|
The amount of denial irt soviet/maoist atrocities among tankies is loving unreal "ya but those are nazi arguments, are you a nazi?" doesn't sound disingenuous to me at all
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2017 01:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 10:36 |
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:if your response to documentary proof anticommunist propaganda comes from nazis is "seems disingenuous to me!" maybe you should stop talking for a while Obviously nazis are going to weaponize all the poo poo on communism's dirty laundry list, because it happens to be loving there and they claim to be at the forefront of the anti-communist movement. But our response to dirty laundry on our side shouldn't be constant refrains of "yes, but actually..." all the loving time
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2017 01:19
|
|
|
The nazi propaganda isn't "holodomor and berlin 1945 were bad" but rather "holodomor/berlin were as bad/worse than auschwitz" The real crime against history is trying to equate Mao and Stalin with Hitler. Saying that they had unprecedentedly authoritarian regimes that nevertheless committed mass atrocities should be uncontroversial
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
A Typical Goon posted:the red army wasn’t any worse in its occupation of Germany than the Wehrmacht were in their occupation of the Soviet Union. Massive retaliation against German citizens was inevitable after the war crimes committed on civilians by nazis. collateral damage, i mean all germans are nazis anyway like how when the tutsis took control of rwanda they totally genocided all the hutus instead of setting up the gacaca courts, or how mandela totally killed all the whites instead of setting up a truth and reconciliation committee 9/11 being backlash for years of american imperialism doesn't justify 9/11. just because events are the result of preceding circumstances don't make them justified
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2017 04:22
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:"Pointing out" mass rape by the Red Army is an intentional effort to try and delegitimize the Soviet Union's conduct in World War 2, despite the official Soviet policy against rape and its punishment by death, which was actually enforced. The implication here being that because some Soviet soldiers committed atrocities in Germany, that somehow means that communism is illegitimate and that the Soviet state was just as bad as the Nazis. delete your account
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2017 19:30
|
|
|
I'm confused. When did anyone say anything about mass rape being the policy of the USSR or communism as a whole? Or being equivalent to Nazi crimes? All I'm saying irt the atrocities are that: - They happened on an unbelievable scale - That they were....bad?  If you can't own up to that, you shouldn't be an ally in making a case for communism. Period. It's amazing how out of touch some of you really are. I haven't followed this thread closely enough to glean any kind of claim from typo that mass rape was Stalin's official policy or unique to communism, but feel free to correct me if I missed something.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
"Qui bono?" asks the valiant intellectuals of cspam, wary that saying poo poo stinks on an internet message board will surely help nazis *galaxy brain* Pointing out abu grahib torture hurts are troops and helps ISIS, folks. ISIS says these things. Do you support ISIS?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
tapine posted:the red army doing terrible things is more down to it being an army than it being red Yes, and it also committed one of the worst mass rapes in history I don't see any part of this thread where anyone blamed the ideology of communism for this
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
Fair enough. It just seemed to me that typo started this off by reading a modern account of Berlin in 1945 and people went batshit
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2017 22:11
|
|
|
"Meltdowns" make sense in the context of comrades being Godwin'd needlessly, which should be a loving unacceptable nonstarter and is a good exhibit A for why the left can't get its poo poo together
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2017 23:04
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:the piss tape is electoral politics, we don't gently caress withthat reformist opportunism (tired): tax returns revolutionary, proletarian (wired): piss tape
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Gamergaters announce gaming boycott upon learning that games have always been woke
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2017 19:17
|
|
|
Ape Fist posted:In fairness, a bunch of AnCaps consider death to be an legitimate opt-out of a bunch of systems 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2017 17:14
|
|
|
I feel like nationalism and anti-imperialism get inevitably too wound up with each other, as though there's some kind of national identity that needs to be protected from foreign encroachment. This becomes problematic around issues like immigration, when "solidarity with kosovar albanians" becomes a prelude to mass deportations of serbs, for example And that' s to say nothing of the idea that all liberation movements have to necessarily be anti-Western or that all imperialism has to be perpetuated by the West. Kosovo was a "liberation struggle" or "Western imperialism" depending on your point of view. Catalonia has had soft backing by Russian imperialism in order to undermine the EU geopolitics is a land of contrasts Yossarian-22 fucked around with this message at 21:46 on Nov 28, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2017 21:43
|
|
|
Annual Prophet posted:no matter how often one reads his work, it never ceases to amaze actually its not pedophilia its righteous child murder bing bong so simple
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
Despera posted:Great irish famine killed 1 million people. Thats like a june in Mao's china. virgin british imperialists vs chad crop-eating locusts
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
Every country is imperialist and sides with a global hegemon, in order to advance its own interests I'm "anti-imperialist" in the sense that I oppose imperialism. The potential victims of American imperialism aren't necessarily members of some phantom valiant anti-imperialist regime simply because they don't want to be invaded. People in Kurdistan, Kuwait, and Iran certainly viewed Saddam Hussein as an imperialist before we invaded Iraq What's bizarre to me is that people who oppose U.S. imperialism and simply choose not to back a side get accused of supporting imperialism
