In what way? You’re complaining about me being a communist, so I just responded by saying I’m indeed a communist and I don’t hide it, no matter how scary you try to make me seem. If you have issues with what I say, address them directly.
You did, you used a pejorative for communists, like “pinko,” “commie,” or “red.” My views are largely aligned with Marxism-Leninism, by far the largest subsection of Marxism by number and absolutely the most relevant historically and currently. The issues you have with me are issues you’d have with the vast majority of communists today and historically. If you’d like to explain where you believe I diverge from the international communist movement in views then that might better illustrate a point, but as of now you’ve just called me the equivalent of “dirty commie.”
All states are authoritarian, I support the proletariat being in control of that authority, rather than the bourgeoisie. I don’t “support authoritarianism” any more or less than the vast majority of the communist movement, because use of authority isn’t really something that works on a linear scale. States wield their authority to represent whichever class controls them, and the extent that authority takes depends on the conditions the state finds itself in.
Nazi Germany, for example, has roughly the same mode of production as modern Germany. The difference in use of authority is because the German economy is not in the same conditions of crisis that existed in the 1930s and 1940s. The bourgeoisie was in control the whole time, that never changed, what did change was the decay of conditions leading to a need for the bourgeoisie to violently assert its control. Now, violent crackdowns on pro-Palestinian protestors is done by the state, because the bourgoeisie needs Israel to continue existing and protecting imperialist super-profits. They didn’t just decide to crackdown for fun, but because they needed to.
Rather than the bourgeoisie being in control, I support the proletariat. This is bog-standard communism, and I cannot imagine you’ll find any communists that want the bourgeoisie to remain in control.
Removed by mod
I’m indeed a known Marxist-Leninist, I’m a spooky scary socialist that encourages people to read Marx. I support socialism, and advocate for it.
this is the kind of reply where you undercut your own work. be better.
In what way? You’re complaining about me being a communist, so I just responded by saying I’m indeed a communist and I don’t hide it, no matter how scary you try to make me seem. If you have issues with what I say, address them directly.
i didn’t complain about you being a communist.
You did, you used a pejorative for communists, like “pinko,” “commie,” or “red.” My views are largely aligned with Marxism-Leninism, by far the largest subsection of Marxism by number and absolutely the most relevant historically and currently. The issues you have with me are issues you’d have with the vast majority of communists today and historically. If you’d like to explain where you believe I diverge from the international communist movement in views then that might better illustrate a point, but as of now you’ve just called me the equivalent of “dirty commie.”
no i did not, but this is your usual washing away of the actual critique of your support for authoritarianism.
we’ve already done this dance, but thanks for proving the point for the new onlookers.
All states are authoritarian, I support the proletariat being in control of that authority, rather than the bourgeoisie. I don’t “support authoritarianism” any more or less than the vast majority of the communist movement, because use of authority isn’t really something that works on a linear scale. States wield their authority to represent whichever class controls them, and the extent that authority takes depends on the conditions the state finds itself in.
Nazi Germany, for example, has roughly the same mode of production as modern Germany. The difference in use of authority is because the German economy is not in the same conditions of crisis that existed in the 1930s and 1940s. The bourgeoisie was in control the whole time, that never changed, what did change was the decay of conditions leading to a need for the bourgeoisie to violently assert its control. Now, violent crackdowns on pro-Palestinian protestors is done by the state, because the bourgoeisie needs Israel to continue existing and protecting imperialist super-profits. They didn’t just decide to crackdown for fun, but because they needed to.
Rather than the bourgeoisie being in control, I support the proletariat. This is bog-standard communism, and I cannot imagine you’ll find any communists that want the bourgeoisie to remain in control.
Thanks for proving my points to the onlookers.
thankfully, i know plenty of Communists in reality that aren’t terminally online tankies, or i’d completely give up on Socialism.
Tankie (noun): a person who ties themselves in knots so they can feel good about supporting authoritarian despots while wearing a red scarf.