70
A trot has a thought on the Khmer Rouge.
(hexbear.net)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2025
70 points (97.3% liked)
Slop.
563 readers
233 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: Do not post public figures, these should be posted to c/El Chisme
founded 8 months ago
MODERATORS
Yeah, I know they oppose the CPC because they are AES and therefore revisionist/Stalinist, but I guess that makes sense that they must blame Stalin somehow for them being "corrupted"
Though that is a rough conversation. Good to see Trots haven't changed a bit and are still perfectly happy spouting off drivel that is internally contradictory and thinking that it makes them the One True Communists. I guess it make sense, the appeal of that sort of thinking is a smug "I told you so" attitude you get to throw at people, so they don't care about their worldview being consistent, they only care about their hypothetical "what should of happened" being better than reality. That's why I lump them in with ultras, because a lot of ultra groups do that too, ignoring material reality in favour of "(insert my favourite socialist figure here) should've waved their magic communism wand and made communism everywhere for everyone."
The conversation was just funny to me. Like, we both basically agreed on several major points that the average person wouldn't even know what we were talking about (for example about the Second International), we both even basically agreed on what should've been done, with the benefit of hindsight, but because I said the decisions were understandable at the time, they're ready to declare me as an enemy of the people. And that's how you know what it's really about, that the theoretical/ideological points are just an afterthought and the main thing is this obsession with attacking and denouncing AES states.
Matches a lot of my experiences with Trots, often well read and know a lot about socialist history, but always in a "I can recite the exact names and addresses of everyone who attended the first international" sort of way. They can recite things that they have memorised, but they don't seek to understand it or interpret it, the "information" is pure and not to be examined or discussed or challenged, like religious dogma. There's no reflection, no understanding of the human element of these events, no "what would I do given the information they had at the time?" it's always just "the bad people did the bad thing and suppressed the good kind of communism forever."
OPPOSE BOOK WORSHIP
It will not do!