Zedong Thought" only thinly veils that fact. Not one Maoist has ever made an argument that didn't go back to "the right people in power." And that's the argument of Aristotle's followers, including feudalists and capitalists and fascists. How "wholehearted" the government officials serve the people is entirely meaningless in discussions of socialist thought except in how movements can get derailed.
Hi, I just wanted to say that I discovered your channel a few days ago and that your videos have been educating me a bit on what communism actually is. So uhh, thanks and I hope you have a great day
Great analysis, really appreciate the nuance and connections to today! (Loved the search through the chest and poster tubes, and that mao poster is phenomenal) Of course, the largest paper tiger still today is the face of US imperialism but now with the spearhead of global zionism. We saw zionism fall in "25 minutes" (jon elmer) and see the US aircraft carriers being repelled in the Red Sea for the first time since WWII. They've been losing wars left and right since WWII getting chunks taken out of their facade, and yet still stand... but barely. We must claw the insides of the beast. Mao said as well that the Korean people were the first people in the world to pierce the idea of US invincibility. Thanks Iz!
They've been losing wars left and right since WWII getting chunks taken out of their facade, and yet still stand... but barely. and in same time its ussr whcih collapsed and other communsit power china made delas with them...their lost wars are disangement from costs sadly not cause of military defeats.USSR wasnt defeated in afgansitan as well just it became too costly to engage. norrth korea was mauled by us invaders and only chinise enterign war saved them and even on door step china coudlnt push ameericans and they are still there. China is tehrefore playing long game as they dotn underesimate enemies.
If I may put forward something a bit silly but fun to think about; it is a law of motion that "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction." As activists, we take action to improve our material conditions, but the law of physics necessarily means there will be reaction. As Marxists, we take action as part of class struggle, which means reaction takes a class character as well. So you might say a reactionary represents the opposition to action as a sociopolitical expression of Newton's laws of motion.
I first liked the term reading it in an underground magazine about China in the late 60's. Luv your in depth full spectrum analysis, Mam. My favorite despicable Fishhead is NATO Sec. Stoltenberg these days, thanks for the Skidaddle historical context🇵🇸🙂
Just at the finale if this as I'm typing... and again... I love it!! I've often had discussions l ike this so it's so nice to see it's not just a weird geek like me talking about it! 😊 Reactionaries are always a subject of conversations and what defines them and so on. I'm glad I subscribed to you the other day, I have to say!! Awesome, fantastic human being that ye are! Much love and solidarity as always 🥰💗❤💚💙✊✊✊
Y'know I was watching this old movie from the 70s set in Iran and it made me realize the Shah's government barely even lasted 26 years; most people last longer than that. Talk about a paper tiger.
Does your Quotations of Chairman Mao book have the preface by Lin Biao? The first versions of the book came with it, the later versions without. Concerning Mao and especially the "Mao bible" it's wothwhile to engage with the history of the 68s movements in France, West Germany etc.
Ole Hanson Hate club assemble!! Norwegians, you owe me an apology 😡
Man I love your work
Lady Izdihar hating Norwegians 🤝 Hakim hating the French
I think we owe the world one because of the existance of Jens Stotenberg
@@NovoPravda I get sick of seeing Jens in the news almost every day begging for more war and more western imperialism. And to think that when I were younger I used to think that labour parties were on the left
Australia has its own arch-reactionary with the same last name -- Pauline Hanson. Not just a real-life villain, but a vile anti-Muslim racist too
Your uncle at thanksgiving
Good thing we don't celebrate thanksgiving.
@@cheesydawg371 good thing I agree 👍
@@waspwrap1235 high five ✋
@@cheesydawg371 hell yea high-five
thank you aamogus
Dusya is actually the reincarnation of Karl Marx himself, in the body of a cat. Dusya is the least reactionary. We should all follow in Dusya's footsteps.
Dusya thinks Izdihar is a reactionary. Dusya seeks to seize the means of cat food production! How is it that Dusya's mother decides when Dusya eats?! Or what they claw on?!