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
A spooky spectre is haunting lf thread, the spectre of semantics 
Yossarian-22 fucked around with this message at 21:43 on Dec 7, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2017 21:40
|
|
|
A Typical Goon posted:If you don’t think Putin could get away with having Navalny and other opposition figures rounded up and thrown in jail or killed I don’t know what to tell you. A show opposition is not an opposition Right-wing dictatorship also doesn't fascism make. Fascism is a counterrevolutionary ideology/system hellbent on crushing every iota of the "left," with an extremely deified nationalist government and a complete merger of the private sector with the state.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2017 03:46
|
|
|
Xelkelvos posted:Someone Red pill me on the difference between Trotskyists, Leninists, Marxists and Maoists so I know which Communist party philosophy is superior. Bordiga, op
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2017 05:00
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:the russian bourgeoisie is far more susceptible to fracture than, say, any country in the imperialist bloc. it's in their best interest to align with the us but at present they're content as a national bourgeois, which gives russian communists an opening so cuba didn't have an opening for a communist revolution because its bourgeois was subservient to u.s. capitalism under bautista? the only thing that needs to precede socialism is a "development of the productive forces." russia industrialized decades ago because of every tankie's favorite tankie. taking sides in putin vs. navalny is about as meaningful as democrats vs. republicans Yossarian-22 fucked around with this message at 09:28 on Dec 12, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2017 09:23
|
|
|
I just don't see how an ardent nationalist gives russia any easier of a path to communism than a neoliberal imperialist stooge failson. Chiang Kai-Shek was a pawn of the West and successfully self-owned enough to make China ripe for the picking. Successful/expansionist right-wing nationalism is arguably the most successfulpreventative measure against communism, short of going fully fascist Netanyahu is perhaps better than avigdor lieberman, but it's not a priority of leftists to lend "tactical support" to Netanyahu as a result (who has been quite a nationalist himself) Right-wing nationalism: not a land of contrasts Yossarian-22 fucked around with this message at 09:56 on Dec 12, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2017 09:53
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:There's literally a better historical record for communist revolutions in repressive weak bourgeois regimes or semifeudal agrarian countries than anything else. Okay, so why does it matter whether or not those countries are western-aligned or "anti-imperialist?" Nicholas II, Chiang Kai-Shek, and Fulgencio Bautista all played ball with the West and the latter two were essentially proxies. The democratic socialist revolutions in South and Central America all occurred under right-wing regimes supported by the U.S. Ironically, I can't think of a single case in which non-alignment with the West helped trigger a communist insurgency.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:all the democratic socialist revolutions in Latin America also failed. you really do have to read Lenin to understand why a national bourgeoisie isn't the same thing as the global, imperialistic bourgeoisie. an "alignment" with the West also isn't the same thing as being fully incorporated into the Western-led global empire of capital. a national bourgeoisie which invests itself into the domestic economy will be much weaker than a global one which can draw upon international resources to guarantee its rule. it's a massive power differential, and it should be obvious which one is easier to overthrow. Please define and delineate "alignment" vis-à-vis "fully incorporated." Ever hear of the Platt Amendment? Short of being an outright official colony, Cuba was about as incorporated into informal U.S. empire and occupation as one could get I also don't see how Lenin's points about national burgeoisie hold up any more today than Luxemburg's theses on the self-determination of nations As far as I can recall, Daniel Ortega is still in charge of Nicaragua, and Central America is relatively more democratic than it used to be. The "pink tide" in South America was also a reaction to decades of U.S. imperialism Yossarian-22 fucked around with this message at 21:08 on Dec 12, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:relevant to this discussion: https://apnews.com/7f9e63cb14a54dfa9148b6430d89e873 weak national bourgeoisie, which just allowed assad to maintain power, paves way for communist revolution in syria with paid contractors
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2017 21:10
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5X8qDDMC-o Lemme quote your post just now: "Electoral politics will never realize socialism when any marginal gains can be immediately rolled back by one bad election." I agree, which is why I think your optimism for the Russian Communist Party given their occasional pisspoor 2nd place results in elections is downright bizarre. You can't decry the successes of electoral politics but then at the same time hype up the opportunities that a "weak national bourgeoisie" presents for a political party that is all but irrelevant at this point
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:This is like trying to have a dialogue with a schizophrenic. My sister is smarter than you and got all A's so take that back you gently caress
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2017 01:00
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:2nd place in any election is a much better track record than any First World communist party in the United States or the UK, and the Russian communist party also has a much bigger membership than any of its western counterparts as well. It's weird how you guys think that it's insane to think it's more likely to see a return of communism to Russia than a communist revolution in the United States, at least within our lifetimes. lol, beyond you putting words in my mouth just now regarding the chances of revolution, the one making the claim of which nations are most likely to see revolution is you, and I find it bizarre that you're conflating the meager success of a failson electoral party with odds of revolution because of russia's magical weak burgeoisie. It's especially odd because you just dismissed socialist success elsewhere, including the toppling of Western backed dictatorships, as nothing more than transient happenstance I have another theory for the successes of Russias CP: maybe it has something to do with votes from old nostalgics and it once being one of the most powerful and institutionalized political parties in world history? Nawww that couldn't be
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2017 01:05
|
|
|
lollontee posted:yeah they can see: our very own secretary of state making deals with russia while in charge of exxon mobil
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Social Democracy is the reference image under "transient happenstance" for the idiomatic dictionary. If you don't realize socialism then it's not a "socialist success." It's no wonder that state socialist regimes have all collapsed or gone capitalist then, seeing as they're essentially social democracy behind the barrel of a gun and have little to nothing to do with workers owning the means of production
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2017 02:02
|
|
|
lol rudatron is right  
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2017 13:38
|
|
|
i support the people's republic of lf and wanna make my support clear and emphatic by posting about it
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2017 04:07
|
|
|
Autism Sneaks posted:you make a compelling case, but you're so consistently wrong it's axiomatic so idk who is right have you contributed anything to this thread that isn't needlessly sardonic and bereft of substance Yossarian-22 fucked around with this message at 00:53 on Dec 15, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2017 00:49
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:I prefer the sliding scale interpretation, where China is a mixed economy that's neither fully socialist or capitalist. this except all economies, and except state planning=/=socialist socialism isn't a sliding scale. either the working class is in charge of the economy and in the process of abolishing commodity exchange and class society or it isn't it's nice that cuba and scandanavia have such robust states, and other countries have reason to emulate them, but that's still just benevolent capitalism. china doesn't even meet that standard. it meets the standard of an industrializing country that's better off than when it was a british opium den exploited by western and japanese imperialism Yossarian-22 fucked around with this message at 23:09 on Dec 18, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2017 21:46
|
|
|
when the state owns most of the means of production and not the working class,  but in a more egalitarian, less dynamic formeven che guevara himself decried how much cuba simply became a proxy for soviet imperialism and remained overly relient on exporting sugar, just that the resulting revenue was owned by the state and reinvested in social democratic programs. there is a lot of pressure on developing countries to compete in the international market so ultimately no "socialist" country in isolation can live up to the term trots may be weird pro-pedo newspaper salesmen but they're correct about the necessity for global revolution
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:we're also back to this bullshit separation between socialist states and the working class. what exactly do you think communist parties do yossarian. plug their ears and sing "la la la" when people bring up problems they're facing? idk, ask the kronstadt working class in 1921. or the hungarian working class in 1956. or the workers in PRC's strikes totalling around 3,000 per year. love too equate party bureaucrats with proletarians
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2017 09:51
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:oh, sure. they pull this poo poo with all socialist states though. some of the particulars may (rarely) change but the song stays the same lmao, beyond using mean income as opposed to median, which includes billionaire wealth, you're deceptively using five figure numbers which are obviously yuan not USD. when some chinese people accumulate hundreds of billions of yuan, of course the mean will go up friendo yeah, china is an east asian success story but that's no different from south korea, singapore, hong kong, taiwan, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2017 10:00
|
|
|
my kid just got hired by nike in my quest to own the means of production, ama
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2017 10:03
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:minimum wages have also tripled and it doesn't matter what currency is used for analysis as long as it's constant. i'm on my phone so can't post but you can check the site yourself. wanna try again? south korea had the wages of mozambique and became a first world democracy in 25 years. development isn't exclusively a socialist thing (although always necessitates vast state intervention contrary to what neolibs say)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2017 19:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 10:36 |
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:South Korea also didn't really develop until a massive injection of American capital after our failure in Vietnam. It'd also be possible for me to found a business if I got a low interest multimillion dollar loan from my rich Uncle Pennybags. I mean, I can both sides this pretty easily by pointing out that the USSR did the same with its proxies. The point is that the rise in the global standard of living was essentially universal and was done successfully by both "socialist" and capitalist regimes. Hell, there's also that fact of American capital going into China after Nixon's road to Beijing moment Saying "muh living standards" is a weird thing I've noticed tankies do with Stalin and Mao when one could just point anywhere on a globe and get a similar result somewhere nearby. Of course having the American empire on your side post-WWII is no joke
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2017 20:03
|
|