Interesting thoughts, and nice talking to you too! Abstraction isn’t necessarily bad, but it’s indeed incredibly easy to have bad abstraction that obfuscates reality.

Nice racism on your part, very western of you. Sorry, but I’m a westerner too, and much of this has already been admitted by western press.

Where did I mention electoralism being viable?

The west admitted to helping the Banderites overthrow the democratically elected president of Ukraine, and said Banderites started ethnically repressing Russians living in Eastern Ukraine.

As for NATO, NATO is an inter-imperialist anti-revolutionary coalition force. It’s “defensive” like the IDF is. The soviets weren’t a threat to Western Europe, and neither is the Russian Federation, yet the imperialists in Europe and the US needed to contain socialism to prevent it from spreading and threatening their super-profits.

Sure? Never said everyone needed to find every joke funny. Have you engaged with people advocating revolutionary means?

It was the west that backed a Banderite coup in 2014, sparking the Ukrainian Civil War. NATO has been encircling Russia for the greater part of a century at this point.

That’s a good point, regarding the abstract nature of Gramsci’s work. It’s similar to Marx and Engels in that sense. Gramsci is a difficult one, like you brought up he’s often used in reactionary and cynical ways, despite being very supportive of existing socialism.

We do both. It’s just a generally human thing to joke around with your community, but again, this just returns to my question of whether or not you’ve engaged with people advocating revolutionary means.

Do you think in war you only attack what you directly plan on taking?

Do you have evidence that Russia hasn’t taken Shesterovka?

The problem is that “nonviolent resistance” doesn’t work, and revolution is necessary. It isn’t about ideological purity, it’s about what is possible and what is not.

Communists have been on Lemmy since the beginning.

Yep! It’s incredible how much he wrote under strict observation.

The OOP has Cuban, Korean, and Palestinian flags, and mentions violent resistance. This implies organization.

No problem! Gramsci’s a bit fresh on my mind since I read a good deal of him a few weeks ago.

Yep, Luhansk should have just accepted being targeted by Kiev rather than fighting back after the Banderites took power.

Have you spoken with people advocating revolution about how they believe it is best handled?

Calling for revolution is not a call for random violence, but the creation of a revolutionary organization. Violence without organization is adventurism.

Secondly, fascism has not been “kept in check.” Fascism happens when capitalism faces crisis, and blaming its rise on the working classes suddenly ceasing to fight it politically ignores why it rises to begin with.

Yep, it’s unfortunate.

As QinShiHuangsSchlong pointed out, the Zapatistas explicitly reject anarchist labeling. You can point to them for their horizontalism (at the same time, they have hierarchy and centralization), but they are primarily an indigenous led movement with their own, original ideology. They see labeling them as “anarchists” as the imposition of western framing on their distinctly indigenous movement.