Pawsteps, you reactionary anti-pawist
cats are hereditary bourgeoisie
I am a Dusya-Meowist, thank you very much
I'm so sorry for the hate you face. It's clear you have good heart and is working hard to share revolutionary knowledge to help people think critically and have a better understanding of Socialism/Communism. But there are immature individuals who want to spread hate, blindly criticize and hurt to feel superior. I love despite that you continue to create good content and inspire us!
wake up world new lady izdihar video just dropped
"Women hold up half the sky" ✊💅
They do!
easy to say it and suallyt lip service in slogan done by every society.party remained male dominated till this day.
5(+?) different fits and they all go hard. Long live chairwoman Izdihar and the drip of the working class.
🫡 🫡 🫡
What if the real reactionaries were the friends we made along the way.
then i probably didn't make very good friends, did i?
🤣🤣
if reactionaries had actual friends they wouldnt be so reactionary
many such cases unfortunately
@@YetAnotherInvHas nothing to do with being a bad or good friend
I live in Seattle. I had no idea about the would be Bolshevik Revolution of Seattle. I learn so much from your channel.
Our city is full of communist history, and much of it is connected to the soviets! I wish it was more widely known
@@LadyIzdihar ill tune in to learn more
If yall ever get a chance to check it out there's a neat Lenin monument in Fremont!!
Same on the east coast too!@@LadyIzdihar
Yeah, I didn't either. That might explain why there was a Lenin statue in Seattle.
Thanks!
So glad we've been blessed with another banger Izdihar video 🙏
Also like, "I'm not strong at theory" *proceeds to explain a great way to productively engage with theory that a lot of people on the internet seem to be totally unaware of* lol if only everyone was this "not strong" at theory
Thank you 😭😭😭
4:10 “step one is reading the text!”
I’ve found that when you encounter a reactionary who wants to tell you how “stupid Marxism is,” you find that none of them have even gotten to step one. In fact, I don’t think I’ve ever met a right wing person who has read any political theory before in my life.
Step one is REALLY IMPORTANT if you want to debate an idea! Why are we the only ones that get to step one!?!
as a marxist, i don't know any socialists or communists that are familiar with intelligent far right theory, and all of them, embracing every kind of simple social constructionism, would lose to right wingers in an academic debate based in materialism. so i would say most socialists today are ironically reactionaries of a type
i’m new to all of this, so some of your points fly over my head a little bit - but this video is really well made and engaging. even as someone who doesn’t understand a lot of what you’re saying, it gives me motivation to learn ! also your style is so awesome :OOO
25:12 it really should be said to 'sweep the capitalist dust', because capitalism, imper¡al¡$m, fa$©¡sm will not crumble by themselves. They will only produce more crises and world w@®s if left untouched. Lenin also wrote that the capitalist rule will not fall down on itself, but it needs a nudge from the proletariat. So no reformism is acceptable.
Keep up the amazing work! I’d love to hear more inspirational stories about the people of the USSR!
0:22 “He, she, me, reactionary “ - Patrick Star
Comrade Izdihar, I want to tell that, after googling "All Reactionaries are Paper Tigers" and going to images to find some visuals, I ended up finding a picture of you in the seventh row! Congratulations for your presence comrade, it is of great inspiration!
Interesting that Seattle and Washington State were considered politically “Soviet” at one point as I’ve always thought of Seattle as being aesthetically similar in certain ways to many Soviet cities. Trolleybuses, Lenin statue, modernist buildings, etc.
Your enthusiasm is a treat.
It's 1 am and now i want to cosplay as a soviet man
Do it
@@LadyIzdihar my tailor is gonna be very confused
By drinking vodka and chasing it with pickles?
@@nikitachaykin6774 Foolish.
Pickle first.
Chase with vodka.
I love your version of the Little Red Book! 😍I have one that has a really awful preamble about how bad Mao is lol
Omg that's terrible. I'm sorry 😞
Mao is actually a great place to begin reading theory because he was writing in a straightforward manner for the largely illiterate peasant population, so it had to be simple to read and easy comprehend.
The same applies for lenin and uncle ho
OK but what was Mao right about?
@@emilianosintarias7337, that's what the reading is for - to answer your questions.
