Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)F

freagle

@ frisbird @lemmy.ml

Posts
3
Comments
678
Joined
3 mo. ago

  • The problem with socialism

    Jump

  • I'm not angry, Lu. I'm just disappointed

  • Why do you think so many people on the Marxist left defend Stalinism?

    Jump

  • I wish you all the best in your rage-induced commenting spree where you pretend to be smarter than people because they don't accept your framing. Ta! See you around the other comments your chasing me down on.

  • The problem with socialism

    Jump

  • Oh hey, I got you mad enough to chase me around now, eh? Welcome! I like that your primary beef with me is that you think I can't read but then you post this particular link. Very well done! Do continue, please.

  • The problem with socialism

    Jump

  • You do realize that the border is with Tibet, right? An autonomous region within China that has never been recognized as a state with firm boundaries in all of human history. The border is contentious because borders are contentious. As much as you might not like border disputes, there is nothing socialist or anti-socialist about having border disputes. Nepal doesn't want to make a big diplomatic stink over the situation. You want to psychologize them as fearful of China and therefore China isn't socialist?

    You're not making any sense. China is not engaged in imperial capitalist expansion simply because there's a few hundred acres being built on by the TAR along their own border in ways that violate the border. That's a resolvable tension and doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

  • Why do you think so many people on the Marxist left defend Stalinism?

    Jump

  • So nothing. Got it.

  • Why do you think so many people on the Marxist left defend Stalinism?

    Jump

  • So did Poland, France, and the UK. Your point is?

  • The problem with socialism

    Jump

  • Yeah a border dispute over a few hundred acres. Please don't use words like "territorial expansion" when discussing a few hundred acres along a contentious border that has historically been undefined and only in modern times have there been an attempt to make them fixed.

  • The problem with socialism

    Jump

  • I find it hard to believe that China is engaged in territorial expansion when it hasn't dropped a single bomb in 35 years

    Or do mean the border dispute with India? Because that's an artifact of the British drawing shitty borders and imposing them on subjugated people and those people have not established an effective framework for redressing the problem yet

  • The problem with socialism

    Jump

  • Sorry!

  • Why do you think so many people on the Marxist left defend Stalinism?

    Jump

  • the tankie pivot from being the saviors of mankind to being the victims who couldn't stand up to western bullying

    That's sounds exactly like what you said. You don't understand how the narrative could be that the USSR won the war to the USSR lost against the West. Maybe you use words differently. I'm open to it. Definitions are unjustified hierarchy. Explain what you mean.

    Or, you know, dig in deeper by not having anything of substance to say and just keep trying to win by virtue signalling. That works for your audience, too.

  • Why do you think so many people on the Marxist left defend Stalinism?

    Jump

  • Hitler threatened the USSR over a decade before he invaded. He wrote it in Mein Kampf. It was out in the open. Stalin attempted to get Western Europe to take the threat seriously, but Western European leaders understood that the primary target of the Third Reich was the USSR and they all wanted the Third Reich to win that war. Stalin never believed that the Third Reich would be an ally, and the attempt of people to spin it that way is so intellectually dishonest it boggles the mind.

  • The problem with socialism

    Jump

  • They live in India

  • Why do you think so many people on the Marxist left defend Stalinism?

    Jump

  • Stalin is indefensible. As are any of the other examples given

    I mean, this is clearly patently false. People defend all of these leaders literally all the time. The OP is asking how it's possible that people could like Stalin. I'm providing what is likely the single largest contributor to his political cache among the people who support him.

    You can say Churchill is indefensible until you're blue in the face, but people will still defend him. Same for Reagan, same for Truman. Just because you believe something doesn't mean other people believe it. Anarchists have no problem with understanding this concept when it comes to affinity groups, but y'all draw the line at people assigning moral valence to specific leadership actions? Y'all are weird.

  • Why do you think so many people on the Marxist left defend Stalinism?

    Jump

  • Talk about a purely emotional analysis. You have no idea how it's possible to go from winning to losing? Really? That's just something that's beyond you? I guess that's what the commitment to prefigurative idealism does to a mind.

  • Why do you think so many people on the Marxist left defend Stalinism?

    Jump

  • I love this talking point from anarchists and leftcoms because it lays bare their complete commitment to debate perversion and unwillingness to actually think.

    If Stalin didn't defeat the Nazis, then Hitler didn't kill Jews, Blacks, Queer folx, Roma, etc, didn't commit genocide, and didn't invade anyone. Bush didn't invade Iraq. bin Laden didn't attack the US. Truman didn't save 10k Nazis. Trump didn't bomb Iran.

    But even more so, it also means Stalin didn't starve anyone, Stalin didn't imprison anyone, and Stalin didn't relocate anyone.

    This is one of those things that just reveals you for who you are.

  • Why do you think so many people on the Marxist left defend Stalinism?

    Jump

  • Again, the question is how could anyone defend it. I think there are some very clear answers. One of those answers is that the paranoid violent and power abusing Stalin was paranoid violent and power abusing but still a) saved the world from the Nazis and b) died penniless with almost zero personal wealth.

    That already puts Stalin above Hitler, Jefferson, Madison, Washington, Trump, Chamberlain, Churchill, Nixon, Reagan, Bush 1, Bush 2, Chiang Kai-Shek, Truman, Franco, Batista, Pinochet, and many many other world historical leaders who still have people who celebrate them.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • How do you enforce a lack of magical fairies?

    Again, private property is a socially constructed concept that has only ever existed because it was enforced by a centralized government. If you are a libertarian who seeks to eliminate centralized authority, especially violent centralized authority, the way you "enforce a lack' of private property is by not having private property laws, and by not believing in exceptions to the NAP on the basis of private property concepts.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • Private property is a legal and social construct. It's not a natural state of nature. It only exists if it's enforced by violence, which violates the NAP.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • OK. So let's start again. Private property is a fundamental problem. Your turn.