Talk:Communist Party of Chile

message: The Comintern was founded in 1919.
I don't think the Communist Party of Chile was founded in 1912, how when the Comintern or the Third International was founded in 1919. I believe Recabarren attended the 2nd Congress of the Comintern; he also went to Russia and met with Lenin and returned to Chile and founded the PCC. It was probably recognized as part of the Comintern by 1922 or later. The person who wrote the introduction to this article appears to be confusing some socialist party with the actual PCC. I don't think there were any Communist Parties in the developing world before the October Revolution of 1917. Moshe-paz 13:51, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, thats incorrect. Plenty of the parties that joined Comintern and took the name 'Communist Party' had pre-Comintern history. Other examples are the Communist Party of the Netherlands (founded 1909) and Communist Party of Sweden (founded in the spring of 1917). POS was founded in 1912, and took the name PCCh in 1922. --Soman 12:49, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You don’t appear to have a very sound understanding about the history of this PCC and the history of the Communist movement in general - not to mention terminology. Firstly, there is a major distinction between the 2nd International and the Comintern. Name one socialist or communist party from a developing country that was invited to the 1st congress of the Comintern? To say that the PCC was founded in 1912 is equivalent to saying that Trotsky’s 4th International was founded in 1919! Moshe-paz 01:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Inside South America by John Gunther gives 1912 as the founding year. Josh (talk) 02:57, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The Communist Party of Chile was NOT founded in 1912

message: Can any one provide a reference for Violeta Parra's membership?. --Best regards, Keysanger (what?) 00:31, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Violeta Parra

message: It looks like the History section needs an introductory sentence; it just starts out with "It [the PCC] achieved congressional representation shortly thereafter and[...]" with no extra context. Maybe that was meant to flow on from the lead section, but someone has since added a sentence about the PCC's involvement in the 2013 election, so it's a bit confusing to read.
Unfortunately I don't know enough about this topic to trust myself with editing it, so hopefully someone else won't mind fixing up this little inconsistency. Onthebirdroads (talk) 06:16, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  History section needs an intro sentence 

message: About that "the article lede says they follow the teachings of both Marx and Lenin". Leninism is the political theory of Lenin, a variant of Marxism; Marxism-Leninism is the ideology of Stalinist political parties. Since it's unsourced I left the lowest common denominator according to the lead. Rupert Loup (talk) 20:39, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: "Marxism-Leninism is the ideology of Stalinist political parties." Well you have just shown yourself to be unable to be impartial. I have worked on international party politics for years and have seen countless parties who call themselves Marxist-Leninist while at the same time being critical or negative of Stalin, like the majority of the communist parties in western Europe or the former Yugoslavia for instance. People who like Marx and Lenin dont just call themselves "Leninist". Furthermore, Marxism-Leninism preceeds Stalins leadership of the USSR which makes your statement utterly ridiculous. If you want to remove marxism (integral to Leninism) and communism (even though Leninism is communist) then go ahead, but find a source that supports your claim of the CPC only being Leninist and nothing else, otherwise you dont have a good reason to remove these ideologies! Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 20:48, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  "shown yourself to be unable to be impartial." This is a persoan attack WP:PA, please refrain of doing that. I stated the Wikipedia's consensus on the issue based in the sources presented in that article. If you don't have a source for your edit it will be reverted. Rupert Loup (talk) 21:01, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not meant as a personal attack in any way. I do not know you and can not make any reliable assumpions about you, though doing so probably would be rude. However, you cannot claim that anyone who calls themselves marxist-leninist is also a stalinist, that is a gross simplification that is not acceptable on wikipedia. If your problem is that marxism-leninism is unsourced, then you cant just remove half of the ideology and assume it is ok to keep the other half based on what is blatant assumptions and nothing more! Feel free to remove all of the ideologies if you think they should not be unsourced, but dont think that you can just leaf half of it or add other unsourced ideologies instead as both of those are just as bad as each other! Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 21:14, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Rupert Loup (talk) 21:25, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

text:   about "that is not acceptable on wikipedia", I said what the Wikipedia article Marxism-Leninism states. If you have a problem with that you should raise your concern there. Rupert Loup (talk) 21:34, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Ideology