@@elonmusksellssnakeoil1744 so this is a religious outreach answer my questions? because I understand more about material reality than Mao. Mao didn't understand class, didn't understand science, genetics, was totally anti-bourgious, was totally anti-colonialist, and mixed confucianism (despite the war on confucian symbols and language) with stalin's ideas and a touch of anarchism. Mao is often unfairly demonized as some kind of devil, and he did have some accomplishments, but he's closer to a smarter Harry Truman than a Rosa Luxembourg.
@Fishandloavesforall well i am in the working class, and I don't care about socialists in an era without a mass workers movement (like our own), and an era when capitalism has further sorted the masses into categories far more than it had 100 years ago. Socialists, self styled of today, aren't going to have anything to do with socialism. They are socialists because their own personality types, class backgrounds, genetic make ups, etc.
Nice video! Your job is so important, we need more references to a revolutionary thinking in internet
Legitimacy is ultimately in the mind.
When I think of reactionaries, I think of Charles X of France, who sought to bring back many pre-1789 elements of the French Monarchy well after the French Revolution. He sought nostalgia for old systems.
敢教日月換新天--要斗私批修 "Daring to command the sun and moon to exchange for a new sky - must fight selfishness and criticize flaws."
Im enjoying the video, in terms of the content you are relaying, but I'm taking a second here to just say *your wardrobe is so on point it's fucking insane.*
I love your outfits. They give a lot of personality to your videos which I love.
Thank you so much!💖
It's surreal seeing a vintage propaganda poster in 1967 still using traditional text despite the first rollout of the simplified Chinese text was in 1955, It's also published by the what appears to be Shanghai Fudan University Revolutionary Rebel Corps(上海复旦革命造反总队), the Cultural Revolution was initially a students movement but a decentralised movement at that as they can be very dogmatic even among themselves who is from another school or universities which can at time either end up in a brawl or drive by shootings.
I have a very similar but tiny version of your enameled Mao mug.
I will forever believe Mao is smiling at me because he's amused at the face I make after downing a shot of hongxing ergoutou.
"You foreigners are so weird..." - Comrade Mao (maybe)
Great analysis comrade.
Lady Idzihar content of a Saturday afternoon 😍
One of the most common areas I see reactionary tendencies arise is drug policy. Things that might seem counterintuitive to some like safe injection sites are often dismissed despite evidence showing their efficacy. Also, I believe the concept of schismogenisis, which I was introduced to through the book “The Dawn of Everything” could be applied to the topic of reactionaries.
hard on drug policy snt reacitonay excep as in liberal societies.addicts need reducatijn adn hospital help not hel in maintining their addictions/
@himpim642
You are proving what they said : having a *Reaction* because it's counterintuitive, despite being studied and found an effective at prevention of OD + more likely to be recruited into a drug program. DEAD ADDICTS DONT RECOVER
Services like MAT, hospital and psych should and do also exist but Addiction itself is not the immediate #1 concern we should have about those already addicted, there are 2 concerns higher in priority:
1. Overdose (because of the drug contamination epidemic)and
2. the spread of incurable HIV and HEPC. The latter is near completely addressed by syringe exchange wherever it exists. We went from HIV prevalence in IV users of something ridiculous like 65% to LESS THAN 2% in like a decade. Addicts have sexual transmission contact with every high risk group: heterosexual, LGBT, sex work, prison, prenatal and breastfeeding. And addicts who do sterile syringe exchange are more likely to access drug treatment because they arw already connected and trust the public health system.
The assumptions it will make you use more are not actually based on how IV drug users ACTUALLY BEHAVE but how we PROJECT they will based on assumptions.
FOr example , ppl assume the prevalence of Narcan will make addicts value their life less because they can always reverse an OD. But that's because they don't understand the actual experience. Narcan is usually incredibly painful and horrific experience to an addict; even to the outliers for whom it doesn't cause pain, chemical terror and condensed withdrawal, it is at minimum a rough day. By contrast ODing FEELS GOOD. Its dying that is easy and pleasant and being revived that is Hell, not the other way around. Addicts try to avoid getting Narcanned. But if someone doesn't understand that, they are going to make incorrect assumptions about incentive and then policies based on their incorrect assumptions.
