Truly living up to their tankie label.
Capitalists are also more than willing to kill innocent people to further their goals. Their goals are profit, though. Defending them in this context just makes it look like your advocating for profitable murder.
Because humans can totally exist in perfect harmony under anything but capitalism. Pack it up fellas, this one’s solved inherent evil in human nature!
No one genuine ever said it was perfect. Just better.
Even removing capitalism in society, communism still killed people for reasons outside of capitalism versus communism. Plenty of prisons and labour camps in various communist countries can attest to that. Tankies are willing to kill just to impose their will. Having “better society” as excuse has nothing to do with, they just want power.
You’re right. There are definitely unsavory actors acting under the banner of communism, whom in an ideal world would be dealt with. Historically, many of thrm have been capitalists trying to secure an increase in profit, however. I’m NOT a tankie, I’m an anarchist, in fact. However, all one has to do is look at history (real history, not propoganda. Actual numbers.) To see that communism’s infamous death toll is actually much, much lower than capitalism’s even when adjusted for whatever factor you can think of. For an accurate, well-researched piece with plenty of nuance and primary sources that deals with this matter explicitly, I reccomend the book ‘Blackshirts and Reds’. It’s a fascinating breakdown of how capitalist propoganda has deeply distorted our view of history, especially when it comes to both fascism and communism.
I’m an anarchist
Imma stop you right there …
If the very word ‘anarchism’ is outaide your comfort zone, then yes I suppose I won’t be able to be very productive for you.
If you do find yourself curious though, I’m always happy to talk politics, and always open to seriously considering and empathizing with other points of view from my own! Even capitalism 😆
‘How can we convince people to move away from a capitalist society?’
‘by murdering them ofc’
I am convinced that many of them are not into communism, they just want power.
They’re looking for simple answers to complex questions. Capitalism being bad is obvious, but they then make the simple jump to say the opposite of capitalism must be good. Anyone who disagrees is simply subject of “western propaganda” or just racist and they can discard any counter point.
Humanity desperately needs to move away from capitalism, if it wants any chance of survival. Either that or we install a Universal base income system.
were never getting the trek version , which is when they shed capitalism in the future after the 3rd ww(and only use it on a case by case base for many other races that still uses it)
They also had replicator technology… kind of the main ingredient there.
true, also tech from other species that made it possible.
I agree. I am actually becoming more inclined towards socialism sans the totalitarianism. We might have a chance once we start taxing AI and robots. After all, our data are stolen to train AI. We should get more tangible benefits from it.
Socialism nor communism are supposed to have any amount of totalitarianism… The people who think they do are ignorant fools listening to the capitalist propaganda.
The countries that call themselves socialist or communist are distinctly NOT in most cases. They’re just the same old asshole ruling class userping the language of socialism/communism to trick dumb people in to maintaining support.
Kind of like how the US calls itself “the land of the free” despite being built on slavery and ethnic cleansing of natives, now with the highest prison population in the world…
If some country is calling themselves something… ALWAYS press X to doubt.
Socialism nor communism are supposed to have any amount of totalitarianism…
Any organisations need some level of authority to maintain order. But if we are talking about totalitarianism which means controlling every aspects of individual lives including who to marry, how many kids to have, how should you plant crops, what to think, what to say etc., then that it is a problem that shouldn’t be tolerated.
Eh… debatable on “authority” being the required attribute. Responsibility is certainly a better word for what an ideal society would look like for many informed anarchists, as far as what many people think of as “authority” now.
Also, “authority” does not have to be something that is given without guard rails or time limits. The authority to arrest and imprison people can exist in a society without full time police, for example. No single person needs to be granted authority as a de facto thing.
I would be much more in favour of anarchism, but I think there needs to be a global wide cultural shift first to happen. Counterparts on the other side of the planet has to be on the same page first before anarchism would take root. But realistically, at the moment, there are far too many diverse expectations and values to allow mutual understanding. Talk to a Somali, Egyptian, Bolivian or Korean about anarchism and you would probably get a confused eyebrow raised on what it means, or even hostile response. I think the lines of communications and technology have to dramatically transform first, to allow organic cultural exchanges and mutual development towards anarchism.
Yea, far, FAR too many morons believe in the “virtues” of a “strong man” leader for actual anarchism to work in current day, sadly…
Y’all both sound like children.
