I get it. you're immature and are unable to concede a point. you really should reflect back on the fact I literally haven't called you a single name while you've been calling me unread, dense, high, a child, an imbecile, insufferably stupid, insufferably an asshole, along with other things.
send as many clown emojis as you want dude. you know I know that you know you were wrong and whether or not you slept through history class in belarus or whatever country you were raised in has nothing to do with the simple fact rosa died after the russian soviet federative socialist republic was established and the bolsheviks were in control of the country. its such a dumb hill to die on
its okay to admit you're wrong. sorry if hist.msu.ru is not a good enough citation for you. I dunno if moscow state university is an authoritative enough source or if I need to go back to youtube videos
you being belarusian just makes this so much more sader for me that you don't know your own history. I have to wonder for whose government the red army was fighting for for in the civil war after trotsky established it on the 28th of january 1918 and how they're getting guns and ammunition and food if the bolsheviks were not in charge of russia. or wtf you think Российская Советская Федеративная Социалистическая Республика means which was established on the 7th of november 1917
right now I think I know the problem. you don't know the history of the russian civil war. it only took the bolsheviks about a week to take over most of the largest population centers and by russian new year they controlled the majority of russia and were implementing their policy on the country. please just watch this youtube video so you have a general idea of the timeline of events https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLDz5QIjQb0
even if that were true and the russian republic was literally the exact same as the russian empire the october revolution happened in 1917... cmon dude you're talking out of your ass here
the russian empire did not exist in 1919… is your history that poor?
and here is a quote from rosa luxembourg on the russian revolution
The basic error of the Lenin-Trotsky theory is that they too, just like Kautsky, oppose dictatorship to democracy. “Dictatorship or democracy” is the way the question is put by Bolsheviks and Kautsky alike. The latter naturally decides in favor of “democracy,” that is, of bourgeois democracy, precisely because he opposes it to the alternative of the socialist revolution. Lenin and Trotsky, on the other hand, decide in favor of dictatorship in contradistinction to democracy, and thereby, in favor of the dictatorship of a handful of persons, that is, in favor of dictatorship on the bourgeois model.
as you can read for yourself she did not consider bolshevik russia to be a dictatorship of the proletariat but a dictatorship following the bourgeois model of a handful of people. now I ask again can you actually put out an argument instead of pointing to “rejection by every contemporary socialist” and calling him names please? no need to follow such a childish argumentation style
I am not trying to pander to any sort of audience only talking about the attractiveness of kautsky and his beliefs to people today and giving my theory why. I’m also not very convinced by your line of reasoning because all you’ve said besides appealing to a number of historical figures not agreeing with him is saying he didn’t believe in the dictatorship of the proletariat which is confusing because he wrote an entire pamphlet called “the dictatorship of the proletariat” explaining how he believed in it and believed what russia was doing was not the dictatorship of the proletariat. especially weird since you included rosa luxembourg who famously considered russia to be a police state not adhering to the dictatorship of the proletariat
what about what he staked his claims on would be particularly damaging because I feel like in a post-soviet collapse world his writings and beliefs would resonate quite well with people who are anti-soviet union and its legacy along with the derrived countries and ideologies like china and trotskyism but also find themselves thoroughly revolutionary unlike social democrats and pro-organization unlike anarchists
from my personal experience the need to collapse as you describe it stems moreso from the geopolitical position the societies of these liberal countries find themselves in moreso than the nature of their political ideology. it is in order to convince themselves of the need to continually take actions to protect their own interests and preferential position. I imagine it was probably pretty similar within nazi germany toward their opponents or within the soviet union against nazi germany. this is something I feel a lot of americans don't exactly realize. anti-americanism is not as pervasive across the world as you may be led to believe and is definitely not at the same level of hate you'll see with americans regarding china or other examples. this was especially weird to me when I first heard the song Eve of Destruction with the lyric "And think of all the hate there is in Red China" because the chinese really do not hate americans they just want to work together with them for mutual benefit. same sentiment was heard when putin gave his now famous interview with tucker carlson
the CPC has allowed muslims to be members during large parts of china's history and most members don't consider themselves athiests in different polls that have been taken. other countries like afghanistan allowed people to be religious in their parties and theres video proof of many of them praying at mosques and such. its not as outlandish as you'd be lead to believe
I don't think this has much to do with liberalism. howmany leftists, might be more politically correct for me to use neo-nazis as the example but whatever, have you talked to who say things like navalny is a nazi, all ukrainian troops are nazis, the free syrian army are isis, also isis is isis, israelis are nazis, kulaks were parasites, or the most classical one germans were nazis. just seems like people in general prefer to be against caricatures and comically evil people rather than humans
I meant the original one but the art style is pretty much the same in this one so basically, yeah. only difference is the sound is much worse IMO and the colour more modern
I'm not entirely sure howmany of the politicians in america actually believe their propaganda about ukrainian heroes and democracy and stuff and howmany are neocons wishing to deal a blow against russia
they're reminding you china is a totalitarian country with censors which affects the creation of movies and what movies people are allowed to enjoy. on the subject of chinese animated films I would like to see them move further away from japanese style animation and return more to the stuff they had in the 60s like havoc in heaven. its time for china's media industry to stand on its own two feet
I would say reddit is generally negative about the united states and positive about europe because its full of social democrats but the site as a whole buys the american empire apologetics wholesale (assad is evil, ukraine is good, russia is evil, israel is good, hamas is evil, taiwan is good, china is evil etc)
post ww2 the united states was largely carried by its automobile industry and the housing boom propelled by the large number of veterans returning with the ability to get cheap mortgages along with american businesses in general being more competitive than the ones from bombed out countries in europe which were quickly losing their unwieldy empires. china on the otherhand made its rise through developing cheaper and consistent manufacturing replacements to western alternatives. all this is kind of besides the more important point that economically speaking its typically better to provide unequal services or even no services at all to a segment of a population in favor of another one. its why china under deng privitized large segments of its healthcare system providing very unequal outcomes. this relates in general to the marxist understanding of capital accumulation (long term its better for people's surplus value to go to one capitalist who will then take the capital to then invest into making more capital resulting in more capital overall)
I get it. you're immature and are unable to concede a point. you really should reflect back on the fact I literally haven't called you a single name while you've been calling me unread, dense, high, a child, an imbecile, insufferably stupid, insufferably an asshole, along with other things.