I really enjoyed the breakdown of how to effectively read political theory. I don’t know why you were waving that knife in our face, but it added a certain jenesaisquoi
read or else 🔪
This is such a fun and informative video! I appreciate the time you took to define 'reactionary' in your own way. The parallels between the past and the way a 'paper tiger' betrayed a movement feels very pertinent...
Haha I love all the parallels we can see between the 20's and 30's and the current day. It's great!
In all seriousness though, drawing these parallels through time between the comrades of the past and the comrades of today is heartening. I love to see it! Many kudos!!!
great video that was unfortunately undermined by the greatest reactionary in history, Dusya 🐱 being present the whole time :((
She's no paper tiger, she's the real thing!
She needs more screen time 🤣🤣🤣
In my opinion, the correct theory aligns with a proletarian outlook. That said, I don't think most communists in this country agree which class fits the definition of proletariat today.
A lot of work is spent confusing the theory on this. The definition is really rather simple:
Do you own capital (assets able to produce value without your input, company shares, real estate, etc)? Youre a capitalist.
Are you forced to rent your time to someone else to survive, aka, do you work for a wage? You're working class. Doesn't matter how much you earn.
Middle class is an invented term made to trick working class people into thinking they are somehow elevated above their "lower class" fellows, introducing interior class strife.
Oh, I’ve been looking for a good explanation of this!
I’m surprised I haven’t heard the colossus with Clay feet analogy from Vladimir Lenin before.
I always get something positive out of your videos. Thanks!
Many thanks, comrade!
fraternal greetings from Serbia!
Bless this comrade ❤
Really amazing video, valuable, educational and entertaining; love your work!!
Forgive me if this is a reactionary reference, but15:54 is like the original "two soyjaks" meme
Thank you for your excellent work, as always, comrade. I don't know if it's used more widely, but in South Africa we say of reactionaries within our movement, that they "talk Left, but walk Right", and I've always found that a very useful line.
A reactionary is someone whose politics oppose mine, & the more they oppose me, the reactionary-er they are 🥹
Your contributions are always welcome (and well founded), Lady Izdihar. Great video! I especially like the highlighting of the phenomenon of the "reactionary within", cause it's very easy to point fingers (and, tbh, I don't see tooooo many people misusing the term usually), but it's harder to look inside the movement (or ourselves!) and spot said tendencies. And I prefer to call it a tendency cause most people have reactionary tendencies without being entirely reactionary as people (those who are are generally outright imperialists).
(making it a point to comment instead of just liking the video to counter some of the insane negativity you get for no reason)
Thanks 😊🙏
I don't know how I bumped into this video but I'm really happy I did. I was really drawn by your description of how to analysis! I realized it's something I've seen over and over again being done (let's say in political and philosophy video essays but never put into words). Thanks comrade!
Excellent work Lady Izdihar! very nice to see some longer form content from you. Good wishes from down in Aotearoa New Zealand
This was a wonderful and informative video, I especially liked the humble angle from which you approached the topic. The content itself showcased your understanding better than any amount of bragging could. Thank you for all the hard work!😎
Its okay to not be fully versed in theory, I'm glad that you still managed to make a long, productive, and organized video about it.
You are doing Mao's work.
don't mind me, just an anarchist passing through 🏴great video!
Great video, thanks for sharing.
Ole Hanson being a turncoat reminded me of another US politician who betrayed workers after they helped get him elected.
During his first campaign, Reagan said he supported PATCO(Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization) and their fight for better pay and safer working conditions. Because of Reagan's promised support, PATCO even endorsed Reagan. Once in the Whitehouse, Reagan went back on his word, and ended up firing ~11,000 union members.
Alzheimer's was better than Ol' Ronnie deserved.
Solidarity forever ✊
Reagan ehh sounds like Clinton
Strong's account of the orphanage called John Reed moved me!
