• Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    6 months ago

    the marginalized still tremble

    oh sorry can’t hear you over colonized people getting autonomy and cultural dignity never experienced under the imperial systems they emerged from

      • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        6 months ago

        they have it both ways in all cases. russians and jews supporting regional autonomy & “affirmative action” in the USSR? that’s a colonial patriarchal mindset toward the indigenous

        the indigenous people do it themselves but choose to associate with the former colonizers? that’s evidence that they are still under the thumb of the Russian Empire.

        it doesn’t actually matter to them, it’s just a fucking line. if indigenous rights meant anything to the west [gestures at everything] this wouldn’t fucking be here

            • Parenti Bot@lemmygrad.mlB
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              ·
              6 months ago
              The quote

              In the United States, for over a hundred years, the ruling interests tirelessly propagated anticommunism among the populace, until it became more like a religious orthodoxy than a political analysis. During the Cold War, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them. If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.

              – Michael Parenti, Blackshirts And Reds

              I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the admins of this instance if you have any questions or concerns.

    • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      6 months ago

      like actually where do these fucking people get off the reason i’m a communist is because i studied and examined the way the socialist states have treated women and cultural minorities, it’s fucking absurd