Yeah, you can call yourself a leftist all you want, but when 90% of your posts is calling Biden and Zelensky Nazis but you never criticize Putin or Trump, I get certain doubts.
You forgot the genocide denial as well. I don’t understand why they worship Russia like the ussr is still around.
Right? They react with appropriate frustration when someone denies the Holocaust happened, but then deny Holodomor with the exact same rhetoric as the Holocaust deniers.
Anarchists didn’t like the fucking USSR either.
Trump isn’t in power, no one is defending Putin, the US set the stage for the invasion and knew exactly how it would play out. Trying to claim they are defending their right to sovereignty, which is bullshit.
No one is defending Russia or Putin? They sure as shit are trying to smoke screen it hard.
The person I replied to was talking about leftists. The only one talking about right wingers is you
The comment was about defending Russia and Putin. You said no one was, you were wrong. Right wingers are the ones doing that, so I showed receipts, to prove you are wrong. Sorry reality upsets you.
Also you literally linked a source to theconservative.com, you can’t make this stuff up.
I linked to theCONVERSATION.com. Your echo chamber reactionary thinking has you seeing things that are not there.
So yes, you CAN just make things up
Lol ok bud, ignore everything said and focus on one small thing and yell about it. You’ve convinced me lol.
It’s not one small thing, it’s lots of big things
no one is defending Putin, the US set the stage for the invasion
That has to be the shortest contradiction.
Its not a contradiction, several politicians, Biden included, spoke of what would happen if the US threatened NATO expansion into Ukraine. Obama, McCain, Kerry, Nuland, and now Biden set the stage for Ukraine to get invaded. Claiming it was to protect democracy which is bullshit. If the US cared about democracy and sovereignty they wouldn’t have orchestrated a coup with the Pakistanian PM.
This war is 100% about decimating Ukraine so capitalists can go in and divide the spoils.
Sure buddy. NATO was responsible for countries wanting to join NATO to forestall Russian invasions.
NATO was also responsible for all of Russia’s other post-USSR invasions, I bet.
Life must be interesting when you don’t understand history or politics.
Straight from the horses mouth
Must be interesting when you are completely fucking clueless outside the official narrative.
I mean, you’d know lol, with an unbiased source like theconservative.com lol. The people who are defending Russia. And you’re just eating it up.
I’m betting you made a judgment based on what you thought the website was. The website was theCONVERSATION.com. But go ahead and stick to your echo chamber and stay ignorant
That’s a really round about way to show you’re defending the very things you said no one was lol.
No one wants to talk about the thousands of extra bots that reddit released during the blackout and afterwards to keep up with the illusion. A whole lot of sub users on reddit are engaging with bots. In fact, some gullible people think r/place is run by users, and not the thousands of bots run by different subs, as well as reddit admins.
Yeah, it’s so strange that people confuse you with a Kremlin bot when you repeatedly spew the same fucking bullshit talking points as the bots themselves.
When it comes to media attraction, what they call themselves (labels) don’t really matter that much. It’s the praise of strong men, authority, that crosses all mythological media systems. Be it bowing down to a burning bush story, Fox News, or Kremlin.
Honestly it’s exhausting to the whole lemmy experience that every time something gets even slightly political, there’s an extreme communist in the comments pushing their agenda.
I can literally say “hey man they all suck yo fuck politics am I right?” And in comes a guy who tells me I’m a Republican or Democrat or fuck America, whatever. I can even agree that the news is biased in America, and I’ll still get the same response.
It makes conversations for the average consumer on the platform unproductive at best, unsettling in its worst form.
For me it’s just the fact that people have delved so deep into their echo chambers that they’ve lost all sense of what regular people think. Like I’m fine with someone being an extreme communist, they can have that opinion, but it seems like a lot of people on here talk to other extreme communists so much that they think more nuanced communists are somehow right wing. It doesn’t matter how much you try to concede to acknowledge their viewpoint, their personal Overton windows have shifted so far that they exclude everyone but people exactly like them, and it just makes conversations impossible.
I’m convinced everyone from h*xbear is a bot. (censored b/c I don’t want any of those fuckers noticing).
You have a very generous opinion of computer scientists
We spell it X-treme communism
Wish this sub would not allow politics and move the shit over to the politics meme place instead.
The only issue is what is considered a political issue? Are we filtering based on US politics? Based on the politics of other countries?
I could post a meme about the wealthgap or the cost of living right now, and I would probably get a lot of concurrence because despite it being a political issue, it is something most people can relate to and agree with.
On the otherhand, I could make an LGBTQ related meme, and I would get some backlash because it is controversial to some people.
