What are you even talking about? This is the least comprehensible comment I've seen here. Everything you've said here has nothing to do with anything I've said; it's the trifecta of straw man, non sequitur, and red herring. And using terms for logical argumentation doesn't make me pedantic, it makes me able to precisely detail why and how your logic doesn't work. I can see why you are afraid of that.
And, predictably, when all else fails, you basically resort to "no u"
You non-sequitur-ed, you double straw man-ed, you red herring-ed. Its not pedantic unless its from the pedant region of France. This is just sparkling smugness.
Ipso facto absurdeum, Checkmate tankie
I'm sorry that you couldn't comprehend my post, i was being pretty clear. You're one of those western left anti-communists. You dont support actually existing socialist states. You think the men and women of the world who have fought revolutions and built real world socialist projects did it, or are doing it wrong. People like that usually have admiration for socialists who failed to bring a project into the real world, where their actions could be critiqued, where mistakes can happen and be visible, because only projects that aren't real can live up to your idealist vision of socialism.
Mocking you for logic pedantry, and reddit debate bro bullshit to be fair is technically unrelated from your "ideology." But there's an obvious connection to how people who don't find actual real world socialist projects worth supporting would also be into flinging thise terms around like anyone outside of online debate perverts would care
Damn, that's a lot of wrong assumptions about me you just made. I can see that you lack the intelligence to actually see that I never really said much about my own ideology, so basically anything that you just tried to claim about me was pulled deep from inside your anus, and is objectively wrong. For the most part I actually support even communist states, but my main criticism with actual communist states is their authoritarianism, made easy by the inherent totalitarianism of communism.
Big problem with your criticism tho: there aren't any true socialist states that exist today. There aren't any states that have successfully fully implemented a socialist society today. A society where the actual individual workers own and control all the means of production, where all basic needs are met, and people are guaranteed the right to their freedoms. I absolutely support and laud the people out there working to achieve those goals. I don't think any state will ever be able to perfectly achieve those goals, so I don't expect perfection out of my fellow socialists. I do expect the abolition of the class, however, and that has never really even been close to being achieved. Not for a lack of trying, but because there is always some asshole who wants to be above others, and they have been very good at fucking things up for the rest of us.
And, you know, that gets me thinking... this whole conversation is exactly what capitalists want; infighting. You think I'm not radical enough for you, so you then label me as completely opposed to you. The problem is, I can guarantee we share a great many ideals, but you are too busy gatekeeping to allow others with slightly different but reconcilable ideals to be allies.
That is, of course, if I suspend my disbelief that you are a capitalist troll who is spitting vitriol, trying to make communists look belligerent and inhospitable.
Your explanation of your beliefs just proved me right. My thoughts about you didn't come from my ass they honestly came from Michael Parenti Black Shirts and Reds
All governments are authoritarian, its a useless word. I didn't make that up either. Its from Engels On Authority
Totalitarian is a bullshit concept invented during the Cold War to conflate fascism with communism, similar to double genocide theory, to use against communist states. To say its inherent to communism is like saying killing 10 gorillion dead, Vuvvezzuula, no food, no iphone, is inherent to communism.
You believe these things because you're a left anti-communist. You can say that you arent, and then continue to describe to us all the ways that you are again if you want.
And, you know, that gets me thinking...
No, no it hasn't gotten you thinking. If we share values, then why do you attack us. There's more than once where you've popped off saying something weird directed at us. If you think our differences are reconcilable, why not lead with that?
Instead you started with TRIGGER WORD, and some comment about us being the same as fascists by saying we're like Hannah Montana or something. Then you dicked around flinging out your straw mans and ad hominems and no true scotsmans instead of telling us about your ideology or making a real critique about ours.
And, you know, that gets me thinking... this whole conversation is exactly what capitalists want; infighting. You think I'm not radical enough for you, so you then label me as completely opposed to you. The problem is, I can guarantee we share a great many ideals, but you are too busy gatekeeping to allow others with slightly different but reconcilable ideals to be allies.
Gatekeeping? That was always the issue I had with "democratic" socialists who have positions, but insist that they're the 'democratic' ones because they want to make sure the slaveowners keep getting a vote (and continue existing).
