A place to ask questions of Lemmygrad's best and brightest
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kommunismus/comments/1lne4zh/was_sind_hier_so_die_meinungen_zum_gsp/?tl=en
According to this reddit post, they seem to be a cult pushing pseudo intellectual garbage. They profess to be "anti morality" and against dialectical materialism too, which i find kinda odd.
If they're against dialectical materialism then they are by definition not Marxists.
Here's a criticism of the group, but it's in german and my firefox translation sounds bad. https://kommunistischepartei.de/diskussion/standpunkt-gegen-den-marxismus/ (I found it in the reddit thread above.)
It looks like gegenstandpunkt/GSP has a positivist view of materialism, which is a materialism without being dialectical. I am concerned about this because if you, or anyone reading this, put gegenstandpunkt in the lemmygrad search engine to find posts/comments you will see an active user heavily influenced by this weird deviation.
It would be nice to have someone here who is German to clear things up cause I'm pretty sure GSP is a cult.
A Reddit link was detected in your comment. Here are links to the same location on alternative frontends that protect your privacy.
I legit don't get the GSP hate. Yes they mostly critique the existing order and they are not a political party offering direct solutions to everything. What does shine through is the desire for a world order that prioritizes the needs of humanity instead of profit. I have yet to read or hear a criticism directed at them that actually concerns itself with their arguments about the state and liberal democracy instead of simply railing against their way of speaking or the alleged arrogance of their readership and/or members. Of course Karl Held often behaved arrogant and overly aggressive when faced with criticism but he was also right a lot of the time.
Pushing all their work aside and labelling it as pseudo intellectual garbage is a take that I can not understand. They are not a cult, they write texts and hold lectures. Yes there are no protests with GSP flags and Peter Decker doesn't squat a house or whatever you want them to do. But I fail to understand why that is a bad thing and what the problem is with people simply putting out good quality analysis for others to read and inform their own praxis. You don't need a "better alternative idea" to articulate a critique of what exists right now. And just because you only criticize the existing order doesn't really mean that you have no interest in it being changed. That is an inference step that I have issues following
Please enlighten me if you know more than I do since I also only recently started paying attention to them. Because so many leftists told me for years that they are not worth my time. I was proven very wrong when I listened to some of their arguments and conversations from the last 34 years and read some of their newer analysis on current events. It's very good theory, nothing more and nothing less in my opinion.
they're a big joke in all german leftist circles and left adjacent communities - they're mostly known for being all about theory and not doing any praxis at all.
people who claim to be members are usually the least pleasant people to talk to.
that's all i can tell.
their theory is bullshit too
they’re mostly known for being all about theory and not doing any praxis at all
What exactly is the issue when a person writes analysis while not doing any praxis? (We already assume for the sake of this argument that writing essays, holding lectures and impacting the "discourse" among the left are not praxis.)
What exactly do you mean by "members"? Are you talking about the people who write texts for the GSP or are you talking about people who buy their material and then read it? I fail to see any form of "membership" in the latter case, and I fail to see the problem with those same people not also doing praxis in the former. Can you elaborate a little bit?