In what universe do you live in where the Red Army, which failed to take Western Europe, would be able to stage a trans-oceanic amphibious invasion of the United States and was only deterred by American nuclear weapons?

Most atheism is not the "hard-atheism" of "God doesn't exist and I will not believe in God even if it is proven that God does exist." Most atheism is the "soft-atheism" of "There is no actual evidence for God existing, and I will not believe in God without evidence. If evidence comes forwards, I will believe in God, but until then, I will not." In fact, most atheism could be better described not as "disbelief in God" but rather as "skepticism in God".

But even then, I don't see how "hard-atheism" is any more of a reactionary view than any other religion ("hard-atheism" could be considered a religion due to its beliefs not being founded on factual evidence). If you would care to explain why that is so, I would gladly listen.

I never understood the association atheism had with marxism.

Marxism is the materialist interpretation of history, and there is no actual material evidence of God. There is no reason to believe in God if you have no evidence that God exists and is actually the way religion posits it.

Ask any leftist today if they believe in some higher power they are bound to say yes

Do you have any statistics to back that up or are you just going to ignore the entire history of state atheism in past and present socialist countries?

We’re ten minutes from going under water.

The 1st class passengers are paying crewmembers to strip the copper wiring out of the walls on their way to their lifeboats.

They are also taking completely empty lifeboats with them, because letting a poor into the extra lifeboats would depreciate their resale value.

The 2nd class passengers are knee-deep in water, but refuse to the believe the ship is sinking because the band is still playing, and White Star Line would never leave a paying customer behind.

And the 3rd class passengers are neck-deep in water if they’re not already dead.

But hey, at least the new Captain likes ice cream and isn’t a dang cheeto, am I right?

- @rubpoll https://hexbear.net/post/128566/comment/1483159

Just thought this comment was relevant here.

his approval rating is in the low 50s

Wow! What a great democratic system America has where only half the population can be satisfied at once!

Another factor that is very common in the western left is to treat suffering and extreme poverty as elements of superiority. It is very common in Western leftist culture to support martyrs and suffering. Everyone today likes Salvador Allende. Why? Salvador Allende is a victim, a martyr. He was assassinated in Pinochet’s coup d’ etat. When Hugo Chavez was alive, many sectors of the left turned their nose up at him. If he had been killed, for example, in the 2002 Coup attempt, he would be adored by the immense majority of the western left today, as a symbol of suffering and martyrdom. Since he continued exercising power as leader of a political process which, by necessity, had various contradictions, he was increasingly abandoned, as time passed -- I don’t even have to mention what has happened to Maduro here. These same sectors which celebrate and support the idea of Allende because he defended democratic socialism do not see or do not want to see that Allende governed almost entirely through decrees. At the time, the Chilean constitution had a legal mechanism which enabled the executive branch to govern by decrees that did not have to be approved by parliament or the Supreme Court. So Allende was able to make laws through decrees which bypassed Congress and the Supreme Court. Since Allende did not have a majority in Congress and suffered a lot from the bourgeois opposition, he basically governed through decree throughout his entire mandate. This kind of action today is enough justification to label any left leader that practices it as authoritarian, to compare him to Trump, Bolsonaro, or Orban. If Allende was alive today he would also be criticized, but he died.

[...]

Another example of this is the situation with Ché Guevarra and Fidel Castro. To most western leftists, Che Guevara represents a rebel dreamer. In real life he was not, but they have built this image around him. Ché Guevara died immolated in the jungles of Bolivia, so now he is a symbol of sacrifice, martyrdom and the agony of defeat. Fidel stayed in Cuba as leader of the Cuban Revolution and all of the contradictions of this process. Today he is viewed as a bureaucrat, without charm or appeal, by many if not the majority of the western left. Ché Guevara is an eternal symbol of resistance, of dreaming, of utopia that is unfulfilled because of death.

https://www.blackagendareport.com/western-marxism-loves-purity-and-martyrdom-not-real-revolution

The Christian narrative of martyrdom promotes defeat and demotes victory. That is harmful.

Why is the link a Google redirection trap?

The actual link of the article: https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/default/files/what-we-do/networks/radicalisation_awareness_network/ran-papers/docs/ran_ad-hoc_pap_fre_humor_20210215_en.pdf

What would you do if capitalist nations just decided to violently suppress any form of leftism?

(emphasis mine)

Things like that do not "just happen". For the mass arrest of tens of millions to happen, there must be extensive planning of logistics, strategy, and how to deal with resistance. Considering your hypothetical scenario includes even milquetoast anti-capitalism like saying "eat the rich" on social media, that number may stretch into the hundreds of millions. Mass arrests on that scale are not to be taken lightly, and the planning process would stretch entire months, if not years.

Most importantly would be the logistics of the operation. How would you ensure the loyalty of the lower sections of the army (it is unlikely that a police force would be dispatched to conduct such an extensive operation) (infantrymen, etc...)? How would you ensure compliance from those taught from literal childhood to believe in the ideals of "freedom and democracy" and "free speech" to a policy of blatant totalitarianism? And how would you ensure the loyalty of the upper sections of the army (generals, etc...)? Generals and commanders may be shocked when given the plans and refuse to obey them, causing chaos in the army. To ensure compliance with such drastic measures would require a cultural shift (away from liberal values) of such a magnitude it could be seen from a mile away, if not ten miles away.

When the National-Socialists came to power, the Holocaust didn't happen in an instant. The second Hitler became Fuhrer, it wasn't as if all Jews in Germany were rounded up and sent to slaughter. The Holocaust required extensive preparation and lead-up, including significant pre-Holocaust massacres like the Kristallnacht. The Holocaust could've been seen from a mile away, Hitler didn't just wake up one day and decide to slaughter all the Jews.

In conclusion, your scenario is incorrect in assuming that such an operation could be decided upon and carried out (literally) overnight. A mass-arrest of that magnitude would include significant build-up of leftist persecution before it actually happens.

edit: you deleted your post while i was writing this lmao

I am simply offering an alternate explanation for the building of aircraft carriers, nothing more. And the battleship wasn't obsolete - until it was.

If the aircraft carrier was dead, China wouldn’t be building new ones.

Aircraft carriers (like battleships in the past) are essentially status symbols of navies. Just like how a navy in the past wouldn't have been taken seriously without at least possessing a fleet of battleships, a navy of today would not be taken seriously without at least possessing a fleet of carriers. This does not mean that they are practical, the previous status symbol, the battleship was proven obsolete by the carrier. The carrier may soon be proven obsolete by the surface-to-surface missile, but that does not reduce its present status.

If China had nothing but a massive spam fleets of corvettes, would its navy be taken seriously?

It's like how America and the Soviet Union competed over who could make the largest nuclear bomb, the Americans testing a 10MT nuclear bomb (Castle Bravo) and the Soviets testing a 50MT nuclear bomb (Tsar Bomba). Neither were practical, and both were expensive and ultimately a waste of time and money. The creation of these bombs were a pure flex to the opposing power. No target on Earth would ever require a 10MT, 50Mt, or god forbid a 100MT (full-size Tsar Bomba) nuclear bomb to destroy. It is purely flexing.

China building these ships is not a question of effectiveness but merely a signal to the public and to foreign powers that China has a great navy and will not be bullied around anymore. Carriers are the ultimate symbol of naval power and dominance, of course China is going to build them.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

I do not live in America, so the feds can suck my ass.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

The Black Panthers were quite violent. They got in shootouts with the police all the time. So if you believe in the Black Panther as the model for revolution, then you don't believe in a "peaceful" transition?

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator