43
muh-terial conditions
(thelemmy.club)
A place to share history memes!
Rules:
No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, assorted bigotry, etc.
No fascism (including tankies/red fash), atrocity denial or apologia, etc.
Tag NSFW pics as NSFW.
Follow all Piefed.social rules.
History referenced must be 20+ years old.
Banner courtesy of @setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world
OTHER COMMS IN THE HISTORYVERSE:
Explanation: A common argument of Soviet apologists is that everything the Soviet Union did was, in some way, dictated by 'material conditions', and thus necessary for the development of Socialism(tm). Obviously, this line of argument is dubious to begin with, but beggars belief when applied towards the Soviet Union's instances of ethnic cleansing and genocide, which are either denied or so justified.
Anarcho-Communists tend to be more critical of... well, everything. The CNT-FAI was an anarchist trade union which was one of the major players in the Spanish Civil War. After offering amnesty to all criminals to begin with a clean slate, they implemented work/detention camps for criminals convicted by local tribunals and fascist PoWs. Since prison abolitionism is a common cause amongst modern anarchists, they're less willing to go to bat for 'Good Team' when it contradicts their basic moral code, even though the CNT-FAI is one of the most beloved examples of anarchist praxis in the 20th century.
I feel like this is a strawman - or at the least you're talking about someone other than Leninists/MLs (which you've made reference to in the meme). Obviously not everything the USSR did was necessary for the development of Socialism, or it wouldn't have ended the way it did. Nor are material conditions something that forwards Socialism automatically. Material conditions are just what Marxists tend to use to explain/predict why people/societies behave as they do, including under other systems such as capitalism.
How many MLs do I have to quote saying shit like that before you'll stop bootlicking for them? Give me a firm number.
I don't think showing me a few examples of internet randos saying something would be a good use of either of our times. I'd have to look into who's posting it and where to judge how much weight I put into each example.
I know that in any ML space I'd have any respect for such ideas wouldn't fly. Actions explained by material conditions aren't a indicator of "goodness" nor is the USSR infallible by any stretch of the imagination.
Yeah, what I fucking thought. "It's a strawman!" becomes "Well, yes, people say it, but it's not IMPORTANT!" Keep bootlicking for your genocidal buddies, I'm sure they'll give you the bullet last. And you'll get to watch all the minorities they slaughter before they murder you. A bonus I'm sure you're thrilled about.
Would sinding you 100 examples of self proclaimed anarchists saying ridiculous shit be useful to you?
Maybe it'll turn out that 40 are "Anarcho-Capitalist" losers, 30 are outright trolls, and 10 are just weirdos. It's just not useful to anyone to attempt to debate in this way.
I know what I believe, and what I think those I respect believe. Showing me a bunch of examples of randos saying something else just isn't doing much.
It would call into question me claiming something was a 'strawman' if you demonstrated that it was a legitimately held position from members of a group, yes. Sorry that you're incapable of parsing that.
I can quote some big names if you prefer. But of course, you'd find any reason to continue your bootlicking for genocide than acknowledge that, either.
Yeah, in camps. Death camps, work camps, and international camps.