This reminds me there was also an american commune in the Caucasus called Seattle! From 1922-39. Some buildings are still there and still called Seattle. The "Seattle Agricultural Commune"
You did a fantastic job comrade. That might be one of the most thoughtful deconstructions of the meaning of 'reactionary' I've yet encountered from anyone on the interwebs. Very, very well said.
You give me strength. Keep on keeping on, comrade.
Not going to lie but I started watching this channel out of like a “hate-watching” anti-“performative” impulse. Honestly, now; this programme has changed my life, and how I approach my politics. Performance IS activism it’s probably one of the most evocative, legitimating, immersive forms of activism. Contemporary communist discourse is ironically fantastical in that it is focussed on a future to come while ignoring the past in which actual communists lived; this outlook gives orientalist vibes. “Anglo-communism or no communism!”. We need to live and act, how we aim to live and act; now. And in a late capitalist hellscape, looking back, and emulating our historical comrades is the perfect place to start! Thank you comrade Izdihar you are doing good work. X
Watching your channel fills me with optimism and it makes think that positive chane is even in a deeply red state
Such a grwat video and Im glad I saw your video about the Paper Tiger Lady and the interview.
I love your videos in general but the this one and the one before have been exceptionally good. I like the direction your taking. And really well made too!
Great video
Inspiring
Informative
Thank you for the video comrade
This was my favourite video of yours, i would love to see more like this. Great work!.
Omg my city got a shoutout ❤ 11:33
( This excites me so much because we have such an amazing history of labor and civil rights movements here )
My aunts name is Izdihar
NOOOOOO, NOT comrade Dusya!!!
Thank you for the content
Oh my god I love this❤😂dunk em Lady Izdihar! 💯💯🔥🔥
This is my Karolina Zebrowska
clicked for the beautiful vintage fashion, stayed for the educational video LOL
the amount of critical thinking skills, maturity and self-awareness you have is much larger than the majority of leftist in the west have. If we all thought this way we could have genuine educated conversations around theory and build stronger connections to creating a solid pathway towards communism.
what a wonderful channel.
This vid was super useful, thanks for making it!
My mom was helping clean out a house belonging to the deceased mother of a colleague and brought me back a 1967 red book lol (just flexing I got my cool shit without seeking it out)
2:44 the song, that's Anchors Away!😊 cool!
Yep! Its royalty free and a bop!
Mao really said "nah, I'd win" or rather "nah, we'd win".
I want a copy of Mao’s red book! 😫
I learn something new every time you post a new video. Thanks Lady Izdihar! The steps to analyze theory texts are very helpful, going to use it reading books from now on!
Answering your question, I think the most stark example of reactionary movement from within today are the people who are willing to accept imperialism if the state pinky-promises them of better conditions for the working class. Essentially allowing solidarity among international capitalist forces while dissolving solidarity among international working class forces.
sick ass poster
and sick ass copy of the lil red book
Thank you. Fantastic subject, resources, and presentation. Creativity +knowledge
Excellent video and breakdown. Thank you. Best view of reactionary I've heard
9:43 Very much so. Talking to so many leftists you come away with the notion that "hierarchy is good and necessary, actually." (Maoists are among the worst, but I see it everywhere in the "socialist/communist" left.) The point of leftward movement is democratization and its equalizing principles, not a better welfare state with a hierarchical power structure that revolves around "the right people" rather than capital and the old-money aristocracy. Rather than push for greater democracy, even inclusive of conservatives (exposure over time is the best deradicalizer of the right), they push for "the right people" to take power, because "it's good when we do it, but bad when they do it."
There's obviously a difference in outcomes between the far right and "the right people," but the tendency is for those in authority, no matter their leanings, to progressively...regress in terms of methodology and the justification for it. It is all about following the vision of a select few or a single "great man" (of course it's a man), and forcing everyone to abide by it. Anyone who doesn't like it is a "reactionary" or some other servant of capital that needs to be isolated, disenfranchised and attacked (strategies that enable and empower the rightward shift while undermining the whole point of leftward movement. Again, Maoists are among the worst, but I see it everywhere on the left). The point of Lenin is that the people, not their "leaders," must hold the real power.