I could probably agree with OP’s meme being political because it is literally an Anarchocommunist poking fun at liberals or American Democrats. On the otherhand, there are several memes here posted daily that are going to “political” to some, and completely benign to others. And in the end, when a sub bans “political” content, it usually comes down to what are the political leanings of the moderation or admin staff.
the “no politics” crowd is speaking from a place of intense privilege and i know this because politics and fucked my life and seeing people support politicians who are responsible for those politics is maddening.
indeed. there are states in the US that are nonviable for me to live for discrimination reasons. I don’t have the ability to be ignorant
Removed by mod
I engage with politics quite a bit, and do my best to try and stay informed about current issues. However, being bombarded with it 24/7 is a great way to make people numb to politics and stop caring. It’s good to be able to choose when you have the energy to engage with it, and being able to filter it out at times is part of that. Yes it is privileged, but that doesn’t make it negative.
However, being bombarded with it 24/7 is a great way to make people numb to politics and stop caring.
I have literally never experienced this.
The people that stop caring are privileged enough to not be impacted by politics. If laws being passed are actively making your life harder, you care. You don’t have the option not to.
I get what you’re saying, but I still think it’s a seriously outsized response to someone asking to categorize memes better lmao.
Not allowing political memes here wouldn’t be categorizing, it would be censorship on a popular community while pushing that content to a smaller community with less visibility.
You always have the option to just keep scrolling.
So because politics screwed up your life that means online communities that do not discuss politics are not allowed to exist?
Politics, like it or not, is a big part of our culture. Art (memes included), comments on culture. I agree it can get exhausting, but it’s not something that we can hide from either. Personally, I prefer white quips about the subject compared to the doom scroll articles seen on political news communities.
Block the sub and find a meme community that’s sanitized to your liking.
is this you @[email protected]
All the fuckin normies on lemmy.world. No piracy, no politics, no fun.
look at the responses in other fediverse instances; the no piracy, no politics, no fun crowd is the majority
No. A loud and opinionated minority does not a majority make. Most people aren’t insufferable on the internet, it’s just that those are the easiest ones to spot and the hardest ones to avoid.
See for example: the amount of American libertarians who “bow to nobody and never stop fighting for their freedom and independence” in online discussions vs the amount of people who vote for the US Libertarian Party rather than the GOP.
You’re in the wrong instance if you don’t want politics, the .ml is short for Marxism-Leninism
Actually it’s short for Mali
actually its short for mike lindell
Actually it’s short for mein leben
Totally agree, at least have political or controversial posts tagged
Because scrolling past them is too hard?
I agree. I had Reddit filtered pretty well to avoid politics, but Lemmy has very few communities which outright ban politics which makes it very difficult to avoid. I even agree with most of the politics on here but it gets annoying and exhausting when it’s absolutely everywhere. I’ve seen the above meme like 5 times already, I didn’t enjoy it the first time and I’m sure as shit not going to the fifth.
I too hate how lemmy doesn’t censor people and communities…
What exactly is a liberal in this context? Is a social democrat a liberal? What about Jeremy Corbyn or Bernie Sanders?
Why are people hating on “liberals” more than conservatives?
This is why. Well, this is one of the reasons.
First, we have extremely few liberals in America. The Democratic party is mostly made up of people that would be best described as center-right anywhere else in the world. They don’t actually want to fight to roll back changes that Republicans make, and actually try to internally sabotage the few members that do want to undo changes the republicans make. They actively prevent change, and then active work against those who do want change all while professing to want change and to do their best to fight for it. But they’re lying, and people are catching on. People are even starting to realize that the whole “We’d do stuff for you if it wasn’t for that bad bad manchin, and Sinema” thing is as much of a lie, too.
The second reason that is more for the communists is something along the lines of the old joke “Scratch a liberal, and a fascist bleeds” Communists don’t like liberals (And the use of the word liberal is pretty different from the usage in the first case) because they view them as people that profess to want these better for others, until it requires any, even minor, amounts of sacrifice from the liberal. The whole Moderate Rebels thing in Syria? It was always a lie for one simple reason. Fighting is an extreme action. Moderates don’t fight, they just don’t. That’s one of the reasons they’re moderates. Liberals are like communists that aren’t willing to fight or do what is necessary to enact change.
Two party system. This duopoly kind of politics prevents the emergence of new parties as well. The system of voting “one person” favours the two party system and even if there was a new party people are less likely to vote them cuz they think they are less likely to win.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/yhO6jfHPFQU
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
Thanks, good bot
I mean all the people arrested and rioting would disagree, but I imagine you’re more talking about our “liberal” politicians? In that case I would agree.
We have corporate shills that wave a Rainbow flag and we have corporate shills that wave a Confederate flag. Then we have like maybe 3 oddballs in all of government that might actually care about people.
Fucking Alan Dershowitz calls himself a liberal.
Does that mean he is?
No.
