- cross-posted to:
- comics@lemmygrad.ml
- cross-posted to:
- comics@lemmygrad.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
@cowbee sparked a liberal massacre here. I’ve never seen so many bans.
Haha, they do it to themselves.
what even happened? Did they all get scratched and spew racist and homophobic shit or something?
Someone who claimed China was better off as a semi-feudal semi-colony and had family there, someone bringing up the Black Book of Communism as a source on China Bad, someone who referenced the Wikipedia page title “People’s Democratic Dictatorship” to claim China has a sole dictator, etc.
Oh I see, the typical reactionary liberal.
Yep.
Haha no it’s mods modding to your benefit, mods did it.
removing reactionary racist shit is to the benefit of marginalized people, not to the benefit of white people
Do you think that if the mods did not ban people, that I would not still be more supported than not? Why do you think it’s to my personal benefit?
Not just to his benefit, but to the benefit of workers across the globe.
When reactionaries spit anticommunist propaganda, shutting them down is a service to womankind.
I would need to see their comments before celebrating because nah nah, naaaaaaaaaaaaaah, we’re not just going to celebrate mods mass-banning opinions they don’t like.
Unless it was actually hateful or filthy in some way. “Communism is good actually” does not count as hateful.
Just go look at the modlog
We know what works and what doesn’t work. We have decades of real data from all over the world.
Some aspects of communism work, others do not.
Some aspects of capitalism work, others do not.
Some aspects of fascism work, others do not.
Some aspects of socialism work, other do not.
… and so on
By “work” I mean increasing the standard of living and lifespan of citizens when compared to tribal living. The bar is pretty low, really. I think we should apply what works the best, regardless of the source, but nobody listens to me.
The USA definitely abused the term “communism” into the ground for almost a century; since the creation of the CIA communism has been our enemy number one, and we’ve spread a lot of misinformation purposefully and with full knowledge.
But, we do know some things for a fact, and should work off of that. For example, standard of living was much higher in Western than Eastern Germany. But… that doesn’t mean that Eastern Germany didn’t have any benefit to its people. Just less benefit. Why? That’s the rub.
Pardon my rambling incoherent thoughts on a comic.
Some aspects of fascism work, others do not.
Hmm.
lmfao
Then you check their modlog and then you start to understand why they are being such a pissbaby over moderation.
ETA mods are mean, good Lord now I have to go through eight steps to find the good stuff that they deleted. Lame
ETA 2- Mods have translated “be civil” rule into “I do what I want” why bother to post rules just do what you want
Quit your crying over racist shit being removed
Comment from @Cowbee on the east/west germany differences below
Comparing west and east Germany, eastern Germans enjoyed more secure lives with better safety nets, and were strapped for luxuries because the Soviet Union sought reparations for World War II. The western side was not de-Nazified like the eastern side was, and was flooded with cash and NATO armaments from the US Empire to serve as a foothold against the socialist bloc.
The Global North is irredeemable. The vassals are as smart as the suzerain which is not at all.
Why should it matter which political philosophy a policy comes from? If a policy optimizes the HDI, GDP PPP, and environmental impact then we should implement it. If it fails to provide better outcomes then why continue to implement it?
You have to understand how to view the world and how it works to figure these things out effectively and in a timely manner.
There’s 8+ billion people and these governments are decades to millenia old. We definitely have the ability to test and see if we wanted. Most of the time though we let society run on pure unadulterated emotions without any care for outcomes.
That’s myopic. China, for example, takes a scientific approach to development through a Marxist-Leninist framework.
The question will always be if policies from a different political philosophy or one not yet invented or otherwise canonized are more optimal. We shouldn’t be enslaved by a particular way of thinking aka it is / isn’t in this political philosophy therefore it will / will not work / be better
That is the basis of marxism in a nutshell. It is a scientific framework to observe society and derive conclusions. it is not a set in stone fixed ideology. All real existing socialist projects were and are quite different in practice. And there is a ton of disagreements among leftists about the details. The fundamental common idea is just to create a society that works in the interest of the 99% instead of being controlled by a small capitalist class. How to go about this in detail must change over time since society and the world around us changes all the time. But policies must always be derived from empirical data and the scientific process.
Right now most policies in capitalist countries are created through a very chaotic and mostly unguided process involving competing capitalist interests and the occasional opposing social movements.
