Capitalists can just be like “dude look at this NPR article socialism is bad”

Meanwhile I have to have an extensive understanding of philosophy, history, science, economics and politics in order to justify my worldview.

Sometimes I forget that people don’t have comprehensive world views, and accidentally say something’s CIA propaganda, then have to go through that whole process of explaining how the CIA having fronts and interfering in global affairs isn’t a conspiracy, it’s just reality, and that finding sources about it isn’t the same as finding sources for an 8th grade book report, because it’s the goddamn CIA! Shits exhausting and sucks balls, I just want to be dumb I know I’m right bitch, get off my dick

  • JoeySteel [comrade/them]
    2·
    4 years ago

    You don't need to be.

    I've been trying to popularise this amongst the left (actual left not synthetic left ie. those that demand as the lowest bar for "being left" the absolute and complete destruction of Western imperialism and Western capitalism. Not the synthetic left labour aristocrats that try to "both sides" shit when it comes to Russia/China/Iran/INSERT_WESTS_ENEMY_IT_WANTS_BALKANISE_AND_DESTORY_FOR_NEW_MARKETS)

    Is that we should all be learning from conservatives and particularly Roger Stone

    Who's philosophy is Never defend, Attack, Attack, Attack

    Some cuckold brings up the wildly discredited black book of communism "100 million dead under gommies" bring up the fact that British capitalism is responsible for 1.8 billion indian deaths alone so surely 100 million dead from every communist country in the 20th century is a million times better than 1 capitalist nation? If they change tact point out under the metrics of that defined "100 million dead" India achieves that every 20 years

    Another cuckold brings up Xinjiang (a recent topic) point out that the US has starved 27 million Yeminis in a completely manmade famine which is over double the population of Xinjiang so why don't they shut their fucking mouth and focus on a problem they can at least pressure their government about.

    They bring up the falsified "slaves picking cotton in Xinjiang" (an obviously emotionally charged call to USsians with US particular history) point out how come they have no problem with slave children farming chocolate in the Ivory Coast , the fact that Burmese slaves are pumped full of amphetamines and tied to the prows of boats and pulled apart if they disobey orders or how come they have no problem with the child slaves of the Congo mining coltan for their mobile phones and laptops?

    Bring up the fact that only 2 years the US army was bombing the Uyghurs in the East Turkestan Islamic Movement which the US designated as terrorists up until this year

    You can adjust your honesty, disingenuous, vitriol and disgust at liberals and conservatives with depending on how dishonest and disingenuous they're being but leftists should understand that even the "well meaning liberals" that at least pretend to be based in reality are in fact disingenuous, disgusting gaslighting pieces of shit and you should have no moral qualm about being as disingenuous, flexible with reality or gaslighting in return.

    In for a penny out for a pound

    These lib and conservative disgusting pieces of shit that now pretend to care about muslim lives in Xinjiang (definitely the human rights they care about and not the geopolitical rivalry opening up between West and China) remind them that they said nothing whilst the US sanctioned Iraq to the point half a million children died in Iraq and the US secretary of state went on TV to tell people "it was worth it" and that they have literally murdered millions of muslims since they began funding the head chopping jihadis in the 80s where Osama Bin Laden built up his networks in the Muhajadeen

    You don't owe these people anything and you should start viewing how you interact with them as a game for your entertainment

      • JoeySteel [comrade/them]
        2·
        4 years ago

        The term "whataboutism" was literally invented by the US to deflect from the very real human rights abuses and atrocities the US commits worldwide both at home and abroad

        In particular when the Soviets presented the document We Charge Genocide to the United Nations written by black Americans

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_Charge_Genocide

        Giving it free reign to commit atrocities on a global scale, apartheid at home then whine about "whataboutism" anytime someone brings up their flagrant and numerous human rights abuses

        The fact you would use "whataboutism" in a sentence unironically suggests youre still a shitlib

        Edit: My bad :heart-sickle:

        • Mog_Pharou [he/him]
          2·
          4 years ago

          I dig the righteous anger but they are clearly being ironic. Unless you are ironically attacking them, in which case I am in over my head in the levels of irony. Good response though to whataboutism, definitely using that.

          • emizeko [they/them]
            ·
            4 years ago

            the US innovated by changing the ending :capitalist-woke:

          • cresspacito [he/him]
            ·
            4 years ago

            Yeah it was in response to Britain going "they're killing civillians!" while also killing 6x as many or something

    • shitstorm [he/him]
      ·
      4 years ago

      You should definitely fight back against the "100 berjillion dead gombunism" since the Black Book is notoriously bad history. I love this post, but I would alter it to say we should never cede ground, not never defend . I think if you concede to a liberal in your argument any notion that the 100 bajillion dead line is true, you have already lost them. They will write off British imperialism as "not real capitalism" and ignore whatever you say from there.

      Definitely the same tactic of being aggressive, but you don't want to ever give them an inch or they'll take a mile.

    • emizeko [they/them]
      ·
      4 years ago

      this is so good

      change tact

      since I'm gonna be reposting this I'm letting you know about the typo, should probably be "tack" (sailing term) or "tactic"

      In for a penny out for a pound

      the usual phrase is "In for a penny in for a pound", you might be engaging in wordplay here that I'm too dense to catch... asking just in case I shouldn't change it

    • Ketamine_device_tech [none/use name]
      9·
      4 years ago

      try to “both sides” shit when it comes to Russia/China

      Never defend, Attack, Attack, Attack

      you can't use Marxist science to critique the bourgeoisie in places where we have to pretend like they're comrades