“Going high when they go low” isn’t a sound strategy when someone threatens to kill. This underestimation and softness is what leads to the authoritarianism on either side. Nothing wrong with dipping one’s hand into the mud once in a while without fully bathing one’s self into the mud. Even Slavoj Zizek advocated for having a “soft dictator” like Franklin Roosevelt to counter extremism.
OMG no one cares!
deleted by creator
Slavoj Zizek also advocated for voting for Donald Trump in 2016 and says that “transgenderism is incompatible with Freud”, so his advocacy doesn’t count for much AFAIAC.
Wasn’t Freud massively debunked?
I don’t know about his comment on transgenderism, but Slavoj advocating to vote Trump is more about shaking up the liberal status quo to wake them up and actually do a better job, rather than him supporting Trump, and also to do away with Democrat Party’s mantra of “vote blue no matter” and their proud label of “lesser evil”. Come Trump 2.0, his reasoning proved to be prescient and correct. The Democrat leadership are fighting harder to stop the progressive Zohran Mamdani taking power as New York Democrat mayor, than actually stopping the Republican fascist agenda. As we speak, the Democrat betting on the “voting blue no matter who” is starting to crumble from the POV of voters as outsider progressives are slowly gaining ground.
I don’t think his reasoning was prescient and correct, though.
If Trump wins, both big parties, Republicans and Democratics, would have to return to basics, rethink themselves, and maybe some things can happen there. That’s my desperate, very desperate hope, that if Trump wins—listen, America is not a dictatorial state, he will not introduce Fascism—but it will be a kind of big awakening. New political processes will be set in motion, will be triggered.
he will not introduce Fascism
Neither party rethought anything (your point about Mamdani shows just how little the Dems have rethought) and now the US is rounding people up to put them in camps.
And re. the transgenderism/Freud comment, I think it mostly serves to show that he puts way more stock in Freud than he should, because Freudian psychology is largely a load of wank.
(Yes, the use of a sexually based pejorative to disparage Freud was deliberate. Please appreciate my clever joke.)
To be honest, a lot of people including me did not expect Trump to go full fascist. His first term was described as fascist-lite at best and many wrongly thought he will continue with that approach. Of course, we were wrong and paying for it dearly.
Going back to the main point of the discussion. Zizek may have been wrong about Trump’s fascism, but his point overall about shaking up the status quo is correct. It is wake up call for implementing actual reform and reflection. Practically it did not happen in the way that Zizek and others may have anticipated, but it is still clear that the sign of times is meant for engaging practical and reform solutions towards betterment of ordinary folks. If you talk to many conservatives and on the right, many of them actually agree that wealth inequality is a problem and don’t believe in trickle down economics. Many on the right are actually willing to vote left if the left offers tangible solutionsbto bread and butter, or kitchen table issues. As we speak, Zohran Mamdani is getting popular support for his common sense policies. AOC and Bernie Sanders are continually drawing record crowds in their national tour even in Republican states.
This is a sign that what Zizek mentions about shaking things up by electing outsiders to prompt soul searching is working among ordinary voters, even if both Democratic and Republican party elites are not doing so because why would they.
Screaming out loud that it’s ingroup / outgroup tribalism.
The fact that you aren’t killing tankies and fascists on-sight is why they keep coming back like roaches to threaten vulnerable people, so this is partially your fault for being a impotent pacifist group of pearl-clutchers that only complain online all fucking day.If you have a termite infestation, do you let them stay in your house? Do you bargain or negotiate with them? No, you fumigate them into near genocidal fury of they will eat the insides of your home until it collapses on top of you in your sleep and kill you.Edit: i don’t think pacifism works, but i wont stop you from believing you think impotently waggling your finger at
Republicansconservatives/regressives/racists/religious xenophobes/patriarchy/oligarchs/incels/proudly ignorant people, complaining online in echo chambers, hoping that police will protect you against gun owning fascists, and politely protesting does anything.Are you advocating for murder or is this just deeply unfunny sarcasm?
I’m saying that I’m a moron and you shouldn’t listen to me.
Please delete or edit your comment. No advocating violence
Ok, done.
It’s not a matter of pacifism, it’s a matter of ToS and not appearing to be a hypocrite. We’d appear hypocritical if we criticise their constant calls for murder with our own.
Though, I personally believe that if you boil society down to its base, it’ll reveal itself to be entirely fuelled by violence.
also fuck off with the us defaultism. no one mentioned republicans or the third-world nation of the us.
also fuck off with the us defaultism. no one mentioned republicans or the third-world nation of the us.
Ok fixed.