Can you link to any primary materials ideally from Marx outlining the use of the scientific method for political means? There’s all sorts of a minority controlling a majority that aren’t capitalistic, monarchy being the classic alongside dictatorships and oligarchies with varying economic structures.
Engels’ Socialism: Utopian and Scientific is enormously helpful for this.
Nobody is saying all answers have been discovered, you’re confusing political philosophy as a world outlook with a particular formula and set of definite conditions. These aren’t the same thing at all, Marxism-Leninism argues against set formula.
You know how some physics experiments are difficult because of shit like particles having indeterminacy, behaving differently when observed and interference from other particles making them interact in unpredictable ways? Well, people are even worse.
That said, geopolitics is a giant live experiment, you need only pay attention and analyse. If you come up with a good enough model of undertanding, you can predict what is the likely the best course of action before taking them.
It’s a live experiment. We’re always going to be doing something and we will at least have data for that. Like Portugal’s decriminalization of drugs has shown to be far more effective than the US war on drugs in decreasing drug use.
Exactly. But knowing what worked for Portugal is just one clue. It’s also important to have an understanding of why it worked, identifying other factors that could have contributed, ways the policy can be improved, how effective it would be if implemented in vastly different countries ways to adapt policies to those countries, and even expand the concept beyond drugs.
Imagine a country is going through terrible times and decides to implement some radical austerity measures, sell public companies, defund public services, do all the stuff the IMF loves. Or maybe the opposite, the country nationalizes everything and expels all foreign companies. Let’s say a decade or two later the country starts really prospering. It would be unwise to assume this is just universal without proper understanding the mechanics of what happened.
deleted by creator
why I can’t see the current iteration of Democracy to be of value for the future. Humans value knee jerk responses too much even if iys to the dentriment of the ir foot flying off.
An educated society is just too improbable when the IQ of the average person is on a range tather than a fixed variable.__
true
does it have billionaires
- yes - It is capitalist
- no - it may be communist or socialist
No? What determines if a country is capitalist or socialist is if private or social ownership is the principal aspect of the economy, and if capitalists or workers control the state. It isn’t based on an arbitrary level of wealth held by any given individual.
If you have billionaires, whatever policies you have implemented are defunct and flawed
flawed yes but not defunct. Every system created by humans is flawed. The usual process with pretty much everything in life is to try to improve things iteratively over time. China is well aware that the market reforms in the 80ies and 90ies created inequalities and billionaires. But it also created massive amounts of wealth and made china the second biggest economy in the world. Right now one of their stated goals is to reduce that inequality moving forward. I personally am quite confident that they will succeed given their track record of achieving their 5 year plan goals.
No? China is the most rapidly developing socialist country in the world, the working classes there see the most rapid uplifting in quality of life in history. Do you think China would be in a better position if they had no capitalists at all, even in underdeveloped sectors where markets legitimately do aid in developing the productive forces?
The worst part is that in USA
Socialism = Communism
🤦♂️
Essentially, communism is socialism within a classless society. Star Trek is communist.
Socialism is a transitional mode of production and distribution towards communism, so in a way they are a part of the same process of communist construction.
I guess to be more precise in what they are likely referring to, Americans have associated communism with the specific characteristics, real or made up, of previous or existing socialist states.
So when someone not educated in Marxist theory tries to make the distinction between “socialism” and “communism,” they’re basically saying “No, we’re not like those scary Russians and Chinese. We want to be like the civilized social democracies in Europe.” In the process they simultaneously:
- Misunderstand what socialism and communism are.
- Play into the right wing narrative that these countries, and therefore any attempt at communism, would just mean authoritarianism even, not realizing that it is neither a critical part of communism in the abstract nor something Western “democracies” are free of.
Not necessarily maliciously. This is a product of the propaganda we’ve all been exposed to for so long.
Even the word “propaganda” itself has been manipulated by us into a meaningless pejorative over the last 100 years, originally a benign “spreading of ideas”.
That’s fair! Understood.
The thing is: has Communism ever produced a good example in any country or historical period? Most religions are also based on some very good principles, but I can’t think of a country where a theocracy produced a good place for people to live. So, I don’t know… there might be a fundamental disconnect between how good the principles are and how badly they adapt to human nature? Not a critique, please believe me. I really want to be educated on this.
