- cross-posted to:
- anarchymemes@anarchist.nexus
- politicalmemes@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- anarchymemes@anarchist.nexus
- politicalmemes@lemmy.world
You must log in or # to comment.
Do I have to worry? My parents are like that and raised me to be like that.
Uh oh am I a far left extremist? Yup
Better get that flat packed guillotine set up… first for the .01% then on to the 1%
I bet you’re part of that terrorista antifascista movement too! You sick fuck.
#
/s
The only good fascist is one tossed into the pig trough to feed the hogs. Specialty hogs not for bacon but for cleaning up the 1%.
But what if you run out of people to murder? Who’s going to be next?
What is with your obsession with defending capitalism and making strawmen out of communists?
In what way was I defending capitalism?
You always seem to poke your head in to make a strawman or some other absurd point against any meaningful alternatitive to capitalism. That’s why I asked.
Someone said they want to murder lots of people. I said murdering people is bad. Yeah, totally a strawman.
Revolution isn’t the same as just killing random people. It isn’t difficult to comprehend that.
Killing non random people is also bad. It shouldn’t be difficult to comprehend that.
Well next is finally having a worthwhile society, you see
If you think you can build a worthwhile society by murdering a lot of people, you’re no better than any fascist.
Who are you, Winston Churchill shitting himself at Stalin’s suggestion of executing nazi officers?
The fact that you people are so keen on killing tells me all I need to know.
The fact that you’re so eager to clutch pearls for dead nazis tells me all I need to know.
Even Nazis have human rights, whether you like it or not. Also, just calling everyone you don’t like a Nazi doesn’t make your homicidal fantasies any more justified.
If those people are fascists, and are the ones preventing the collectivization of production and distribution in order to satisfy everyone’s needs, then a worthwhile society can absolutely be created via revolution. The ones that overthrow fascists are in fact better than fascists.
“The people who defeated the Nazis are just as bad as the Nazis”
-average .worlder
I dunno start with the elite that greedily hoard money and power to the detriment of society, the politicians that suckle at the teat of those elite while ignoring the needs of their actual voters.
That would probably be enough. Maybe clean up the fascist trash in various countries then flat pack the guillotines back up until next time power imbalances risk the destruction of the majority of society.
Also add wants a world where people take according to there needs and give according to there ability to do work.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
So supporting all sexualities and genders as in USSR or PRC?
Actually existing socialism will never be good enough because building a new economic system while the Empire tries to stamp it out is hard and inevitably it won’t be perfect, and if there are problems then it wasn’t worth trying and we should just go back under the boot of capitalism and be grateful it’s such a great boot that stomps on us.
@harc almost like material conditions of countries on opposite ends of the globe or literal decades apart make a difference
Since to my understanding, and their occasional border shootout USSR and PRC were not particularly distant, I understand you’re pitching them against EU/USA? So bourgeois nation states, one established by religious puritans by means of a continent wide genocide, have some distinct advantage over 70+ years of communism, is your point?
@harc A state being bourgeois is not the only material condition of that state. The west in the 90s saw immense growth and stability, which meant that it could afford more rights to the groups that it had previously marginalized. We’re now seeing that rolled back as said stability comes crashing down.
China, meanwhile, is quite new to stability, so we’re only now seeing rights there increased. The USSR, one could argue, never really saw stability due to constant sanctions and external threat.
Those rights were won by the working class and marginalized groups fighting for their rights, forcing the state to capitulate. They were not ‘afforded’ by any benevolence of the state.
Not benevolence at all. Workers had significant extra pressure when the ruling elite were worried about communism spreading. Now with union membership at historic lows, and government unafraid to side with capital, western workers have very little bargaining power.
Good read if you haven’t already come across it :) https://redsails.org/concessions/
You get that the USSR was actually incredibly accepting of LGBTQ people post revolution, right? It wasn’t until Stalin changed that when he took power that they were vilified.
And the PRC they literally have pride parades in Shanghai and Chengdu is like the unofficially accepted LGBTQ home in China. What are you on about?
Lmao thanks
So a decade? And never really thereafter?
We have a yearly pride in my country, just as well as very little rights for LGBTQ and the biggest fascist march in Europe, what are you trying to prove with this? And you well know what I’m on about, as your knee-yerk reaction proves in itself.
Well the point is your claims are patently false. Neither of these projects were ardently anti LGBTQ like you are claiming. Both of them had or have issues but by and large the fact of the matter is these projects were founded broadly on expanding equality for these classes of people.
Hell the Bolsheviks were fuckin pro Trans people in their fight for power.
Not to mention that there are complex geopolitical reasons for why homosexuality in particular were (incorrectly I will add) targeted for repression. For both Stalin and Mao these were tactics aimed around stifling western imperial influence on their plans to further build and free their peoples from the chains of capital. Homosexuality was viewed as trappings of Western imperialism. Let’s remember at this same time in the US gay people are treated pretty fucking terribly as well we don’t really have room to criticize here as much as we’d love to.
Like you have to understand these decisions in context of the historical upheavals surrounding them. Soviet Russia was under constant attack from the entire world as the worlds first functional socialist nation operating in entirely uncharted waters. Which is not to lend approval to the misgivings of the USSR but to somewhat contextualize them and see how they make some sense from a different perspective. Likewise with Mao they were working to solidify power after an intense revolution and civil war - the logic was very similar.
Obviously China has moved much more towards acceptance but there’s still work to be done. LGBTQ culture just isn’t expressed the same way the culture just isn’t as hyper individualistic as we are used to.
And again let’s take a look at the state of the US and how every rights for LGBTQ people are backsliding before we start throwing stones.
Omg, they got us! Pack it up comrades, back to liberalism! There’s no recovering from this retort.
If you can’t care for some marginalized communities how can anyone trust you to care for them?
Communists have fairly consistently been more progressive than their capitalist contemporaries on LGBT issues
Pretty sure that’s not the case for my region, so what do you base that opinion on?