Nor was he ever, even when he was considered in the in-group with liberals. He’s always been a right wing crank.
What you call yourself is not a useful description of the political philosophy you hold. It just describes which tribe you consider your own, for most people.
A problem of definitions. The word ‘liberal’ has a whole bunch of meanings depending on who you ask. Someone farther on the left usually uses the term to describe people who claim to support freedoms and rights for everyone, but only as long as they themselves don’t have to sacrifice a thing. People who go out to riot and get arrested for it definitely fall outside of that group.
It has a correct meaning, and the meanings the ignorant use.
deleted by creator
What two groups of people invaded Cambodia to remove Pol Pot, again?
What were the political ideologies of the two groups that did so?
In the United States, we refer to anyone in the Democratic party as “liberals”. Many people refer to Bernie Sanders as “liberal”. It’s kinda dumb, but easy to get caught in when you live in it.
Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good. Bad is the enemy of good, and right-wingers are bad.
If you always vote for the lesser of two evils, you end up with the worst evil imaginable.
i accidentally deleted my comment ahhhhhhhhh sorry for double ping
Could you explain this?
If I have a truly evil person, say a Hitler like figure. Then I have a guy who is kind of an idiot. How does voting for the slight idiot end up way worse than a guy who wants to commit genocide. The slight idiot becomes the worst evil imaginable, but how?
If you always vote for the lesser of two evils, you end up with the worst evil imaginable.
But we only ever have 2 evils. There is no “other” to choose. The old folks make sure of that during primaries, they vote and they choose people who look like them and are their age, so we always end up with the 2 worst choices.
yeah, thats been going great so far
The right loves anti-electoralism on the left, it means that they have less of a fight from the left.
Can you imagine how bad things would be if people didn’t vote if they felt like they were picking between the lesser of 2 evils?
This nation would look a whole hell of a lot like modern Florida with it’s politics because Republicans in general turn out way more often than anyone else to vote.
Then why have things been getting so much worse over the past 50 years even with plenty of blue boys and gals getting put in office?
Ummm because nuance is a thing that exists. Global conditions, etc. I mean the guy in power during the pandemic saying we should inject bleach or nuke incoming hurricanes sure as shit helped things be worse.
What about the good that has happened?
Do you think gay marriage would have been protected?
Access to birth control secured?
Anti-sodomy laws getting struck down?
The Affordable Care Act passing?
Disability rights?
Do you think any of those things would have happened if Republicans been able to seize power and hold it unopposed over the last 50 years? No. None of those things would have happened. Those things happened because people further left than them got elected, the lesser of 2 evils won some elections.
Don’t let perfect be the enemy of better.
lmao, i’ve been getting that constantly
What’s the difference between a fascist and an “anarchist” who does everything they can to kneecap the only viable left leaning political party in the US?
There’s no practical difference, just window dressing. They both cheer on oppression and pain for those suffering under Republicans.
And don’t even get me started on communists. Left and right authoritarians, I’ve gotten death threats from both of them. Whether it’s some leftist telling me I would “get the wall” when the Revolution comes or some fucking Republican telling me that the US was only for Christians and that they’ll go after “traitors” soon, you get to the same fucking place at the end of the day. The only real difference is that there’s far more Republicans, and they’re far more organized than left authoritarians.
bOtH sIdEs
This is why libs get clowned on so hard. You claim to support “the only viable left leaning political party”, and yet you’re kneecapping large swaths of people on the ground engaging in direct action advancing left leaning values. Remember, segregation wasn’t ended because black people voted, blood was spilt in the streets. Same with the LGBT community, see the stonewall uprising, aka, the first pride parade.
I don’t care how you vote, but if you can’t see the difference between an anarchist engaging in direct action against an oppressive state and fascists doing hate crimes; well, I’d say it’s time to get off your high horse and do a little introspection.
yet you’re kneecapping large swaths of people on the ground engaging in direct action advancing left leaning values
Direct action is meaningless if you’re hostile to building a coalition broad enough to actually gain any significant political power. It doesn’t matter how many lit memes anarchists and communists share on social media and how much they horn on about “direct action,” this is a democracy and without votes going to candidates who can win, it is ultimately meaningless.
You want me to do some introspection? I did. I remember being young and convinced socialism was the way forward. Then I grew the fuck up and did some introspection.
Direct action is meaningless if you’re hostile to building a coalition broad enough to actually gain any significant political power.
Spoken like someone who’s never done organizing, participated in protests or any other direct action. You’re a keyboard warrior who’s probably never even interacted with a socialist IRL.
this is a democracy and without votes going to candidates who can win, it is ultimately meaningless.
Not a democracy and also I already gave 2 examples showing the contrary.
I remember being young and convinced socialism was the way forward. Then I grew the fuck up and did some introspection.