Everywhere communists have taken power has seen dramatic, rapid improvements for the lives of the working classes. Every single time socialism has been solidified, it has worked out for the majority of society.
The thing is: has Communism ever produced a good example in any country or historical period?
Depends on what you consider “good.” You can define good so strictly that no country has ever qualified. You can also define it based on the standards of historically wealthy countries with high standards of living built off of slavery and colonialism. If you do either of those, the answer is probably no.
Otherwise, if you look at socialist systems in comparison to 1) what they had before, and 2) what other options were realistically open to them, the answer is yes.
- China had a life expectancy in the 30’s that remained there through the Qing, the warlord period, and the nationalists. As soon as the communists came to power and redistributed the land to the people, life expectancy skyrocketed, doubling within a generation. In spite of those improvements, in 1980 over 90% of the population was still living in extreme poverty, which has now been entirely eradicated.
-
Vietnam was ruled by a brutal colonial oppressor and fought against a corrupt far-right puppet regime, the communists won and established autonomy, raised standards of living and developed the country, and put down Pol Pot, stopping the Cambodian genocide.
-
Russia under the tsar was drafting hordes of people to be thrown into the pointless meat grinder of WWI, rather than focusing on domestic development and industrialization. Even when there were reforms, the “moderates” were still insistent on staying in the war and reclaiming lost territory. Once Lenin came to power, he took the L to get out of the war and refocused on domestic development and industrialization. Standards of living rose, and the USSR rapidly transformed from a feudal backwater into a global superpower, even with bearing the brunt of the costs of WWII (which they were only able to do because of that development).
-
Cuba had a corrupt gangster state that was a puppet of the US. Once the communists took over, they conducted a very successful literacy campaign and trained so many doctors that they’ve not only provided medical care to their own people, but also sent them abroad to help with humanitarian crises. They have, however, suffered a lot because of the US blockade (which has been condemned by the UN 165-7). In the past, they could have relied on the USSR for assistance, but without it many countries have had to stand on their own against US imperialism, without another option to turn to.
Sure. I’ll try to answer the best I can, but I’ll start by saying this is a very complex topic and it’s really worth reading some other materials on it depending on what you’re interested in specifically.
I’ll start with the most important point which is: Socialism isn’t just one static thing. It is essentially a belief in radical democracy. That the majority of people, the people actually doing the work in society, ought to be the ones who get to control their economic and political lives. This is hindered by the means of production, the tools and materials needed to make stuff, being owned by a handful of people who don’t work and have incentives which are in direct opposition to those of the workers. How exactly create this transition and then manage society in the future is in our hands, but it’s not a set path. It’s on us to analyze our situation and make decisions accordingly. We can make the wrong decisions, but at least we got to make them. There is no inevitable outcome of a socialist project because we’re the ones responsible for making it happen.
By contrast, capitalism is a system that is mostly controlled by market forces. Even in the idealized version of capitalism, nobody is in the driver’s seat. The world we see today was not the deliberate result of any intentional action by a person or group, but by essentially an evolutionary process by which competition filters out less profitable businesses and elevates more profitable ones. Of course, capitalist economists would say that this is a good thing and a reason for it’s “success.” They’d say, among other things, that humans cannot make decisions that are as good as the results of this “natural” process and therefore, we should let that process go in order to produce the best results for society. What a Marxist economist points out is that these forces actually result in some inherent contradictions which lead to social problems which this system cannot naturally overcome. I’d also have you ask the question: WHO has capitalism helped? Progress isn’t even. What helps some people may not help, or may even hurt others. What metric for progress can we realistically use to account for the fortunes of a capitalist, the deaths and injuries of people in sweatshops, homeless people, people in other countries exploited by imperialism, etc.?
Basically, I can tell you why capitalism will inevitably end up acting in a certain way because we know how it works. It’s almost like a math question. Socialism isn’t bound by any specific thing other than our own creativity, ingenuity, and will. Past and present socialist societies don’t represent a fixed end goal, they are history we can learn from, good and bad.
As far as those specific societies go, there’s so much reading to do on this to fully understand the topic and it’s not like I’m even an expert, but I’d push back on the idea that “socialism” has failed to create good outcomes for people. Each of these countries has their own particular history and material conditions and we should analyze them with those in mind.
-
Russia was an agrarian feudal society that was way behind the west in industrial development. It also took a lot of the brunt of damage from WWII. Despite this and having to fend off antagonism by the US, they managed to develop society into a modern industrialized economy.
-
China was an agrarian feudal society in it’s death throes beset by exploitation by European colonialists carving out economic spheres of influence. It fought off Imperial Japan in WWII with massive loss of life. Immediately following this, they were abandoned by their supposed allies in the west who then helped rebuild their former enemy. Despite this, they have evolved into a modern economy that rivals and in some ways surpasses the US economy. You might say that this is due to their market reforms, but the key part of those market reforms is that the state retained control over key sectors of the economy and were able to deliberately make use of foreign capital towards their own developmental ends. It’s yet to be seen if in the long term this is going to work out or if the rise of a capitalist class in China will lead to their eventual political dominance.
-
Vietnam was a colony which had to fight off it’s owners, then the US along with the dictator they propped up. This was a pretty viscous war that killed many and ruined what infrastructure they had. On top of that, the use of Agent Orange has had long lasting effects. There are STILL children being born today with birth defects due to Agent Orange. After the war they were the subject of US sanctions for some time. And yet, again they became a rapidly developing economy that while not quite at the level of China or the US, has made some massive strides towards becoming a modern nation.
-
Korea also dealt with the horrors of Imperial Japan during WWII followed up by a dictator and then a war by the US which absolutely leveled their infrastructure. While the US assisted the south in rebuilding, they isolated the North. They definitely haven’t had the success of countries like China, but the fact that they’ve had any progress under such harsh conditions should be considered a miracle.
-
Cuba used to be a playground for foreign capitalists who owned plantations, casinos, etc. Their revolution was immediately followed by the US isolating them and repeatedly trying to sabotage them. Again, it’s hard to make much progress when you have no access to trade with the rest of the world and have to be constantly on guard against a superpower at your doorstep, but even then, they’ve managed quite a bit. Cuba has had so much success with their healthcare system that they’ve been able to send doctors around the world on humanitarian missions as one example.
Were all of these societies perfect? No of course not. People are people and they will struggle and sometimes stumble, but were/are they complete failures owing to the inherent properties of socialism? No. But again, this is all a very cursory overview of the topic. I would highly encourage you to learn more for yourself on whatever part of this interests you most.
EDIT: Also, taking this back to capitalism, it has been responsible for tons of deaths and human suffering over the course of it’s history, but people don’t really consider that suffering in the same way as they do any suffering that happened during the history of various socialist societies. This isn’t whataboutism, it’s highlighting a flaw in the way we think about these issues. A famine caused by natural conditions in a country that has had famines for all of it’s history? The failures of communism. Capitalism failing to feed large amounts of people while it produces more than enough food to do so? Apparently that’s not a problem.
-
Capitalism has destroyed our planet, becoming an existential threat to the human species and all other complex life on Earth.
But yeah, cumyouism bad…mmmkay👍🤤
I’m not saying Capitalism=good and I’m even open to accept Communism as the ethically superior alternative. It’s just that, while I see Communism as a good balance to unchecked neoliberalism in a democracy, when either side completely takes over, countries seem to drift toward two opposite (but also so similar) types of dictatorship.
I do see how “pure free market” is becoming a threat, as you write, and I would like to see a bit more socialism added to the democratic mix again.
The “dictatorship” you fear is the dictatorship of the proletariat. It’s called democracy, something that’s incompatible with capitalism.
You’re seriously saying with a straight face that you’re concerned for the right of .01% of Americans to be idle parasites sucking our blood dry? You can fuck right off, and keep fucking off.
The dictatorships capitalism and socialism drift towards are not dictatorships in the popular imagination, of a single individual, but instead of classes. Capitalism is the dictatorship of capitalists, who collectively decide the course of society. Socialism is the dictatorship of the workers, who also collectively decide the course of society. In both cases, there is democracy for one class and dictatorship for the rest, the primary difference is that in socialism it is the great majority of people, the ones that actually create value for society, that finally control it.
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
Well, then it’s settled!
Communism killed a few members of your family, while capitalism kills half a million people every year (lowest possible estimate).
Clearly capitalism is the best we’ve got.
Life expectancy doubled in China under Mao. Footbinding was ended, industrialization rapidly expanded, and famine was permanently ended. China was a semi-feudal backwater before the communists took charge and began restoring the sovereignty of China.