The focus on leadership rather than democratization is the tripping point of most leftist movements. Mao definitely made some efforts towards democratization (it's hard not to for any leftist movement in a feudal nation), but as he also noted there was a strong tendency of the leaders to disempower those democratic elements. We can't just point to the power of the proletariat, we have to EMPOWER the proletariat by democratizing government and the economy, because to do otherwise is to follow that definition of reactionary via trying to maintain the old hierarchical notions of how people should govern, to conserve the power structure while changing aspects of it; there is a level of democracy, but that democracy can and often will be ignored by the people above (in part or in whole).
That's why Lenin's "fullest democracy" and similar phrases are important. It's not about merely achieving "better" outcomes, but giving the people the right to build their own society "in their own way, for themselves, on the principles of their own Soviet." That can't be done in a system that touts the "mass line" as its way to keep the leaders abrest of the proletariat; the leaders should be teaching the proletariat how to rule itself democratically, not rule over them "but helping them become more class conscious."
(I'm not a fan of Mao or Maoists. Every discussion I've had with Maoists always comes back to "we should have leaders above us deciding who is allowed to participate and who is not." For all of their talk of democracy, that's what it boils down to. And it's the democracy of select individuals even if it's totally randomized, meaning that no matter how faithful the individuals are to the class's ideals, they represent THEIR vision of what should be. Representative democracies all have that fatal flaw, which is why calling it a "form of democracy" is a euphemism; it's only democratic for the few that get to participate. That's why statist movements like Maoism adopt the model rather than more fully democratizing everything. They promise democracy but they give more top-down control. Mao's writings have some good points, but they do not lead to the democratization that Marx and Lenin called for. They lead to "better leadership." Hopefully. If reactionaries or others trying to coopt the movement don't get into those positions.)
Good video as usual.
We also have to oppose vague and lazy abstractions of complex subjects, we have to oppose idealistic tendencies of thought that ascribe to the material conditions utopian and metaphysical concepts. Democracy and the necessity for democratization are used very often to disparage progressive organizations and socialist experiments around the world, and what's worse, these idealistic conceptualizations are used to dismiss the material conditions in favor of metaphysical and philosophical utopianism. The critique of "Statist" models of socialism are one such example of idealistic analysis that dismisses the fact we live under an era of imperialism. The latter being a very specific set of base and super-structural circumstances. "Democracy and Decentralization" nonetheless remain in the abstract plain, they remain ideal. If imperialism, such a complex topic, has strict requirements for it's existence: historical, material, sociological, economical, &c, why democracy in the final analysis always remains definite enough to be invoked and demanded, but vague enough for it to be infinitely flexible? In their final analysis the democratic content and behavior of organizations and socialist experiments is always inadequate and the undemocratic always expresses itself in the organized exertion of organized working class power. Democracy in their final analysis becomes a hazy conception that never applies to communist organization and becomes a rallying point from which to oppose it. In the final vague, abstract and lazy analysis, good working class leadership, which means the democratization of society and organization for the sole benefactor that is the popular class -- equates tyranny. This is counter-revolutionary.
毛泽东思想并不适合全世界，只适合中国的国情。所以你不要照搬毛泽东思想，而是要学习毛泽东思想的精髓：实事求是，全心全意为人民服务！要灵活运用！
Mao Zedong Thought is not suitable for the whole world, but only for China's actual condition. So you should not copy Mao Zedong Thought, but learn the essence of Mao Zedong Thought: seek truth from facts and serve the people wholeheartedly! You should apply it flexibly!
毛泽东还有句名言：理论联系实际！--Mao Zedong has a famous saying ：Linking theory with practice
@@特警-y6h That is a religious response, not one that has anything to do with socialism. MZT is not about democratization, it is about "better governance." Socialism IS democratization, which was the point Marx/Engels kept trying to make. That Mao created a religion with Marxist aesthetics does not change anything. Lysenkoism never would have taken hold in China otherwise, especially not with your proclamation that it's ESSENCE is "seek truth from facts and serve the people wholeheartedly," because the whole idea was not verified before mass application, before Mao's "Eight Point Charter of Agriculture."