No need to be a condescending dick. I’m also guessing I’m older than you, not that it’s relevant.
I’ve participated in dozens of protests. Protests with political organization can lead to change. Protests without political organization are just yelling at a wall.
No need to be a condescending dick.
If you don’t want someone to take offense at what you write, don’t smugly tell them to learn introspection. Act like an arrogant dick, get treated like an arrogant dick.
Protests with political organization can lead to change. Protests without political organization are just yelling at a wall.
Right… I’m not sure why you think I’m not in favor of organized resistance.
If you don’t want someone to take offense at what you write, don’t smugly tell them to learn introspection. Act like an arrogant dick, get treated like an arrogant dick.
You were doing a “both sides” between anarchists and fascists, eerily similar to Trump, while claiming to be “left leaning”. I think my response was warranted, if not understated. But frankly, that’s plain ignorant.
Like I said, attempting to degrade the only left leaning political coalition means someone is hostile to any sort of positive left leaning activism. If that doesn’t describe a given anarchist, then what I said doesn’t apply to them. If it does, then they might as well be a Trumpster.
Who or what is this sole “left leaning political coalition”? If you’re referring to Democrats they are neither left leaning nor a coalition. They are a center-right political party. Coalition implies multiple parties. And the Democratic party isn’t exactly known for activism, unless you’re counting fundraising events.
I’ve participated in dozens of protests. Protests with political organization can lead to change. Protests without political organization are just yelling at a wall.
Protests !== organizing. Organizing achieves political change. Protest does not. Leftists know how to organize, liberals do not.
If liberals don’t know how to organize and leftists do, why does the Democratic party dominate elections
Liberals don’t know how to organize precisely because the Democratic party dominates the elections. No need to organize when the organization already exists. All they need to do is to “vote blue no matter who”.
This is unnecessary aggro, and you are the only one here making sweeping assumptions.
This is delusional. Direct action absolutely has its place, but all the things you mentioned were ultimately won at the ballot box. As it should be. Don’t let a childish revolution fetish blind you to what constitutes a viable framework for lasting progress.
Edit - “Has.” As in he has a ball. Or she has a textbook.
It’s funny how libs think they can tell me when direct action is necessary, and it’s always in the past tense, never in the present.
It’s funny when ML thinks they are the only leftists
Not an ML. And certainly don’t think I’m the only leftist. Lots of different types of leftists, many I disagree with. But unless you’re opposed to capitalism, then you’re a liberal, not a leftist.
deleted by creator
Yup, like I said, lots of leftists I disagree with. That includes ML’s. What’s your point exactly?
I am a ML and everything I have seen of Jenkem’s posting here makes me think they are probably a leftist.
We probably don’t agree on everything, but they’re no liberal.
Can you define direct action for me? What do you think it is?
Is your issue with anarchists or authoritarians? I somehow doubt that anarchists are sending you death threats. Nor do I see anarchists kneecapping the Democrats. Anarchists don’t want a state, though many do vote for the moderate right-wing (not “left leaning”) Democrats simply because they think it’s the right thing to do.
Your sweeping generalizations and attempts to paint all of us with the same brush betray your own lack of knowledge, but don’t worry, I’m sure the planet will last long enough for the Democrats’ slow incremental change, and I’m sure my family in border camps are very thankful to be in liberal concentration camps.
Democrats aren’t right wing, sorry. Conservatives aren’t reformers.
An anarchist is fighting against military/police. A fascist belongs, or wants to, to military/police. An anarchist is fighting against people who hold some power. A fascist is fighting against people because of their religion or origins. An anarchist likes to vote and discuss. A fascist likes to follow orders. An anarchist tends towards decentralization. A fascist tends towards centralization.
This are only some differences but spoiler alert : anarchist and fascist are not the same. They do not act the same way, they do not think the same way.
I understand that you hate them both, it is your point of view, and it’s okay. But please, follow my advice : avoid trying to justify it with sentences as universal and strong as “There is no practical difference”, it makes the whole thing ridiculous.
In the end, saying there is only “one viable […] party”, and even believing in a party itself, are also part of the problem imo. If you truly believe in this sentence, no wonder why you dislike anarchists and why they probably dislike you. But does it imply that either you or them are fascistic ? And if yes, did you considered that it could be you, who are defending a single “viable” party as the only solution, hating on every other option ?
His point was that “anarchist” was in quotes because they self-identify as an anarchist but behave in contradictory way.
And I would say my experience with a few lemmy instances is exactly that. “I am an anarchist” is a way of creating group lines, consisting of the in-group of anarchists, and everyone else in the out-group (fascists and liberals together).
It’s really silly because it’s an inherent contradiction. The point of being an anarchist is that there is no out-group, and yet they’ve just recreated the in-group out-group mentality all over again.