For anyone curious, they are, according to themselves, a Taiwanese capitalist:
I didn’t know what I wanted to do until I was well in my 30s. Prior to that, I worked at a very big retail bank and worked from a teller to a regional manager with over 220 stores under me.
You know what. I fucking hated every moment of that job.
I quit after my mom passed and they gave me 2 weeks off and then I was back into the grind.
I took 1 year off and decided to go into tech. The one place I enjoyed doing on my spare time.
I got my first tech job at 36. And since then have owned my own company and worked for big corporate companies.
You sorta have to try things and hate things before you know what you want.
It makes perfect, logical sense for OP whose background is in finance and has owned a business to despise socialism. This is their bias.
Oh no did somebody take away your egg monopoly?
Yeah? And I’m the Queen of Spain. Anything is possible when you just make shit up.
Removed by mod
Even Wikipedia, which is biased towards western liberalism, disagrees with you:
Deaths by famine
The exact number of deaths by famine is difficult to determine, and estimates range from 15 million to 55 million people.[4][93][94] Because of the uncertainties which are involved in estimating the number of deaths which were caused by the failure of the Great Leap Forward and the ensuing famine and because of the uncertainties which are involved in estimating the numbers of deaths which were caused by other famines, it is difficult to compare the severity of different famines. If an estimate of 30 million deaths is accepted, the failure of the Great Leap Forward caused the deadliest famine in the history of China, and it also caused the deadliest famine in human history.[95][96] This extremely high loss of human lives was partially caused by China’s large population. To put things into absolute and relative numerical perspective: in the Great Irish Famine, approximately 1 million people[97] out of a total population of 8 million people died, or 12.5% of Ireland’s entire population. If approximately 23 million people out of a total population of 650 million people died during the Great Chinese Famine, the percentage would be 3.5%.[4] Hence, the famine during the Great Leap Forward had the highest absolute death toll, though not the highest relative (percentage) one.
40-70 million
15-55 million
This actually corroborates john_save_america’s comment, because the ranges overlap.
The ranges overlap, but no scholar actually believes the 70 million number, and actual evidence backs numbers closer to 15 million. The history of famines in China is heavily politicized in the west to discredit socialism.
Removed by mod
Margolin is one of the crank historians caught making up numbers in the Black Book of Communism, which famously included non-births as deaths, as well as Nazis killed during World War II as “victims of communism.” Liberalism only cares about the freedom of private property and the capitalist class, workers be damned and enslaved.
Removed by mod
Your author is a propagandist with bad data, that’s the point. You referenced a contributor caught lying.
What the fuck does that have to do with my source? I didn’t cite the Black Book of Communism.
Because your source was caught making up claims in it?
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
The truth is that life expectancy doubled in China under Mao. Anyone saying life was made worse by the communists is either extremely ignorant, or purely looking at it from the perspective of the former ruling class.
Removed by mod
Margolin is one of the crank historians caught making up numbers in the Black Book of Communism, which famously included non-births as deaths, as well as Nazis killed during World War II as “victims of communism.” The benefits of socialism are immediately obvious when looking at the numbers:
Life expectancy from birth doubled under Mao, and the country was turned from a semi-feudal backwater ex-colony into a rising power.
its funny that all the life expectancies shot up in the 1940s, as thats when penicillin went into mass production and was widely implemented
Not evenly. China was emerging from civil war and semi-feudalism in 1949, it had no way to get mass amounts of insulin nor produce them until later. Addressing economic problems improved access to necessities for the majority of society.
Removed by mod
It was the communists that saw life expectancy dramatically rise as to what came before. You seem to have pivoted from the question of whether or not socialism is good to whether or not the same benefits could have been made without socialism, or in other words you have conceded that socialism was a positive.
Then why didn’t life expectancy increase under the ROC?
Yes, any country can reap large benefits from industrialization and modern medicine, regardless of the economic system. But communists were the only major faction in China pushing for those things. Communists always push for those things when they aren’t present, while for capitalists the record is much more spotty.
Removed by mod
Accusing communists of not reading books is very funny. We’re like the only ones that read books.
The last time I pressed a lib on recommending theory, they just said, “a text book” lmao.
Does Socialism with Chinese Characteristics: A Guide for Foreigners count, or is it too commie?
Definitely too commie for them. But the question isn’t whether lib theory exists, but whether they actually read it.