MZT is not a socialist tool. It's a religious tool for "better statism" with Marxist aesthetics. Without democratization as the core activity of the movement, the foundation of the ideology, there is no socialism. The 1989 protests across China demanding more democracy would not have been stomped-out if MZT was about building socialism, nor would the lack of meaningful democracy have been a common complaint in the decade leading up to those protests.
Sorry, I don't consider Maoists to be socialists/communists. Democratization is THE thing that defines socialism, but Maoists double down on hierarchy; even "the essence of Mao Zedong Thought" only thinly veils that fact. Not one Maoist has ever made an argument that didn't go back to "the right people in power." And that's the argument of Aristotle's followers, including feudalists and capitalists and fascists. How "wholehearted" the government officials serve the people is entirely meaningless in discussions of socialist thought except in how movements can get derailed.
Where can I find a book, video, or even a podcast about the Seattle strike
Hi, I just wanted to say that I discovered your channel a few days ago and that your videos have been educating me a bit on what communism actually is. So uhh, thanks and I hope you have a great day
Just found your channel!
Thank you for being very 101 friendly with this one, it helps grab more normies! 😊
Great work!
I like your pointer lol
Much love to you comrade, love your work.
Excellent video, and excellent definition of the word comrade!
Great analysis, really appreciate the nuance and connections to today! (Loved the search through the chest and poster tubes, and that mao poster is phenomenal) Of course, the largest paper tiger still today is the face of US imperialism but now with the spearhead of global zionism. We saw zionism fall in "25 minutes" (jon elmer) and see the US aircraft carriers being repelled in the Red Sea for the first time since WWII. They've been losing wars left and right since WWII getting chunks taken out of their facade, and yet still stand... but barely. We must claw the insides of the beast.
Mao said as well that the Korean people were the first people in the world to pierce the idea of US invincibility. Thanks Iz!
They've been losing wars left and right since WWII getting chunks taken out of their facade, and yet still stand... but barely.
and in same time its ussr whcih collapsed and other communsit power china made delas with them...their lost wars are disangement from costs sadly not cause of military defeats.USSR wasnt defeated in afgansitan as well just it became too costly to engage.
norrth korea was mauled by us invaders and only chinise enterign war saved them and even on door step china coudlnt push ameericans and they are still there.
China is tehrefore playing long game as they dotn underesimate enemies.
If I may put forward something a bit silly but fun to think about; it is a law of motion that "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction." As activists, we take action to improve our material conditions, but the law of physics necessarily means there will be reaction. As Marxists, we take action as part of class struggle, which means reaction takes a class character as well. So you might say a reactionary represents the opposition to action as a sociopolitical expression of Newton's laws of motion.
I first liked the term reading it in an underground magazine about China in the late 60's. Luv your in depth full spectrum analysis, Mam. My favorite despicable Fishhead is NATO Sec. Stoltenberg these days, thanks for the Skidaddle historical context🇵🇸🙂
Just at the finale if this as I'm typing... and again... I love it!! I've often had discussions l ike this so it's so nice to see it's not just a weird geek like me talking about it! 😊
Reactionaries are always a subject of conversations and what defines them and so on. I'm glad I subscribed to you the other day, I have to say!! Awesome, fantastic human being that ye are! Much love and solidarity as always 🥰💗❤💚💙✊✊✊
💖💖💖
@@LadyIzdihar ❤️💗💕💜💞✊✊✊😊😊😊
GOAT I love all your props sm
Can I have your opinion on jacque fresco and his idea of the resource based economy? :) thank you for your time and your amazing videos
Y'know I was watching this old movie from the 70s set in Iran and it made me realize the Shah's government barely even lasted 26 years; most people last longer than that. Talk about a paper tiger.
Love your videos, comrade
How do you get your eyes to do that?
Are there any books about the discussed period in Seattle history that you would recommend? It's wild how I've never heard about that
My chihuahua is definitely reactionary.
Does your Quotations of Chairman Mao book have the preface by Lin Biao? The first versions of the book came with it, the later versions without.
Concerning Mao and especially the "Mao bible" it's wothwhile to engage with the history of the 68s movements in France, West Germany etc.