the amount of ad hominems being used and call out posts / videos regarding other marxists, of any tendency, is disgraceful. this debate serves great value and theoretical relevance but unfortunately we have bad actors

The reason I left Communists and Marxist-Leninists heavily disagree on a variety of subjects is because left Communism is essentially the Refusion of Compromise whereas Marxism-Leninism embraces Compromise so long as it pays the world for quote-unquote socialism. We saw this in the early 20th century when Vladimir Lenin introduced the NEP program. This was essentially a huge compromise on his own. He even lamented the fact and called it quote "one step backwards, two steps forward." In all of its context, the NEP was a major compromise, it was a major step back, reintroducing aspects of capital. It was greatly consequential, especially to the cool likes that later developed during Stalin's time. Speaking of Stalin, this guy hated the fact that there was wage labor and commodity production in the Soviet Union. He lamented the fact and he even criticized the Soviet Union for developing or rather maintaining these relations within his existence. However, again, just like Lenin, his predecessor, he saw it as a major compromise necessary to make the move go forward. Essentially, any way to keep the project alive. Whereas left Communists, like I mentioned, they are essentially ruthless pragmatists and you kind of have to appreciate how ruthless and pragmatic they are. I certainly do, not because I agree with them, not because I myself am a left Communist, but because sometimes we do need to be reminded of where the line is. That's not to say or discredit any of the achievements led by any of the previous socialist experiments in the 20th century. However, the major coalition between MLs and left comms is the fact that there is a splinter in theoretical knowledge and application. For example, the Italian left communist tendency was pro party, they were pro vanguard, but they saw the maintaining of capitalist relations as a degradation, as a defilement of Marxism and Leninism to an extent, specifically Bordeiga's interpretation of it. Now, the Dutch German left communist tendency, absolutely hated the idea of a vanguard party directing the working class and maintaining a status quo or rather a relation above the class itself. Now, this is why, or this is rather how you got a councilist, right? This is actually the main critique that Lenin had about left Communists. He wasn't insulting or criticizing the Italian left communist tendency in left-wing communism and infantile disorder. He was actually criticizing the German left comms, the Dutch left comms, the councilists. Again, I kind of see the value in both aspects. Left Communists have a hard-lined hatred against revision and compromise, which its tenacity has to be admired, maybe even now by all but by some. And then on the other hand, Marxist Leninism was the 20th century's brightest ideology for proletarian revolution. It was the guiding spear for class action and revolution worldwide. However, as we live in the 21st century, conditions and relations change, new theory must be developed, new ways of implementing our theory has to be experimented with. So I feel like this discourse is both informative but also very degrading to the individuals that took stuff personally and outed themselves as horrible people or were outed by as horrible people by other people. It's not just a shit show, but I think the theoretical development between this discourse is really important.