The vast majority of liberals get their ideas passively, from cultural hegemony. They don’t read books on politics because they think they already have all the answers, that it’s all simple and obvious. Just support “freedom” and oppose “authoritarianism,” and there’s no need to actually deconstruct and examine those concepts, because it’s “obvious” what they mean.
It’s like, hell, I’ve even read shit by Giovanni Gentile, who laid out the ideological foundations of fascism, in the hope of finding a coherent formation of that ideology for the sake of knowing the enemy. But I did so knowing that actual fascists would never read that nerd shit. What they actually engage with are conspiracy theories, rage bait, incoherent rants, shit like that. It’s the same way, we can seek out liberal theory to try to grasp some insight of the latent assumptions liberals are operating under, but it’s only so useful when they themselves don’t read it, when they aren’t even consciously aware of those assumptions.
If you try to ask them something that exposes a hole in their ideology, they’ll just ignore it, refuse to answer, or change the subject. They never step back and actually think about what they believe. It’s not something they’re interested in. Instead, they’re immersed in the soup of current events, just reacting to the current thing, and their opinions are formed around a combination of ideas absorbed from cultural hegemony, and what the news tells them to think about them.
Oh fully agreed! Common sense is just ruling class ideology, and this applies to capitalism and socialism alike.
I’ve read quite a few books on communist history, and China is a particular area of interest for me given that they are the biggest currently-standing socialist country with the longest history of socialism. Do you have any recommendations? For what it’s worth, equating communists to the Nazis is a form of Holocaust trivialization, and is a core component of Double Genocide Theory. I’m not sure I put much stake in the views of someone that lets their hatred of communism trivialize the Holocaust, but I’m always interested in exploring dissenting views, if only to reinforce or sharpen my own existing views.
yeah ok man not like Denmark has a history of reprehensible shit like repressing the inuit on Greenland with sterilization and kidnapping children. A lot of Danish people get really possessive with Greenland whenever the locals want independence and it’s gross.
Not to mention how Denmark is a big supporter of “Israel” and love being a spy network against other European countries for the CIA.
Sorry, I like to look at empirical evidence instead of random anecdotes shat out online. Empirically:
- The Chinese government has one of the highest approval ratings worldwide
- The Chinese people have immense trust in their democracy
- The CPC has overseen massive improvements in QoL, life expectancy, literacy, and basically all measures of development
- The CPC has overseen the uplifting of hundreds of millions out of poverty
Of course you will never engage with these facts because they conflict with the propaganda that has indoctrinated you from birth. You will never read a book or jump through hoops to do any research on your own, you will instead gladly believe every tale told to you about the horrible orient. You are no better than a nazi who fervently bays for another holocaust.
China wasn’t Communist
China has been socialist since 1949.
how come it has billionaires then
Because it has private property in the marketized sectors of the economy. The CPC takes a Marxist view of economics that sees markets as progressive with respect to decentralized, underdeveloped production, and regressive with respect to large scale production. The commanding heights of the economy are overwhelmingly socially owned, while developing sectors are marketized to accelerate the process of socialization, which speeds up the effective rate of collectivization.
its just the “for progress” excuse.
You don’t need billionaires or exploitation of workers for progress
You don’t need them for progress, sure, but marketizing underdeveloped sectors sure benefits workers more than dogmatically treating planned economy as the most effective in all cases at all levels of development. China already tried your approach under the Gang of Four, and this was seen as a misstep.
My chud brother accused me of being indoctrinated before, and I’m like, my brother in
christactuality, we were raised by the same conservative parents, in the same conservative area, in many of the same conservative schools. I know what you believe backwards and forwards. You can’t tell the difference between my beliefs and Joe Biden’s. One of us thinks critically about our own beliefs and tries to understand other perspectives, and it sure as hell ain’t you.It’s just really funny on some level when they’re so set on reading the same talking points from their script and try to go off about privileged out-of-touch coastal elites who only believe things because they’re never exposed to outside ideas, with someone they literally grew up with.
They’re indoctrinated into calling us indoctrinated or saying we live in a bubble, and the irony is lost on them.
Shut up bubble boy!
- liberals, probably
Europeans too. But we’re basically Americans also, so.