Oh, okay thank you for clarification. I agree with you, sectarianism is to me one of the biggest problem in far-left groups. But I still think that this is not enough imo to justify that “There is no practical difference” between them and fascists, even if restricted to their behavior on those communities. Anyway, i understand this comment better now, thank you <3
Oh yeah, there’s a huge difference between tankies and fascists. Tankies are 10,000% better.
Suppose my only two choices in a vote were between a tankie that punched me in the face and slept with my mother, and a fascist. I would not just vote for the tankie, I would also donate money, canvas for them, and tell all my friends to vote for them.
I think it’s just an online problem, anybody who gets radicalized in an echo chamber loses the plot of their own cause. It’s just optics.
If an “anarchist” is trying to undermine any politician with a realistic chance of making office who is at all sympathetic to efforts at police reform, they’re not fighting the police, they’re fighting reform efforts.
I understand that you may not like it, or that you may think this is stupid, but to the eyes of the anarchists, they could be fighting both reforms and police. I think some (maybe most of) anarchists are against the idea of reform itself, thinking that complete revolution is the only way. This may sound dumb to you, but they have reason for this : the main argument i know of is that police has already been reformed and still is a problem, or even that police is a problem in itself, reformed or not. (It is reasonable to disagree with this statement, i’m not saying it’s right, just reminding their point of view, which explain why they could be against a police reform, and still fighting the police. In other words, it’s not just “defending the police / reforming the police”, but rather “defending the police / accepting the police / reforming the police / abolishing the police”). There are many ways to fight anything, and it’s in the very nature of anarchists to dislike the ways that imply governement/laws/authority.
the only viable left leaning political party in the US?
I might be misunderstanding you, so I apologize if that is the case, but if you are referring to the Democrats they are far from left leaning. They aren’t even center leaning.
You can’t even say they have a better track record than the Republicans. They bomb countries as much (or in recent years even more) than the Republicans. They advocate for wars. They fund ICE even more than the Republicans. They stand up just as much for reproductive rights (read: not at all). They just do all of it while waving a rainbow flag.
I really hope you meant the Greens or the CPUSA; which have their own issues but are certainly more left than either the Democrats or Republicans.
Link to them bombing more than Republicans? And also several blue states have abortion rights and protections while the red states have none.
Whatever lies you need to tell yourself, I guess.
Don’t lump anarchists with way too online MLs.
That’s why I am specifically criticizing people who spend all their time undermining the Democrats rather than trying to engage in real activism
This comment is giving me so much whiplash.
I was sure it was gonna be ironic when they started comparing anarchists to fascists, but fun fact: no, they actually mean it. Anarchists are fascists, everyone. You’ve heard it here first!
I swear, if there’s something liberals hate more than what’s on their right, it’s what’s on their left.
What’s the difference between a fascist and an “anarchist” who does everything they can to kneecap the only viable left leaning political party in the US?
Sorry which party is this? Dems are not even a remotely left-leaning party. Joe Biden literally criminalized the rail workers using their legal right to strike.
This is also like a children’s picture book-level of understanding of fascism. As if the Dems’ policy of 4 more years of the status quo could prevent fascism at all. That has literally never worked as a way to combat fascism.
Joe Biden literally criminalized the rail workers using their legal right to strike.
And then used his platform and office to force the rail companies to address their concerns. You fucks are so dishonest
Do you have a source for this? I have never heard the other side of this story so I am interested.
This happened right before CSX announced an agreement on sick leave
Unfortunate and very true.
What’s the difference between a fascist, a democrat, and a Republican? At least the fascist makes the trains run on time while he’s running concentration camps and murdering minorities in the streets.
You’re deranged.
Oh so Title 42 didn’t expand under Biden, and the concentration camps haven’t grown multiple-fold in the last few years? They didn’t put literally record breaking funding into the very police forces that have been proven definitively not only to NOT reduce crime, but to systematically oppress the poor and minorities? The democrats pulled out of all of our foreign invasions and curtailed military industrial spending, closing bases around the world and bringing troops home? They stopped the absurd sanctions regimes intended to specifically starve civilians in many countries around the world?
I guess when you’re a middle class American, you have the luxury of not caring about the explicitly fascist behavior of thecUS government. Those of us in minority groups and the lower classes, and even more so those of us not in the US, don’t have that luxury. US fascism is maintained by force both internally and externally.
The Biden administration ended title 42, kid. And police forces do reduce crime. What’s needed is to get accountability for bad cops and to reform training, not neuter the justice system.
You’re such an arrogant dick in your ignorance.
Police forces don’t reduce crime, and it’s laughable that anyone could still think so after this many years of empirical data showing that increasing police presence and funding is not correlated with a decrease in criminality. Improving economic conditions for lower classes, however, is correlated with reduction in criminality.