What are you even talking about? This is the least comprehensible comment I've seen here. Everything you've said here has nothing to do with anything I've said; it's the trifecta of straw man, non sequitur, and red herring. And using terms for logical argumentation doesn't make me pedantic, it makes me able to precisely detail why and how your logic doesn't work. I can see why you are afraid of that.
And, predictably, when all else fails, you basically resort to "no u"
You non-sequitur-ed, you double straw man-ed, you red herring-ed. Its not pedantic unless its from the pedant region of France. This is just sparkling smugness.
Ipso facto absurdeum, Checkmate tankie
I'm sorry that you couldn't comprehend my post, i was being pretty clear. You're one of those western left anti-communists. You dont support actually existing socialist states. You think the men and women of the world who have fought revolutions and built real world socialist projects did it, or are doing it wrong. People like that usually have admiration for socialists who failed to bring a project into the real world, where their actions could be critiqued, where mistakes can happen and be visible, because only projects that aren't real can live up to your idealist vision of socialism.
Mocking you for logic pedantry, and reddit debate bro bullshit to be fair is technically unrelated from your "ideology." But there's an obvious connection to how people who don't find actual real world socialist projects worth supporting would also be into flinging thise terms around like anyone outside of online debate perverts would care
Damn, that's a lot of wrong assumptions about me you just made. I can see that you lack the intelligence to actually see that I never really said much about my own ideology, so basically anything that you just tried to claim about me was pulled deep from inside your anus, and is objectively wrong. For the most part I actually support even communist states, but my main criticism with actual communist states is their authoritarianism, made easy by the inherent totalitarianism of communism.
Big problem with your criticism tho: there aren't any true socialist states that exist today. There aren't any states that have successfully fully implemented a socialist society today. A society where the actual individual workers own and control all the means of production, where all basic needs are met, and people are guaranteed the right to their freedoms. I absolutely support and laud the people out there working to achieve those goals. I don't think any state will ever be able to perfectly achieve those goals, so I don't expect perfection out of my fellow socialists. I do expect the abolition of the class, however, and that has never really even been close to being achieved. Not for a lack of trying, but because there is always some asshole who wants to be above others, and they have been very good at fucking things up for the rest of us.
And, you know, that gets me thinking... this whole conversation is exactly what capitalists want; infighting. You think I'm not radical enough for you, so you then label me as completely opposed to you. The problem is, I can guarantee we share a great many ideals, but you are too busy gatekeeping to allow others with slightly different but reconcilable ideals to be allies.
That is, of course, if I suspend my disbelief that you are a capitalist troll who is spitting vitriol, trying to make communists look belligerent and inhospitable.
Your explanation of your beliefs just proved me right. My thoughts about you didn't come from my ass they honestly came from Michael Parenti Black Shirts and Reds
All governments are authoritarian, its a useless word. I didn't make that up either. Its from Engels On Authority
Totalitarian is a bullshit concept invented during the Cold War to conflate fascism with communism, similar to double genocide theory, to use against communist states. To say its inherent to communism is like saying killing 10 gorillion dead, Vuvvezzuula, no food, no iphone, is inherent to communism.
You believe these things because you're a left anti-communist. You can say that you arent, and then continue to describe to us all the ways that you are again if you want.
No, no it hasn't gotten you thinking. If we share values, then why do you attack us. There's more than once where you've popped off saying something weird directed at us. If you think our differences are reconcilable, why not lead with that?
Instead you started with TRIGGER WORD, and some comment about us being the same as fascists by saying we're like Hannah Montana or something. Then you dicked around flinging out your straw mans and ad hominems and no true scotsmans instead of telling us about your ideology or making a real critique about ours.
Gatekeeping? That was always the issue I had with "democratic" socialists who have
positions, but insist that they're the 'democratic' ones because they want to make sure the slaveowners keep getting a vote (and continue existing).
Shit the fuck up liberal
You really think you did something here with that wall of cringe text
Remind me what happened with Allende yesterday in 1973, and what happened to the Indonesian communists?