The most rabbid anti communist I know is French
a more pathetic and spineless version of americans. Especially germans.
spineless
I would not call what france people are doing “spineless” and even the (IMO) the most spineless of europe (Italians) burned down at least 1 building and are protesting, sud italian farmers even refused to work and are blocking roads with some mayors supporting 'em
I didn’t mean to generalize to all of europes population. Mainly its governments. And mainly germans. But also most of german citizens. We REALLY like to follow orders. It’s like a fetish. So what’s happening in france would never happen here. Especially not with that severity. Maybe to an extend localized in some areas like berlin and maybe parts of hamburg. Overall the sentiment here is that most people are appalled by the violence and feel sad for that beautiful building that was burned down. And that’s about it.
Well I mean, at the moment at least it seems that European protests against the current regimes are burning down city halls while the Americans are busy dancing with cop-approved parameters and building human sculptures that say “vote”. But then again, until either of these areas goes through a communist revolution I’ll call neither less pathetic or spineless population than the other.
the french really know how to protest. Their neighbours to the right not so much, though.
Albanians seem to be burning more than French atm. Given enough time capitalism will drive us all up a wall, into war and to concentration camps. It’s only natural.
We’re about as American as we are African like the South African colonial settlers who tried to appropriate the term African to refer to themselves but failed.
I’d say we as Europeans live in a culture that is Usianized to the extent of being unrecognizable from the original. Our leaders do what the Usians tell them to do, our institutions serve Usian interests, our militaries use Usian weapons. Our populations watch Usian movies and serials, read Usian books, follow Usian zeitgeists. We use Usian social media platforms, where Usian algorithms serve us Usian propaganda. We learn to speak American English in school, where they teach us the history of the world that is approved by Usians.
propagandized against communism? 100%
vassals of the US? same.
But “we’re basically Americans” is an insult I won’t take.oh no!
at least some still have a fighting spirit.
and tasteI gotta hand you guys that, it does seem like there’s a limit to how much bullshit you’ll tolerate. We have yet to find that limit in the states.
Glad you acknowledge it.
Plenty here get real defensive for pointing that out.I guess we are slightly less indoctrinated into bootlicking the authoritarian state.
We don’t thank our regime troops for their service, our cops don’t get free stuff in shops, etc…
No comically large flags or killer jet fly overs at sports games either.
well yeah, it seems the usians prefer to dance and vote. i’d rather celebrate local cultures on their own terms, not under US hegemony.
Then we need to kick these bootlicker EU ‘leaders’ or nato cucks like Rutte out with the US invaders.
we’d also need a way to fight against homegrown fascism after that, but a good first step. tear down nato and the eu
I mean… Compare the outccomes of west and east germany… History isn’t in communism’s favor, at all…
Comparing west and east Germany, eastern Germans enjoyed more secure lives with better safety nets, and were strapped for luxuries because the Soviet Union sought reparations for World War II. The western side was not de-Nazified like the eastern side was, and was flooded with cash and NATO armaments from the US Empire to serve as a foothold against the socialist bloc.
Lmao what a dumbass statement.
- East Germany was not communist, there has never been a nation even claiming to be communist. East Germany was socialist
- Among the people who lived in the GDR there is general agreement life was better back then
- You have plenty of examples of succesful socialist nations, like China, Cuba, Vietnam and more
- East Germanys downfall came with the Union of the two nations when capitalists made up a bunch of non-existent debt in order to buy state infrastructure for cheap
- Read “Stasi state or socialist paradise” instead of hallucinating more half-remembered propaganda from your childhood indoctrination.
Removed by mod
China and Vietnam are democratic countries that elect delegates from councils to represent their constituents.
America arms over 80% of dictatorship globally, so it would seem we are objectively the least democratic nation in the world.
“Democracy” to us has always been a selective privilege enjoyed on the backs of the oppressed. It’s only a cudgel we weaponize to steal natural resources.
And this didn’t start with Trump.
You’re just making shit up now. Well, you were before as well, but you’re also doing it now.
China and Vietnam are both democracies. Even if they did not have elections, which they do, they would not be dictatorships, since power is not consolidated with one individual. The executive in China is in fact far less powerful than the executive in the US, for example. I don’t know much about the political institutions of the rest of SEA, but I doubt you do either.
I would love to live in China. Would be nice to experience competent governance and institutions that actually exist to serve the people.