Biden admin didn’t end title 42, they ended the pandemic which prevented them from continuing the policy(and also resulted in the eviction of thousands of people and is implicated in the current covid wave by ending free testing), and so now they’ve gone back to Trump Era policy of refusal at the border for anyone who came through another country along the way, a definitive violation of international refugee laws. Even that only happened after years of use of Title 42 to deport hundreds of thousands of refugees and migrants a year.
Also note how you ignored the concentration camps on the border… do you support their existence?
Yes, police forces do reduce crime. That’s long been established in social science. I don’t care what your ideology is, if you’re denying reality, then I don’t know what the point of having a conversation with you is.
And I’m glad you admitted that the Biden administration ended Title 42.
Lmao. Still nothing on the concentration camps, nor their expansion under Biden, nor the illegal use of Trumps pre-covid policy, and nothing but apologia for Biden using title 42 for 2 full years to deport well over a million refugees.
If it were the case that more police means less crime, crime rates around the country would be at record low rates after the billions of dollars pumped into law enforcement by the federal government. Not to mention that the average city spends between 30-60% of its entire yearly budget on police forces. Is your belief that if they increase that to 70%, 80%, 100%, it will reduce crime? Do you not realize funding is indeed a zero sum game, and that putting more money into police necessarily means putting less money into social programs that have shown actual efficacy in reducing criminality?
Left is literally the opposite of authoritarian. You seem to be conflating a whole lot of ideas and terminology here. You sound like an ideological leftist who has been confused by the right’s deliberate language-muddying.
Left is egalitarian. That takes many different forms: socialism, communism, direct democracy, anarchism, etc.
Right is authoritarian. That also takes many different forms: monarchy, feudalism, oligarchy, corporatism, etc.Authoritarianism (or vertical/hierarchical power structure) is THE defining characteristic of the right. “Auth-left” is Doublethink; an oxymoron meant to distract from the fact that wealth and power are one and the same.
State-imposed collectivism is left-leaning authoritarianism. It is the authoritarian and non-voluntary implementation of leftist economic policy. It is an extremely simple concept that I cant fathom how you aren’t able to grasp.
This is very easy. I provided the definitions of left and right.
Think about what you mean by “the state”. Which definition does it fit?
Um, “the state” is whatever the government is. Are you actually suggesting that True Anarchy is the only leftist organizational structure that can fit the definition of “Leftist”? Because that’s what you are alluding to.
Also, you absolutely did not provide the “definitions of left and right”. These definitions aren’t even universally agreed upon. I am assuming you mean “Liberalism and Conservatism” when you say “left and right”, and it is just untrue that Liberalism is incompatible with authoritarianism, and it is equally untrue that conservatism must be accompanied by authoritarianism. For example, Libertarianism is a patently right-leaning ideology that completely rejects authoritarianism. At the same time, communism is state-imposed redistribution of economic means; that is 100% undeniably a left-leaning ideology that accepts and implements authoritarianism.
Are you actually suggesting that True Anarchy is the only leftist organizational structure that can fit the definition of “Leftist”?
I provided specific examples, as well as clear, concise definitions.
Also, you absolutely did not provide the “definitions of left and right”. These definitions aren’t even universally agreed upon.
You can brush up on the origins and meaning of the left-right spectrum here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_spectrum
I am assuming you mean “Liberalism and Conservatism” when you say “left and right”
I do not, because those are not the same thing in the same way buttered toast is not a pizza. Liberalism is “centrist”. It appears egalitarian at first glance, but if focuses heavily (if not entirely) on means rather than ends, allowing for (and even encouraging) consolidation of wealth & power; that is: rightward drift. “Conservatism” is a relative term, not an absolute.
Libertarianism is a patently right-leaning ideology that completely rejects authoritarianism.
Libertarianism’s origins are leftist/anarchist, but the term itself has recently been co-opted by rightists and liberals the same way authoritarians always always co-opt leftist terms.
communism is state-imposed redistribution of economic means; that is 100% undeniably a left-leaning ideology that accepts and implements authoritarianism.
That is not the definition of communism. Regardless of what you think about Marxist concepts themselves (or their feasibility) Marxism/Communism requires the “withering away of the state.” So long as there is entrenched leadership, that society is not leftist in the same way the Nazis were not socialist, and Republicans are not “pro-life”. And yes, that means the USSR was right wing, not left. At no point did the USSR meet the criteria or definition of communism. The definitions lead to the label, not the other way around.
Regardless of what you think about Marxist concepts themselves (or their feasibility) Marxism/Communism requires the “withering away of the state.” So long as there is entrenched leadership, that society is not leftist in the same way the Nazis were not socialist, and Republicans are not “pro-life”. And yes, that means the USSR was right wing, not left. At no point did the USSR meet the criteria or definition of communism. The definitions lead to the label, not the other way around.
I have disagreed with almost everything you have said, and am likely a member of the group you are railing against in this discussion. However, IMO you are spot on here.
Thank you for that. Keep this in mind though: I’m just saying the same thing over and over in different ways each time.
“Auth-left” is just another kind of “both-siding”. It’s rightists claiming that other rightists are actually leftists so that the masses will be too afraid to consider actual leftist proposals seriously.
Leftist/egalitarian systems tend to be inherently unstable because of the existence of human greed. Greed will always lead to certain people trying, and succeeding, to hoard wealth and power for themselves. I refer to this as “rightward pressure”. The trick is pushing the dial as far left as possible while ensuring it remains stable and preventing rightward drift.
Lenin and other revolutionaries recognized this catch a long time ago, and tried to justify “temporary tyranny” as a means to establish a leftist ends. Lenin didn’t have a lot of success with that in life, and in death Stalin seized power and never let it go… trading one right wing authority for another. Same story in China… And North Korea… And Cuba…
On the flip-side you have liberalism; which are leftist means that deliberately ignores “rightward pressure”, eventually resulting in rightist ends.
So the question is: how do we reach leftist ends while using only leftist means?
My personal stance? Democracy. We use Democracy to bolster Democracy a bit at a time… and the first thing we need to do to make that possible in implement a very aggressive progressive taxation system that caps how much wealth (and therefore power) any one individual or entity can control. Until we can fix that one thing, the politicians will continue to control the public instead of the other way around. That is the essence of leftism.
No, you provided head canon which would get you a failing grade in a freshman political science course.
Authoritarianism (or vertical/hierarchical power structure) is THE defining characteristic of the right. “Auth-left” is Doublethink; an oxymoron meant to distract from the fact that wealth and power are one and the same.
This is so incredibly naive. Stalin? Mao? Evil authoritarianism comes in all flavors left and right. If you truly believe leftists aren’t capable of evil you need to study more history.
So close. You came soooo close to getting it. Just a little further…
MLs and having a cringeworthy enlightenment complex - name a more iconic duo.
Not a Marxist, but I won’t tolerate deliberately lying about terminology or muddying language. That’s a bad faith authoritarian/rightist tactic and I won’t let it slide.
deleted by creator
Authoritarianism is literally a defining feature of communism. Redefining terms to escape the reality of what ideologies look like when implemented is just dishonest.
Communism literally - by Marx and Engel’s own definition - requires the “withering away of the state”. As the creators and originators of the very concept of “communism”, can you name one society that has met their criteria or achieved the goals laid out in their definition?
Yes, I understand that Marx and Engels did not have realistic political ideals and that every attempt to implement their ideology has diverged from their utopian vision into authoritarianism when reality hits that ideology. That’s the point.
deleted by creator
Yes, I understand that Marx and Engels did not have realistic political ideals
Have you read any of Marx? I’m not an ML but if you even glance at Capital you can tell that Marx’s whole schtick was using science to come up with realistic political ideals.
Then why didn’t he come up with realistic political ideas
I see you moved the goal post to a different field.
If you want to criticize the specifics of Marx/Engels proposals, that is very different than - whether by ignorance or malice - outright lying about them.
I didn’t say anything about Marx or Engels. I talked about communism.
I didn’t say anything about Marx or Engels. I talked about communism.
Oh dear. 🤦🏽
What’s the difference between a fascist and an “anarchist” who does everything they can to kneecap the only viable left leaning political party in the US?
what’s the difference between a cuckold and someone who votes for racist, homophobic, classicist establishment politicians no matter what; there is no difference.
Whatever lies you have to tell to make sure America gets worse, I guess. No honest, thinking human being could think there is no difference between Democrats and Republicans. That’s how we all know people like you are either useful idiots or just cosplaying Republicans.
Removed by mod
But everyone’s mom thinks you’re super.
Removed by mod
The fact that your statement insults the left by calling them “shit libs” then you just call the right “right wingers” kinda indicates where you land imo.
Removed by mod
Horseshoe theory!
Horseshoe theory is bullshit. One side has extremists who burn down cars the other has extremists who burn people. It is not the same.
The third side has people who burn themselves.
Removed by mod
Are you thinking of equivocation? The very first one here: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fallacies/
Removed by mod
I’m quite sure it is, because equivocation often occurs by boiling down two disparate concepts to the same vague and simple description, in this case “using violence against those you disagree with”. Genetic fallacy is guilt by association.
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
Anarchy and Communism are not the fucking same, what a retarded meme
To anyone offended, Go watch “The Ringer”
Well to be clear, the “joke” is that the blue hat doesn’t know the difference.
Removed by mod
There is overlap especially when you don’t confuse communism as the broader framework with state communism or even worse soviet communism.
