The poll absolutely shows substance, it shows that of a large sample size, more said they were better off under socialism than those that said they are better off now. Further, Czechoslovakia is one former socialist state. Across the board, results are similar or even more in favor of socialism. This makes sense, with the dissolution of socialism, 7 million people died around the world. Poverty, disparity, drug abuse, prostitution, human trafficking, and more skyrocketed, while life expectancy, literacy rates, and quality of life in general fell, for the vast majority of society while a scarce few benefited massively.
It isn’t at all disingenuous. Using results from complex parliamentary elections as a way to disprove straightforward polls that ask very simple questions is disingenuous.
Am I wrong that the vast majority of the communist movement internationally largely has similar views to mine?
Am I wrong that electoral results are far more complex than a clear-cut “are you doing better or worse under capitalism than under socialism?”
Is there some fourth thing you think is divorced from reality?
I’m not going to just let this go, you came here specifically to discredit and insult me, I’m going to defend myself. You don’t just get to show your ass, claim I’m the one divorced from reality, then leave when it’s clear that your comments aren’t having the intended effects. If you want to stop responding, that’s your right, just like it’s mine to clear my name from baseless accusations and generic anti-communism.
they are having the intended effect. you reveal the thinness of your position, and the absurdity of how you cling deriving large claims from a tiny poll from 2011 rather than the repeatable, impactful, society-wide “polls” that happen regularly called elections.
THAT’S how you’re divorced from reality, JUST TO START.
the fact that you can’t see that, and consider your position even remotely serious, is why this conversation isn’t worth the time.
ppl who are the fence should know what kind of a crackpot you are, and it’s not because you’re a communist.
Elections are not polls. Elections are more complex, driven by which party has a greater chance of making an impact. Smaller parties tend to get fewer votes not because their positions are unpopular, but because their capacity to make change is smaller. Furthermore, Marxists are, in general, against electoralism. This is fundamental to Marxism.
sample size of 400 will give you a confidence interval of +/-5% 19 times out of 20 (95%)
A sample size of 1000 will give you a confidence interval of +/-3% 19 times out of 20 (95%)
This is basic statistics. If you aren’t familiar enough with polling to understand degrees of confidence, then you aren’t in a position to argue against the validity of polling based on sample size.
Finally, if you check the up/downvote ratios, it seems pretty much nobody is agreeing with you and everyone is agreeing with me. Your comments are having the opposite effect, they are legitimizing me. People on the fence seem to be siding with me.
lol they’re not on the fence, mate. XD you know that. it’s your tankie buddies. you live in an echo chamber. me popping by is me popping into that bubble.
listen man, again, you’re just gonna keep carrying on. the point was made, for anyone new to your sell.
you support authoritarians and draw specious conclusions from old, small, cherry-picked data while ignoring the real world happening around you.
If everyone here is a communist, then again, which bystanders are you trying to convert? The rest of your comment is more dodging, and calling polls “cherry picked” even after proving that the data is actually towards the median sample size for high-confidence data. This is silly.
The poll absolutely shows substance, it shows that of a large sample size, more said they were better off under socialism than those that said they are better off now. Further, Czechoslovakia is one former socialist state. Across the board, results are similar or even more in favor of socialism. This makes sense, with the dissolution of socialism, 7 million people died around the world. Poverty, disparity, drug abuse, prostitution, human trafficking, and more skyrocketed, while life expectancy, literacy rates, and quality of life in general fell, for the vast majority of society while a scarce few benefited massively.
It isn’t at all disingenuous. Using results from complex parliamentary elections as a way to disprove straightforward polls that ask very simple questions is disingenuous.
Sure, Jan.
…Jan?
it’s an old meme.
point is, you’re too divorced from reality. but neither of us will change our position, so just forget it and move on.
Where, exactly, am I divorced from reality?
Is the poll I linked fake?
Am I wrong that the vast majority of the communist movement internationally largely has similar views to mine?
Am I wrong that electoral results are far more complex than a clear-cut “are you doing better or worse under capitalism than under socialism?”
Is there some fourth thing you think is divorced from reality?
I’m not going to just let this go, you came here specifically to discredit and insult me, I’m going to defend myself. You don’t just get to show your ass, claim I’m the one divorced from reality, then leave when it’s clear that your comments aren’t having the intended effects. If you want to stop responding, that’s your right, just like it’s mine to clear my name from baseless accusations and generic anti-communism.
they are having the intended effect. you reveal the thinness of your position, and the absurdity of how you cling deriving large claims from a tiny poll from 2011 rather than the repeatable, impactful, society-wide “polls” that happen regularly called elections.
THAT’S how you’re divorced from reality, JUST TO START.
the fact that you can’t see that, and consider your position even remotely serious, is why this conversation isn’t worth the time.
ppl who are the fence should know what kind of a crackpot you are, and it’s not because you’re a communist.
Elections are not polls. Elections are more complex, driven by which party has a greater chance of making an impact. Smaller parties tend to get fewer votes not because their positions are unpopular, but because their capacity to make change is smaller. Furthermore, Marxists are, in general, against electoralism. This is fundamental to Marxism.
The sample size in the Czech poll was large enough for a coherent view of general opinions. Most professional polls are between 400 and 1000 samples:
This is basic statistics. If you aren’t familiar enough with polling to understand degrees of confidence, then you aren’t in a position to argue against the validity of polling based on sample size.
Finally, if you check the up/downvote ratios, it seems pretty much nobody is agreeing with you and everyone is agreeing with me. Your comments are having the opposite effect, they are legitimizing me. People on the fence seem to be siding with me.
lol they’re not on the fence, mate. XD you know that. it’s your tankie buddies. you live in an echo chamber. me popping by is me popping into that bubble.
listen man, again, you’re just gonna keep carrying on. the point was made, for anyone new to your sell.
you support authoritarians and draw specious conclusions from old, small, cherry-picked data while ignoring the real world happening around you.
that’s it. you’re happy with with all this.
If everyone here is a communist, then again, which bystanders are you trying to convert? The rest of your comment is more dodging, and calling polls “cherry picked” even after proving that the data is actually towards the median sample size for high-confidence data. This is silly.
The fact that you just keep doubling down here is absolutely hilarious. Just take the L and move on bud.
Removed by mod
yet here you are replying, curious