Removed by mod
Damn I seem to have triggered all the Chinese fanboys with this
Me when I say something wrong and people try to educate me: lol trigurd tha libruls
They literally define themselves as a dictatorship of the proletariat, idk what to tell y’all
Holy shit lmao, this might be the funniest thing a halfwit like you could write. What a massive tell. I could not imagine ever showing my ass like this, that might be the dumbest thing Ive ever seen. I can’t even think of an analogy that would help you understand how fucking stupid the thing you wrote is. Please do some basic reading on marxism before you open your mouth on the subject next time. By your own logic literally every country is a dictatorship https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dictatorship_of_the_bourgeoisie
Try reading the pages you’re linking. The dictatorship of the proletariat means democracy for workers, no democracy for capitalists. It means the class of the proletariat makes up the dictator of society, not an individual dictator. Wikipedia literally states this in the first paragraph:
People’s democratic dictatorship is a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) term to describe the state system of the People’s Republic of China. The premise of the people’s democratic dictatorship is that it is led by the working class, based on the alliance of workers and peasants, and the system exercises democracy over the people who constitute the vast majority of the national population, while perceived hostile elements are subject to dictatorship.[1] The CCP and state represent and act on behalf of the people, but in the preservation of the dictatorship of the proletariat, and possess and may use coercive powers against perceived reactionary forces.[2]
As for Xinjiang, see Xinjiang: A Resource and Report Compilation.
Go back to reddit.
What’s the problem? I literally just shared sources? Or am I not allowed to partake in this specific echo chamber?
No, it’s because you’re stupid and clearly lack most kinds of comprehension. Tell me, do you hold your breath when you type?
Read the articles you shared you immense oaf
you have done what every shitlib has done every time; linking to wikipedia articles without any specification.
You didn’t even read the articles, you just googled this shit and called it a day.
That’s what my middle school history teacher said, who was also my gym coach. 🤡
I can forgive imperial core boomers for this level of “brainwashing,” but most of the rabidly anti-“tankie” Lemmitors aren’t that old.
imperial core boomers for this level of “brainwashing
But why? They were actually around when USSR was alive and kicking. Unlike the youngsters you mentioned, who grew up in the world of unchallenged propaganda
Propaganda during the cold war was challenged even less, and there weren’t alternative sources of information outside of corporate mass media.
challenged even less
Gonna have to disagree with this part. Remember the 90’s? Early 00’s?
shudders Yeah, I do. Propaganda was so all-encompassing that they bragged about doing the coup d’etat of the USSR
Can you define the word ‘communism’?
Commulism
VerbDepicting minorities in video games or movies
What about when woman but no booba?
Woman with no booba is like M&M when no boots: communism?
deleted by creator
There is very big difference between socialism and communism. Communism is an idea and pretty idea but in this world it don’t work because people are “not always good” and socialism is bad try to make communism.
Socialism is a transition between capitalism and communism where social ownership is the rising aspect of society and the working class runs the state. Communism is a fully collectivized global economy. Neither socialism or communism require everyone to be “good.”
Communism is I think fragile. When it works then not so much but it’s almost impossible to build that big and stable community.
China has a communist government and they seem to be doing fine, no?
China has a fascist government that cosplays as communist.
You clearly don’t understand what fascism means, nor are you familiar with how China operates at any level
In what way is China “fascist”?
No? China has a communist government over a socialist system. The working classes run the state, and social ownership is the principal aspect of its economy. Fascism would be a bourgeois-run state with private ownership supplemented by state control.
Oh, so the fascism one is the United States.
Better not tell conservatives. Jk, as if they’d think about this comment.
Only one of those two countries has concentration camps, and it aint china
Yes, the US is fascist.
Let me guess: you listened to a German christian fundamentalist, who has never set a foot on Xinjiang, hallucinate lies about Uygurs in concentration camps?
Removed by mod
oh wow, could’ve fooled me! which one is it then? or have you hallucinated some brand new baseless accusations?
Communism has not existed yet, so I see no reason for you to believe it to be almost impossible to build.
Primitive communism existed for hundreds of thousands of years though.
The term was used to show how, through development, future structures “rhyme” with those in the past. Early communalism, as I prefer to call it, shares in common with communism classless, stateless, and moneyless society, but the key difference is the scale and the level of development of the productive forces. The sheer difference in what we use to produce what we need, and how we distribute it, makes these entirely distinct modes of production and distribution.