There is still overlap in the societal aspects, just not the governmental aspects. Mostly because anarchy has no government. That’s the point. People can still choose to work together and basically create a communist society, without any enforcement from a government. Unlikely, but it’s not impossible.
Good luck teaching that difference to the typical 'murican
Lmao that hat reminded me of this (short) video:
Edit: Piped doesn’t seem to be working? Maybe an issue with Shorts. https://youtu.be/qowJStEn534
https://piped.video/watch?v=qowJStEn534
Also check out his other shorts, he never misses, legitimately great content.
hahaha thats great
This but unironically.
Do you think pro-Trump Russian bots are building up anarchist/communist post histories to throw you off? Or that anarchists/communists are de facto Trump supporters by not voting blue no matter who?
I don’t go through people’s comment histories to try to validate them.
And there’s a shocking overlap in vernacular and memes between tankies and alt-right. Obviously they’re diametrically opposed on almost all issues. BUT neither really believe in good faith discussion, it’s mostly trolling and “dunking”. Mix in sarcasm that’s not obvious to an outsider, and the jokes are hard to tell apart from misinformation or “muddying the water”.
It’s way more present since Hexbear federated in, every first impression is that it’s an alt-right troll farm. After some interaction it gets clear quickly that it isn’t.
Just expect us normies to have that first impression.
What’s your normie impression of what lolcatnip is actually saying?
Sorry who is GP in this context?
lolcatnip at the top of this comment chain
My take is that he’s another normie that can’t easily distinguish between trump/russia troll farms and tankies.
BUT neither really believe in good faith discussion, it’s mostly trolling and “dunking”.
I do not like tankies but I have absolutely never experienced this, all tankies typically want to do is discuss theory and history to the point that it’s exhausting. Have you talked to any Trotskyists??
It’s way more present since Hexbear federated in, every first impression is that it’s an alt-right troll farm.
I literally never got this impression, it’s like extraordinarily clear that Hexbear is a leftist instance. From the pronouns in names to the leftist jokes lol.
The double sets of pronouns and neopronouns, at first glance, made it look like a satire of gender inclusivity to me.
And after some experience with them it’s clear that it isn’t satire, and they highly value gender inclusivity. My opinion now is that the apparent absurdity is a loyalty test. If you think fae/faer pronouns are silly, you aren’t an “ally” and you are immediately identified as out-group. And the out-group, transpobes, liberals, fascists, all get lumped together so much they can’t distinguish between them.
It’s pretty much exactly what the right wing does. They can’t distinguish between liberals, leftists, tankies, or anarchists, because it’s all just “the enemy” to them.
I do not like tankies but I have absolutely never experienced this, all tankies typically want to do is discuss theory and history to the point that it’s exhausting. Have you talked to any Trotskyists??
I have almost no experience with tankies tbh, so I’ll be the first to say my opinions of them comes mostly from ignorance.
But so far I’ve heard that a “nuanced understanding of geopolitics and history” means you think “NATO made Putin do it”.
Removed by mod
they highly value gender inclusivity.
It’s pretty much exactly what the right wing does.
I’m sorry WHAT
Please tell me this is a shitpost
Look at that, you took two unrelated parts and stripped out all of the context.
That’s what we call bad-faith trolling.
Tankies can be ideologically diametrically opposed to alt-right fascists, yet use the same techniques. For example, they both love bad-faith trolling.
You’re thinking of communists or socialists. They are the ones who talk about theory and praxis.
Tankies are the “the cruelty is the point” gang - don’t care about theory, workers rights, or anything else, and only use it to justify wars.
Removed by mod
LMAOOO WHAT?? I’m just using the term they use for themselves.
I ran into a group of Trotskyists once and it turned out they were absurdly boring and wanted me to grab coffee with them for weeks on end before they’d tell me anything, and they apparently read a metric fuckton of theory. So now I know the word Trotskyist. But I guess that makes me a tankie 🤷
you use a real word
correctly use the historically/globally understood meanings of words
“mm no that’s made up tankie nonesense”
This is at least the fourth time I’ve seen lemmitors do this. Righteously indignant about not knowing things.
Removed by mod
Where am I brigading other instances???
Do you think pro-Trump Russian bots are building up anarchist/communist post histories to throw you off?
Of course. They even set up entire subreddits like wayofthebern and walkaway doing this very thing. You must be very naive and inexperienced to never have noticed any of that.
You seem to be under the impression that my beef with Russian trolls is their lack of sincerity. It’s not. If you act like a Russian troll, it makes no difference to me whether you’re being sincere.
No, I’m asking literally.
Exactly.
Removed by mod
Ayyy Krolden! Long time no see, I remember you from the beforetimes! Hope you’ve been doing well!
