Talk:Amadeo Bordiga

Untitled
What is the source for the claim that "most socialists in Latin countries campaigned against Freemasonry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.20.152.85 (talk) 09:59, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Was Bordiga really the last person to tell Stalin he had betrayed the revolution and stay alive? Can someone confirm that? --koenige 20:37, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I removed the link which redirect Communist Party of Italy to Italian Communist Party. The two parties were completely different and there's not a continuity between them, but a terrible break. Thousand of PCd'I militants were sent in the Gulags after the bolscevization of the International(1926), that is the "changing" of the name from "Communist Party of Italy, section of the Communist International" to "Communist Party of Italy", underlining the turning point of the theory about "the socialism in one country". It seems a bad joke to redirect PCdI to the organization of Togliatti, who with his comrade Stalin, was one of the most responsible of the death of thousand of communists. You don't have a page about PCd'I, and I can't help you because I don't know english enough. If someone knows italian, there is a page on the italian wiki: http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partito_Comunista_d%27Italia Bye, Tompint --213.140.16.177 13:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Now there is a page for Communist Party of Italy.--Tompint 11:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Never Bordiga was secretary of the Communist Party of Italy. This title didn't exist until 1924. First secretary was Gramsci. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.117.83.31 (talk) 10:43, 11 July 2008 (UTC) funny i imagined him looking like bruce lee or something —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.254.189.228 (talk) 04:56, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Request for Comments
There is an RfC on the question of using "Religion: None" vs. "Religion: None (atheist)" in the infobox on this and other similar pages.

The RfC is at Template talk:Infobox person.

Please help us determine consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:38, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Bordiga Socialism vs Communism
Although most Leninists do distinguish between "socialism" and "communism", and Bordiga did consider himself a "Leninist", I am fairly certain he did not distinguish between the two in the same way Leninists do. I think that, although you use the word "stages", it must be clarified here that Bordiga did not see "socialism" as a separate mode of production from communism, rather just as how communism looks as it emerges out of capitalism before it has "developed on its own foundations". Marx used socialism and communism interchangeably. I think Bordiga uses socialism to mean "lower-phase communism", but, again, it must be clarified he does not consider it a separate mode of production. Although this is kind of explained in the rest of the paragraph, I think this distinction from all Leninist must be clarified more. I didn't want to go ahead and try to edit the page directly myself, as I wanted to hear others' thoughts first, and didn't want to be too hasty and correct something in case I am mistaken and it does not need to be corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qirequiam (talk • contribs) 05:45, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Move toward "Left Communism"
It's not clear to me why Bordiga is said to have moved toward "left communism" after the end of WWII. His fundamental positions basically did not change in the entire time from his participation in the formation of the PCd'I and his death. He never really considered himself a "left communist;" the term was popularized by Lenin in The Childhood Disease of "Leftism" in Communism (better known in the Anglosphere as "Left Wing" Communism: An Infantile Disorder), in which he polemicized against what he regarded as various deviations from the correct line, largely emanating from the KAPD. Bordiga promoted electoral abstentionism as a line for the entire International, but aside from a few other disagreements with Lenin (none of which Lenin appeared to believe warranted mention in Childhood Disease), he was as orthodox as they come (he was famously described as being "more Leninist than Lenin"). It wasn't until the party center was captured by Gramsci and the L'Ordine Nuovo circle around him, i.e., Stalin's men, that Bordiga found himself in opposition. The latest possible date at which Bordiga can be said to have become a "left communist" is 1926.--Masque (talk) 01:58, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Section "Theories"
I think there is a problem with the section Theories: it says "Main article: Bordigism" but Bordigism is almost empty. Ripepette (talk) 10:24, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * There is now a proposed merge. See the discussion below. --MarioGom (talk) 11:32, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Merge from Bordigism
has proposed to merge Bordigism to Amadeo Bordiga. --MarioGom (talk) 11:28, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

This page is already reproduced word-for-word on Amadeo Bordiga. Why is a seperate page needed? --Mychemicalromanceisrealemo (talk) 17:01, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Definitely agree, should be merged and turned into redirect page to his theory page --Pithon314 (talk) 03:08, 2 December 2019 (UTC)


 * I agree also, as this isn't really a political or socialist school of thought independent of the man himself, and having it be separate would mean that each individual's political ideology should be written up as a philosophy independent of the individual --Tarasivashchuk (talk) 18:18, 25 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Disagree - Bordiguism developed largely independently of Bordiga, who spent decades almost retired from politics, only building bridges in Italy while "Bordiguists" in France were creating "Bordiguist" organizations, developing the "Bordiguist" theory, etc. If anything Bordiguism could be merged with International Communist Party.--MiguelMadeira (talk) 18:12, 30 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Suppport merge. MiguelMadeira is probably correct, but the claim is unreferenced and also irrelevant, as the content of the Bordigism article is not expressed in the form of the beliefs of a movement, but rather in the form of the personal beliefs of Amadeo Bordiga. It is possible that a distinct post-Bordiga Bordigism article could be written, but it isn't there currently, and so Bordigism should (for now) be redirected to the identical Amadeo Bordiga (which should perhaps be renamed to Amadeo Bordiga). Klbrain (talk) 20:35, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ Klbrain (talk) 21:47, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Marxism-Leninism
Bordiga was a Leninist, but in sense of Marxist/Leninist rather than Marxism–Leninism, which is another specific ideology that is also called as "Stalinism". Using the proper term of "Marxism-Leninism" rather than antagonist term "Stalinism" is more neutral. --Comrade-yutyo (talk) 08:07, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * "In Bordiga's conception of Marxism–Leninism; Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalin, and later Mao Zedong, Ho Chi Minh, Che Guevara and so on were great Romantic revolutionaries, i.e. bourgeois revolutionaries." But he considered Lenin a "burgeois revolutionary"?--MiguelMadeira (talk) 10:01, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Lasagna
Can anyone confirm the lasagna thing that was put into the personal life section? They cited their source but my Italian isn't good enough to read it critically like that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mysteriousmarx (talk • contribs) 17:04, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

it's total bullshit of course. the link provided, in italian, had no reference to it. but also without link, it was too stupid to be true. bordiga died of old age 87.3.58.211 (talk) 15:56, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

You guys are no fun 2600:1007:B108:6E26:33C5:4A87:365A:5F10 (talk) 21:10, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

NPOV issues
Several parts of the article are phrased in a way that implies his views are the correct ones. The style also comes off very "high school essay" for lack of a better way of putting it. Lots of verbosity, and unnecessary adjectives + active voice. I don't think they do a particularly bad job at explaining Bordiga's views, but they definitely cross the line from description to affirmation.

Examples:

"As such, Bordiga opposed the idea of revolutionary theory being the product of a democratic process of pluralist views, believing that the Marxist perspective has the merit of underscoring the fact that like all social formations, communism is above all about the expression of programmatic content. This enforces the fact that, for Marxists, communism is not an ideal to be achieved, but a real movement born from the old society with a set of programmatic tasks."

"On the theoretical level, Bordiga developed an understanding of the Soviet Union as a capitalist society. Bordiga's writings on the capitalist nature of the Soviet economy in contrast to those produced by the Trotskyists also focused on the agrarian sector. " Chilltherevolutionist (talk) 06:32, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't see why the sentences you are citing would be POV, they are just describing Bordiga's views. Schenkstroop (talk) 10:27, 13 January 2023 (UTC)