697
both pretty extreme (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world
109 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/23485321

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 12 points 2 years ago (31 children)

At least some definition of "Far Left" would be more: "we're gonna get everyone's basic needs meet by exterminating entire social groups because they're impure".

What the hell are you talking about? "Exterminatidg entrire social groups because they're impure" sounds very right-wing to me.

Are you trying to peddle some weird horseshoe bullshit?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 31 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago* (4 children)

    @Prunebutt
    China? Khmer Rouge in Cambodia?

    I know the horseshoe theory is problematic, but it's fact that some nominally "left" groups in practice resemble the "far right"; today's China specially in practice resembles more Nazism than Communism.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    I don't consider China to be very left. It's a capitalist country. The same goes for other state-capitalist projects.

    While there are authoritarian leftists, I think it's wrong to act as if these where the only part of the so-called "far left". How many genocides were committed by anarchists?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    There are more figures on the far left than anarchists. You can't just No true Scotsman Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Did those people try to deconstruct existing power structures while in office? That makes them counter revolutionary. The state is counter revolutionary.

    You can't abolish maters by using the master's tools.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    That's just a No true Scotsman argument. Their (alleged) end goal was the creation of a classless, stateless communist society. They haven't achieved that, and they wouldn't have claimed to have achieved that. But they would've claimed that their crimes were a necessary step towards that goal. You can't just brush aside the people most associated with the "far left" label, regardless of whether or not you personally feel like they are "undeserving" of it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -13 points 2 years ago (24 children)

    Change "impure" for "bourgeoisie", "imperialistic", "exploitative", or some other arbitrary bs

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
    •
  • [+] 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (10 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [+] -10 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    That would also mean that poor people choose to stay poor. They did not choose to be born into a class, but they do choose their futures.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    You're strawmanning again.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [+] -6 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    How comes?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    They didn't say anything about thee poor chosing to be poor.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    They literally said that while people are born into a class, they decide their future and whether to stay in that class. I literally quoted it word for word.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    They were talking about the exploiter class. The thing about class war is that one class takes the freedom to chose away from the other class.

    You're claiming that people chose to be bullied after someone says that being a bully is a choice.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    The thing about class war is that one class takes the freedom to chose away from the other class.

    Oh really? But that would mean that proletarian revolution is impossible since proletarians can't choose to conduct it, bc they have no freedom to choose. I wonder what Marx thinks about that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    How does that follow in any way?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Can exploited proletarians choose to start revolution and stop being exploited, or not? If yes, they have freedom of choice and being exploited is their choice, If not, then proletarian revolution is impossible.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (12 children)

    Yeah, you're still talking no sense. What do you mean by "social group"?

    Get your strawman out of here.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [+] -8 points 2 years ago (11 children)

    What do you mean by “social group”?

    I didn't use the term "social group" anywhere. Come back when you're sober.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (10 children)

    I didn't use the term "social group" anywhere.

    Ok, let me rephrase the question, then:

    Why do you engage in a conversation that you weren't a part of, if you're going to ignore the context of the conversation? That conversation contained the following, two comments before you entered:

    exterminating entire social groups

    Come back when you're sober.

    No reason to get rude.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] -4 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    Why do you engage in a conversation that you weren’t a part of, if you’re going to ignore the context of the conversation?

    You asking me what did I mean by social groups when I didn't mention social groups is "ignoring the context of the conversation". Just admit you were a lil bit drunk and took me for the wrong person.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    I think it's fair to assume that you were the one who wrote "social groups".

    Even if you didn't yourself say that term: You accepted the terminology, so I'll ask you: how are landlords a "social group" that the "far left" wants to "exterminate".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    How about we skip this step and you just tell us your definition of "social groups" and it will turn out that people "far right" want to "exterminate" are social groups, but people "far left" want to "exterminate" aren't social groups (and aren't really fully fledged humans, if you ask me (dehumanizing you enemies is important)).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (6 children)

    I'm actually more opposed to the term "exterminate". The far left would actually rather "expropriate" that certain "social group".

    To "exterminate a social group" means genocide done by the exterminators. To expropriate the wealthy class usually means that the to be expropriated class shoots first.

    But you centrists usually can't tell the difference between violence and expropriation.

    Edit: I've been looking through your comments. "I never said 'social groups'! uwu" my ass!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    The far left would actually rather “expropriate” that certain “social group”.

    Oh, but somehow they ended up exterminating that social group instead of expropriating. Given the experience of the 20th century.

    To “exterminate a social group” means genocide done by the exterminators

    Yep.

    But you centrists usually can’t tell the difference between violence and expropriation.

    I'm not a centrist. I'm right-wing. I'm so far right, that I consider nazis to be far left.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Oh, but somehow they ended up exterminating that social group instead of expropriating. Given the experience of the 20th century.

    I'm not here to defend bourgeois revolutions. Explain how e.g. Nestor Makhno or the CNT/FAI "exterminated" the bourgeoisie.

    I’m not a centrist. I’m right-wing. I’m so far right, that I consider nazis to be far left.

    Yeah. I figured that you didn't have an internally consistent worldview.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    I’m not here to defend bourgeois revolutions

    Ah, so you're a communist with the real-communism-was-never-tried flavor. Ok then.

    Explain how e.g. Nestor Makhno or the CNT/FAI “exterminated” the bourgeoisie.

    What about him? He was bourgeoisie himself, participating in bourgeoisie revolution. He's irrelevant to the question.

    Yeah. I figured that you didn’t have an internally consistent worldview.

    Where's the inconsistency?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (2 children)

    Ah, so you’re a communist with the real-communism-was-never-tried flavor. Ok then.

    Your ignorance amuses me.

    What about him? He was bourgeoisie himself, participating in bourgeoisie revolution.

    Tell me you just did a quick google without telling me...

    And the CNT/FAI?

    Where’s the inconsistency?

    In your worldview. You said yourself that you think nazis are left-wing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Tell me you just did a quick google without telling me

    Tell me you did a quick Google without telling me

    And the CNT/FAI?

    Dunno wtf this is, but I bet another bunch of bourgeoisie

    You said yourself that you think nazis are left-wing.

    You said my worldview is internally inconsistent. Nazis being left wing contradicts some of my other beliefs? Or is it that my worldview contradicts your cringe communist worldview? Well, fuck your worldview then. You're wrong and I'm right.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    Tell me you did a quick Google without telling me

    Lol, afraid to admit that you have no idea who Nestor Makhno was?

    Dunno wtf this is, but I bet another bunch of bourgeoisie

    I thought that they "exterminated" the bourgeoisie, get your story straight. Also: shouldn't you be in favour of exterminating the boprgeoisie, if you "despise democracy"?

    You said my worldview is internally inconsistent. Nazis being left wing contradicts some of my other beliefs?

    I guess you've got me there: your worldview might be internally consistent. It just probably clashes with fundamental truths of reality. I've yet to meet someone who claims that the Nazis were "far left" where that's not the case.

    You’re wrong and I’m right.

    Prove it. Make an argument.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent