I’m curious whether calling someone an ultra has a generally agreed upon meaning here.
Not to defend any accused ultras or whatever. Recent post got me thinking about it though. It feels like a very loaded word and using it seems like in-group/out-group differentiation signalling or … I dunno.
Maybe another way to put it is often when I see the term being used it feels like its serves a similar purpose to the “tankie” label’s utility for anarchists and liberals.
I might just be running up against tone parsing issues or something, and so maybe this is just me or a figment of my imagination, but it often seems to limit or shape discussion when it pops up early in a discussion.
Again I’m sure I’m just Wrong about this, but it almost feels like a mild thought terminating cliche at least some of the time.
Not trying to fight with anyone, I’m just curious about the nuances (if there are any) with the term.
What does it mean to you and do you have any thoughts you feel like sharing regarding the role it plays in online leftist spaces?
Everyone with a position that calls for an immediate implementation of a thing that actually requires several steps to occur first. Essentially anyone with a “press the communism button” mentality instead of a “communism is a movement over time to abolish the old order of things” mentality.
For example, someone demanding that China implement a fully socialist command economy like the USSR. This analysis is deeply flawed because the conditions China exists in are not the same as the USSR, China does not have 100% of the resources it requires within its landmass, China requires access to the global market for many things, notably 75% of its oil requirements are imported. If China did not have a market economy it would be cut off from the global markets as it would serve no value to the international bourgeoisie who function as a faction that wants China to have access to those markets so they can profit from investing in it. China would be sanctioned and it would undergo enormous hardship. They must first achieve self sufficiency before this is even possible, getting off oil, getting off uranium (also a key import), among other things. Thorium reactors and solar are concrete steps towards this but these are just a couple of major examples.
It is an ultraleft position to hold the view that China should press the socialist economy button. The ultra left is not considering the conditions properly when they take this position. A development process must occur first to bring about the conditions where that action is possible.
Almost every position that anyone would call ultra will usually fit into this.
This description is not correct. Ultras think the USSR was imperialist/red fascist and needs to be toppled. They also think the US and China are both bourgeois establishment and imperialists who are carving out the world for the benefits of the ruling elites.
They’re much closer to Trotsky’s permanent revolution position and think all the AES are imperialists and need to be toppled and replaced with proletariat revolutions of the world.
And why do they think that? Because they didn’t push the magic “communism now” button. When you examine their reasons for this it’s because communism didn’t happen fast enough. They all have a desire to rush and to ignore pesky things like complex material conditions or limitations.