Objection comments on leftist infighting

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/microblogmemes@lemmy.world

232 comments fedilink hide all child comments

(this is a sarcastic post meant to highlight the absurdity of some of the “greater good” rhetoric we’ve been hearing, especially around leaving vulnerable populations like disabled people behind in case of revolution, basically accelerationism)

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

The influence of “bots” is highly overstated and is basically just a way of dismissing legitimate criticism

Ah, bootlicker/propaganda bot it is.

Well, that didn't take long 🙄

Every statement you’ve made has been in bad faith, purely attempting to derail the argument and make readers glaze their eyes over.

I love when people just say shit. Like, you haven't pointed to any actual reason why anything I've said is "bad faith" or "emotional." Really just rolling out all the go-to methods of categorically dismissing any and all criticism, huh?

Fox News is watched by 60% of the country

Lmao no it isn't. You got a source for that number?

No, the NEOliberal status quo. We have never been a leftist nation. Our Overton window is very far to the right. Bernie is like a single step to the left of the center. Check out any other major democracy.

Yeah, no shit? Why are you telling me this as if I don't already know?

Attacking "liberal"ism is straight kremlin propaganda.

Lmao. A liberal is a supporter of capitalism, as a socialist, of course I'm opposed to liberalism. I guess every socialist in the world is a "Kremlin propagandist" in your view.

Why do you think the right-wing, free market "Liberal Democrats" of the UK are called that?

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] witnessbolt@lemm.ee -5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

100% stand by my initial statement that you are genuinely an idiot to dismiss the legitimacy of how badly propaganda & bots have fucked us up.
after reviewing your comment history, I edited that out (after you posted). I take this statement back.
WHAT ACTUAL criticism do you have besides continuing to vaguely attack the democrats and whine they campaigned with Cheney -- which I already said they went too HAM into. But I also wouldn't exile her entirely.

You ignored the question... and continued to make attacks that have no actual end result/point to the convo you claim to be trying to have. That's why they're in bad faith.

Again. Re read #3 because I've already said it multiple times. Do you have any actual other point than that besides "dems & Cheney bad?" That's what I've been trying to get to.

I am wrong on the Fox News viewership and conflating it with specific numbers.

However, I'm not going to pretend the prevalence of Fox News being turned on in many businesses, hospitals, etc, and the internet also sharing clips of it (and being repeated places like edit: Joe Rogan. I'm tired, k?) isn't relevant to the convo.

Also Facebook working with Cambridge Analytica, the Trump campaign, & others to tailor their algorithms to target Americans and influence the election.

Because you just said that Americans were tired with the "liberal" way of things. What liberal way of things?

"Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on the rights of the individual, liberty, consent of the governed, political equality, the right to private property, and equality before the law."

I mean.. you have to go beyond socialism into communism to not think that some form of capitalism should exist. And I'm not saying I'm not on board with SOME of that, but you're kind of driving my point home that you're just... saying shit.

I'm a basically a fuckin' socialist you turd. That's part of why I've been asking "what the hell are you talking about" this whole time when I've addressed the Cheney point MULTIPLE times, which was your only real complaint until you kept attacking random shit. (However I do ultimately appreciate having taking the time to review a couple things you made me double check so I'm not repeating them again... just kinda lame it took your attitude of wanting to attack with once again... seeming no real end goal.. to get that)

Once again: if you're more angry that even Liz Cheney went "oh fuck this is bad I'll say something" and the democrats embraced that... than the fact we literally have a CEO dictator flagrantly going against the courts & constitution and deporting legal immigrants.. idk what the fuck to tell you. Being more mad at the system than the actual Nazis taking power is speechlessly stupid in my eyes. I have repeatedly said in past comments that we wouldn't be in this situation if the system itself wasn't broken, and I have never defended it.

Forest. For. The. Fucking. Trees.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You ignored the question… and continued to make attacks that have no actual end result/point to the convo you claim to be trying to have.

What question did I ignore, exactly? And what convo do I "claim to be trying to have?"

Again. Re read #3 because I’ve already said it multiple times. Do you have any actual other point than that besides “dems & Cheney bad?” That’s what I’ve been trying to get to.

I mean, if you want to get into a more general discussion of why the democrats lost, we can do that - the main reason being that they were associated with a declining status quo. I talked about the Cheney's because that was the specific topic being discussed.

I don't really get why you seem to be taking my points so personally.

I mean… you have to go beyond socialism into communism to not think that some form of capitalism should exist. And I’m not saying I’m not on board with SOME of that, but you’re kind of driving my point home that you’re just… saying shit.

I’m a basically a fuckin’ socialist you turd.

I don't understand how you're using any of these terms. To me, "communist" and "socialist" are pretty much interchangable in the same way that "liberalism" and "capitalism" are.

this whole time when I’ve addressed the Cheney point MULTIPLE times, which was your only real complaint until you kept attacking random shit.

See, I don't have any understanding of why you think my criticism of the Cheney's or the Democratic Party was an attack on you that you had to defend against.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] witnessbolt@lemm.ee -3 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

Wow. It is shocking you have the lack of self awareness to criticize the messaging of having Cheney around.. but are what, ignoring on purpose the messaging in America around socialism/communism?? Totally oblivious? Yeah good luck walking around telling the average American that isn't already a leftist "yeah come join me, I'm a socialist communist!"

Do you.. not see what the right would.. do with that? Not only are you butchering the reality and history of these terms, you literally make the world black and white in exactly a way that benefits MAGA?

But I'm supposed to believe you are arguing in good faith? I've made some mistakes in this convo but jfc this is egregious.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago*

Yeah good luck walking around telling the average American that isn’t already a leftist “yeah come join me, I’m a socialist communist!”

Do you… not see what the right would… do with that?

Whereas if I just say, "Yeah come join me, I'm a socialist" the right will just call me a communist anyway. I'd rather own it and wear it with pride than allow it to be used as a boogeyman. The way I see it, reclaiming the term means I have a better chance to define it, if the right says, "Communists believe this," I can say, "I'm a communist and none of us believe that shit, this is what we're actually about." Whereas if I let it be a boogeyman then I'm stuck giving them ground and punching left, "I'm a leftist, but I'm not like those dirty commies." They're still gonna hate my fucking guts for being a leftist and in the process I've alienated potential allies and given in to their rhetoric.

It's no different from reclaiming other insults, except it wasn't originally an insult and we shouldn't allow it to be.

Not only are you butchering the reality and history of these terms

Please define them and explain how they're different, because again, I genuinely don't know how you're using them. The way they're commonly used varies tremendously and generally leaves a lot of ambiguity, I'm guessing the difference is that communism has a harsher vibe or something.

Socialism as a system is a transitionary state that aims to establish communism, that is, a classless, moneyless, stateless society. A socialist is someone who aims to establish communism through such a transitionary state. I guess you could distinguish socialists from anarcho-communists, who seek to go straight to communism without a transitionary period. There is also a distinction between Marxists and Social Democrats, but Social Democrats, at least originally (Karl Kautsky, Eduard Bernstein, etc), still claimed that their end goal was communism, and that they could achieve that through reforming existing systems. And on the other side of that, the USSR was called the USSR and not the USCR, because it did not claim to have achieved communism but rather to be a transitionary state towards that eventual goal.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent