|
Tacky-rear end Rococco posted:Yeah, think about how much it would have owned if only powers of arbitrary suppression of free expression had been granted to bourgeois Gilded Age Republicans. Goddamn, that would have been so great, what a missed opportunity. The Radical Republicans were absolutely right.
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 02:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 12:24 |
|
|
Good time to remind everyone to check out socialist hunk Matt Karp's This Vast Southern Empire. http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674737259
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 02:43
|
|
|
I don't trust horse guys
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 02:45
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:The Radical Republicans were absolutely right. I don't disagree, but they were only a faction of a party with less than universal support.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:Nah. It was the federal government's unwillingness to wage a counter-insurgency. refusing to engage in an active repression of the losing south allowed the racism and ideology to fester for the next hundred years and resulted in a lot of unnecessary suffering. my point is mainly that there is dangerous speech and it's ridiculous to pretend that it's just a matter of differing opinions when it comes to fascism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 02:51
|
|
|
jarofpiss posted:freedom of speech after the american civil war got you another hundred years of the tyranny of the kkk and jim crow so i guess it was a good thing that we didn't repress those white southern traitors' right to express themselves We may not be in disagreement. IMO Reconstruction (negative example) and post-war Germany (more positive example) show that there are political movements it is best to eternally and vigorously prosecute, but I don't know a good test for identifying which ones those are. I don't think free speech is sacred in itself, but despite shifting evidence I'm still convinced that it can make a net positive contribution to human welfare. Even if the government were very good, criticism of it would not be inherently bad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 03:01
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:but I don't know a good test for identifying which ones those are. Generally you can spot a fascist by how much they talk about degenerates, or subhumans.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 06:14
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Generally you can spot a fascist by how much they talk about degenerates, or subhumans. Also their strapping outfits
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 07:26
|
|
|
communism... is good
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 08:03
|
|
|
consumed by normies posted:communism... is good   
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 08:07
|
|
|
Zoq-Fot-Pik posted:"Not without cost" is not equivalent to "we shouldn't have it at all and in fact our socialist government should be more like the Confederacy," which is something I'm sure you already understand. prepare to be surprised
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 08:23
|
|
|
consumed by normies posted:communism... is good when it's not being used as a footstool for dictators sure shame it almost always is
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 08:23
|
|
|
Yinlock posted:when it's not being used as a footstool for dictators sure 
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 09:07
|
|
|
The thing about prosecuting people for thoughtcrimes is that generally speaking it's not limited to going after ideological opposites. In fact, the most violent purges in leftist regimes tend to be against other leftists while rightwingers mostly escape, because the Left is nothing if not a circular firing squad. There is apparently no greater enemy to freedom than someone who almost agrees with you 
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 09:17
|
|
|
consumed by normies posted:communism... is good christianity... is stupid
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 09:21
|
|
|
Dreddout posted:christianity... is stupid christianity is cool! the messiah is not going to save the world, is in fact dead, and your faith should now lie with the community of believers who are enacting the kingdom of heaven on earth. "the kingdom of heaven" is another way of saying "the dictatorship of the proletariat".
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 09:33
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Generally you can spot a fascist by how much they talk about degenerates, or subhumans. I tend to go by how often they use the word "females" in reference to human women.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 10:59
|
|
|
what we have now also loving sucks yes, i wasn't aware this was up for debate
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 12:35
|
|
|
Darkman Fanpage posted:killing isis members. and also setting off bombs in Turkish marketplaces
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 15:49
|
|
|
funny way to spell posted:and also setting off bombs in Turkish marketplaces that's tak, not the ypg.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 16:39
|
|
|
Dreddout posted:christianity... is stupid No, it's good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 16:59
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:No, it's good. Reactionary spotted.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 17:04
|
|
|
the core message of christianity is good, actually-existing-christianity is bad and always will be
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 17:33
|
|
|
freedom of speech is a necessity for social advancement and the checking of power, without it, inconvenient truths will never be aired and the system as a whole will jump of a cliff because no one wants to 'rock the boat' the issue is that it hasn't ever existed, even in the united states - freedom of speech exists in the US only in a 'theoretical sense', whenever it's actually challenged, then suddenly, out of nowhere, people start arguing for 'special exceptions'. its the existence of these special exceptions, and their continued reappearance whenever convenient, that disproves the existence of free speech in liberal societies
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 17:36
|
|
|
Yinlock posted:when it's not being used as a footstool for dictators sure i want to address this full-bore. che guevara developed a theory on this a long time ago and i think it was most recently vindicated after the Arab Spring revolutions. Guevara's theory was basically that leftists cannot afford to be democrats, not because it's impossible to win, but because the messy churning of multiparty democracy makes any anti-imperialist government fatally susceptible to being undermined and couped against. He was thinking mainly of the coups in 1953 in Iran and 1945 in Guatemala where an anti-imperialist government got immediately overturned by the CIA (so he reckoned) because if you have a liberal political order the CIA has ready-made allies built into the system who will be eager to displace the elected government. Your only hope is to keep an ironclad lock on your political system so its not so easy for the imperialists to infiltrate and destroy you - in fact that's exactly what Castro did, in Cuba, which is why it was so successful. Under imperialist conditions electoral politics is a fool's errand. Other anti-imperialist forces have been learning this lesson too, like in Algeria in 1990, Palestine in 2005, and Egypt 2012.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 17:39
|
|
|
 also free speech is good, and speech used to perpetuate oppression is not free
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
consumed by normies posted:communism... is good which tendency pls advise
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
DOCTOR ZIMBARDO posted:i want to address this full-bore. che guevara developed a theory on this a long time ago and i think it was most recently vindicated after the Arab Spring revolutions. you need to have a system that is both flexible enough to have effective political opposition, but somehow still resistant enough to meddling that it doesn't get overthrown by external powers
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
and the expectation of even peeps like lenin that a vanguard party-state would eventually 'evolve' into socialism is a fools errand - you may as well ask why capitalism doesn't naturally 'evolve into socialism, they both have power structures that will perpetuate themselves absent even the intention of the people leading them to do so
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 17:45
|
|
|
I think the objective of MLM's mass line is to try and keep the party "honest". I'm skeptical of MLM but I think that at least they try to address that issue.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
well considering how china went i'd be skeptical too I have a couple of hypothetical answers to the problem, but I guess my main point is this: the revolutionary organization must, in miniature, resemble the state it which to creates, because it is that power structure that will be 'expanded' once it actually seizes power. ergo, the task of actually designing a schematic for socialism is the first order of business, not the last - it cannot wait until 'after the revolution', it must occur before
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 17:53
|
|
|
rudatron posted:well considering how china went i'd be skeptical too Agreed on most counts. Do you think revolutionary catalonia is an example of that? This isn't a "gotcha" or anything I'm just curious.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
no, because it was an anarchist mess, it was going to get hosed anyway despite what certain dumb people preech i'm not advocating 'immediate transition towards communism or get out', or that transitionary governments won't exist, but the system has to be designed from the ground up to allow it to occur, or make it inevitable, that means it's going to have to be carefully (very carefully) blueprinted up
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 18:04
|
|
|
rudatron posted:the core message of christianity is good, actually-existing-christianity is bad and always will be It's like the only proven effective source of progressive change in the US. Christianity is extremely good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
lmao someone keeps spending money on rudatron's av
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
i've literally had to buy it back 21 times over the last couple of months so either someone spent $210 on giving me the same fat guy, or it's a mod with an axe to grind
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 18:27
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/sam_kriss/status/813814044167639044
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 19:36
|
|
|
rudatron posted:no, because it was an anarchist mess, it was going to get hosed anyway despite what certain dumb people preech I'm pretty sure the republicans had a Popular Front mess more so than an anarchist mess
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
The problem was that Britain & France would rather support Franco than the Republicans.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 20:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 12:24 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 20:25
|
|