The purity fetish of the Western left strikes again! This time against the new Socialist international.
It is videos such as the one “Danny El Comunista” just did about Sovintern that demonstrate how improbable it is to unite with the social liberals who call themselves “leftists” or even “communist.” One of the great successes of the SOVINTERN INTERNATIONAL congress was how it was able to bring together people from such diverse cultural backgrounds – from individuals that came from more “woke” or “liberal” cultures, such as those that came from the Hispanic world, to those that came from more “traditional,” “religious,” or “conservative” cultures, such as those of the comrades from the East.
The congress was far from perfect, and no one should have expected perfection from the first steps taken in such a monumental task. But what Danny highlights as a defect in this event is precisely one of its strengths. In highlighting it Danny only demonstrates HIS defects, his purity fetish, his inability to focus – as the congress urged – on unity around the principal contradiction of the struggle against imperialism and the struggle for socialism. Danny wants to impose – in a good cultural imperialist manner – his liberal morality on people that come from ancient civilizations whose cultures and traditions are not defined immediately by the dictates of liberal NGOs, but by communal bonds which stretch back thousands of years – and which are perfectly compatible with communism. Danny condemns the Moldovan (who simply pointed out how modern capitalism reduces freedom to the freedom of changing one’s gender), the American, the British, and the Russian parties – parties that were founders of the international and made this unity possible – for being “reactionary socialists” (a term he wholly misinterprets through the petty-bourgeois liberal framework he mistakes for “Marxism”). Danny’s liberalism does not forgive these organizations who, alongside a Just Russia, made this herculean effect of unity possible, on the basis that they don’t share his arbitrary and INDIVIDUAL conception of social morality. According to Danny’s Obama-like standard of what defines reactionary and progressive (i.e., liberal versus traditional cultural values) almost all of the socialist and anti-imperialist states in world history would be reactionary – at least if Danny was consistent. The Soviets would be reactionary, the Chinese (even today) would be reactionary, the Sandinistas (who were a co-founding party) would be reactionary, the Palestinians and the axis of resistance would all be reactionaries, the Alliance of Sahel states in Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger would all be reactionaries, revolutionary Cuba for most of its history would be reactionary, the Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea would be reactionary, etc. Given that all of these states upheld – and most still do – what Danny hears when the words “traditional morality” are uttered. The only progressives for Danny would be the liberal NGO left propped up and financed by imperialism (Open Society, Ford Foundation, etc.) and at the vanguard of the tribalist struggles for liberal values which the dominant liberal wing of imperialism ‘defends’ (through this “left”) around the world. If there is anyone who has shown real right-wing tendencies in the aftermath of this congress it is Danny himself, who has done the first FACTIONALIST hit piece on an event premised on unity around a principal contradiction. Left and right is not defined – as Danny’s American exceptionalist paradigm holds – around social liberalism and conservatism. It is defined, instead, around where one positions themselves with regard to the dominant system – which today is capitalist-imperialism. Danny, by introducing factionalism into this venture – all for the sake of defending social liberalism – is the one that is acting in a true right wing fashion, dividing a left-wing effort at anti-imperialist unity over sectors of it not thinking like him (and all the other liberal NGO’s of imperialism) on issues of social morality. This is, in large part, the world-historic significance of my organization – the American Communist Party – it has been able to keep the heads of thousands of cadres on the key issues, on the principal contradiction at hand. In doing so, it has seen the peaceful co-existence of socially liberal and conservative cadres, who might disagree on the status of something like trans issues, but who treat their comrades with respect, dignity, and tolerance, fighting side-by-side on the basis of a common principle, a shared class struggle. Watch the stream on this topic below:
Originally published on Carlos' blog Philosophy in Crisis (Available in Spanish, too)
Author
Dr. Carlos L. Garrido is a Cuban American Professor of Philosophy who received his M.A. and Ph.D. from Southern Illinois University Carbondale. He serves as the Secretary of Education for the American Communist Party and as a Director of the Midwestern Marx Institute, the largest Marxist-Leninist think-tank in the United States. Dr. Garrido has authored a few books, including Marxism and the Dialectical Materialist Worldview (2022), The Purity Fetish and the Crisis of Western Marxism (2023), Why We Need American Marxism (2024), and the two forthcoming texts, Domenico Losurdo and the Marxist-Leninist Critique of Western Marxism (2026) and Hegel, Marxism, and Dialectics (2026-7). Dr. Garrido has published over a dozen scholarly articles and over a hundred articles in popular settings across the U.S., Mexico, Cuba, Iran, China, Brazil, Venezuela, Greece, Peru, Canada, etc. His writings have been translated into over a dozen languages. He also writes short form articles for his Substack, @philosophyincrisis, and does regular YouTube programs for the Midwestern Marx Institute channel. He is on Instagram @carlos.l.garrido ArchivesMay 2026
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Archives
June 2026
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed