deleted by creator

Unlike you liberals I have all the trust and respect for the working class as a suburban WASP mother has for their 15 year old failson. You think you're slick, wanting to be a functioning adult who can both work a job and do drugs in your free time like tens of millions of laborers manage under an oppressive capitalist system? Nice try pal, I know the only reason anyone would want satan's cabbage legalized is so they can sit around and play video games and shoot up mary jane in between their toes. Now if you'll excuse me I need to listen to some Phil Ochs records backwards to make sure the proletariat aren't listening to any subliminal satanic messages.

/bit

If there's one thing you can take solace in it's knowing that none of these dorks making these proclamations will be in charge of anything more significant than a subreddit.

Isn't that sub an fbi op

Is this a bit? I keep switching between yes and no after each sentence.

deleted by creator

this is some posting right here

This has gotta be some weird bit.

r/communism101 is fucking weird. It's absurdly ban-happy and full of some of the most dogmatic MLs I've ever encountered. I got banned for asking how drug use is unique to capitalism and why it would be wrong to let people grow weed on their own time. I think it might have been in one of those threads lol. The drug policy of present-day socialist states leaves a lot to be desired but I hope people don't get the impression that all MLs are like this. u/whatsunoftruth is a real piece of work based on his posting history.

These posts annoy me so I feel like going at them line-by-line:

This thread is swarmed with liberals who think communism is a utopia of “individual liberty and fulfillment” where you get to sit around and smoke weed all day

What does this shit even mean? How does being able to smoke weed imply that you would literally only smoke weed? How does this not extend to alcohol or tobacco?

Why do you people keep speculating? Does the thought of studying what socialist states that actually existed did, and is doing presently even enter your mind? Or do those solutions not satisfy you because deep down you find them “oppressive”?

Ridiculous dogmatism. No socialist state is perfect, and drug policy is one area where former and current ones are lacking (though this is absolutely not unique to socialist countries). Honestly, I think the histories of these countries' experience with drugs used as tools of imperialism, along with generally culturally conservative attitudes toward drug use (as inherently bad, as a moral failing rather than a health issue, as something best combated with criminalization, etc.), can explain why they have such harsh drug policies - see the Batista dictatorship in Cuba being a narco-dictatorship, CIA heroin trafficking in Vietnam and Laos, and the Opium Wars in China. I can understand why they are the way they are, but I think it's fair (and perfectly in line with materialism) to critique them as inefficient, counterproductive, and needlessly harmful.

As for the actual dogmatism, the reasoning he's using is: other socialist states did it this way, therefore it must always be this way under socialism. Which is pretty obviously bullshit; you could just as easily make the same argument against gay marriage. But beyond that, total prohibition is at odds with the medical and scientific consensus.

And when the oppressed peoples of the world think about communism this is definitely not the first thing that enter their mind.

Obviously irrelevant; no shit the priority is feeding people and liberating them from the oppression of capitalism and imperialism, but that doesn't preclude consideration of progressive drug policy.

Questions like this just screams First World petit-bourgeois consciousness.

There are both many, many drug users in the global periphery and many, many oppressed people within the imperial core who are disproportionately hurt by the war on drugs. Try saying this to the millions of slaves, mostly Black and Latino, in the US prison system because of drug laws, or to Bolivian coca growers.

I despise you people.

Yup, this was the thread I got banned in.

Under socialism “hard drugs” are obviously banned, and if you try to trade it you will get shot.

Jesus.

Addicts will be sent to rehabilitation centers, where they will receive free job training, get educated about the harmful effects of drugs

Sounds ok, although it depends on the drugs we're talking about, and there's no mention of mental health treatment.

and perform rehabilitative labor.

What the fuck? The solution to drug addiction is forced labor?

Perhaps the latter isn’t much more “dangerous” compared to the former. But while the former is a part of daily life for the peasantry in rural areas, the latter is considered by the masses to be a sign of comprador decadence, as marijuana is mostly brought from the united $tates.

So the actual effects of the drugs don't matter, just what they're "considered a sign of"?

On the other hand, under a future socialist state of the Black nation, I’d imagine drugs like marijuana wouldn’t be banned, since marijuana for many years was used as an excuse to justify mass incarceration of Black people.

So, because marijuana was used as an excuse to justify mass incarceration of Black people, under socialism it will be used to justify the incarceration of Black people???

Communism will not soft peddle to your white middle class privilege, you will have to give up every activity that is premised on the oppression of a vast, invisible pool of labor and the imperialist division of the world.

How the hell is all drug production premised on imperialism? Are we just gonna ignore that people can grow or produce their own drugs, or how people in the global periphery frequently do make their own drugs? Are we going to ignore the literal millennia of drug use that occurred outside of imperialism?

That includes drugs, pornography and prostitution, video games and whatever other idle activities you think grow on trees.

I can't even begin to understand what point this person is trying to make. Almost goddamn everything that's used or consumed in the world is produced under conditions of imperialist capitalism. Under socialism, we wouldn't rely on superexploitation of workers in the global periphery to produce things for us, but we would still have things because we would produce things ourselves or exchange what we produce under equal terms with the rest of the world. There's more than enough labor and resources already to produce more than just the bare minimum in every country; there would be video games just like there would be books and alcohol and toys for children. Less, sure, but not none. Tetris was invented in the USSR for fuck's sake!

If you can imagine a totally different economic system but can’t even imagine not sitting around smoking weed and playing video games, or accurately this is when it stops being “fun” and starts to sound scary, you are the problem.

Not only is he assuming that when we talk about being able to smoke weed or play videogames we mean literally 24/7 without doing anything else, he's also feeding into the anticommunist narrative that communism is dystopian drudgery where all you do is work. In every socialist country now and throughout history there has been leisure - there are pools and water parks and ski resorts in the DPRK. Every socialist country has alcohol and music and books and movies and TV shows, and every socialist country lets workers take days off of work.

They will keep asking the same question until they get the “right” answer, I specifically brought up those things because that is where the mask of petty-bourgeois radicalism comes off and the full-on middle class white male redditor emerges. I’m using this thread to weed those people out, I have no illusions anyone will change their minds.

Yes, it's literally just middle class white male Redditors who want more than just bare subsistence. Also:

smokeuptheweed9

🤡

Note to self: Never let Sam_Hyde (?) be in charge of anything.