you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 20 points 18 hours ago (22 children)

It was a good feeling but always had the aftertaste of instantly disappearing when the political wind changes. We will sadly never truly be free under capitalism

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 18 hours ago (21 children)

    Historically speaking, under communism... Oh no. Oh no

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 18 hours ago (14 children)

    Depends on what time you look at. In the starting years of the USSR and DDR gay, trans and womens rights were very good in comparison to western states at the time. It started getting worse when the economic problems accumulated due to war and outside pressure.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 16 hours ago (13 children)

    Sure. My point isn't communism bad, it's that the idea isn't capitalism "causing" LGBT oppression and communism is sunshine and rainbow flags.

    Like when atheists bitch about how "imagine no religion" would make everything great, and neglect to explain how they would get there. Like when the atheist Khamer rouge killed 50,000+ religious people in the name of atheism.

    Folks, turns out it's authoritarianism that causes oppression of civil liberties, not economic systems.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

    The khmer* rouge didn't kill people "in the name of atheism". They were largely copying the Chinese "great leap forward" pushing to cultural unification through genocide of minority groups. Yes, many of those groups were religious minorities, but to say they killed them in the name of atheism is like saying that the soviets killed people because they hate freedom. It's obscenely disingenuous and clearly said to push an agenda.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 12 hours ago (1 child)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmer_Rouge#Relationship_to_religion

    Nevertheless, it has been estimated that nearly 25,000 Buddhist monks were killed by the regime.[71]

    They were largely copying the Chinese “great leap forward” pushing to cultural unification through genocide of minority groups.

    And this is ok?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 12 hours ago

    No, but I clearly didn't say that. I just said you're assigned the wrong reason for their actions. They didn't do it because they were atheist. They targeted waaaaaay more people than religious groups. They did what China is doing now to the uyghurs. It's clearly a terrible thing, you're just trying to manufacture an atheist pogrom when this was your standard totalitarian cultural genocide.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 14 hours ago* (8 children)

    But capitalism does cause the oppression. It's the us vs them mentality engrained deeply in society. People always have to be better and greater than others and everything is about competition. This makes people reject change because they fear that their status might be harmed by trying something new and the state spending money on other things.

    It's also not as direct of a solution as just killing all capitalists because the underlying system would remain the same and just produce more capitalists.

    Capitalists do everything to distract from class-consciousness and creating outgroups helps a lot with this.

    Free capitalism without "authoritarianism" also leads to oppression as one group would start hording wealth and indoctrinating the people to fight difference so they can keep the wealth they accumulated. This happens without forcing anything unto people by convincing them that they can also achieve wealth.

    The people profiting from the status quo will always defend it

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 13 hours ago (7 children)

    you can spin that about anything.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 12 hours ago* (6 children)

    But it's the case. Do you knows who owns most of the US media and the mass media in other countries?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 12 hours ago (5 children)
  • [–] 2 points 12 hours ago (4 children)

    But it is the material conditions leading to oppresion. All other explanations are either idealistic in the sense that they attribute some magic human nature or they are heavily simplified without addressing the root causes

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 hours ago* (3 children)

    guess what, shitty material conditions can lead to oppression no matter what economic system you use, because natural disasters ruining crops have existed since the dawn of agriculture.

    EDIT : Oh, and them causing famine has happened to every goddamn economic system of governance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 hours ago (2 children)

    Without a state they would have much less effect though as the means of production would be serving the people only and not exploiting them for profit. This is the theory layed out by marx, the way there includes unions etc. because they can kmprove the conditions for the workers which also leads to minorities being treated better as the workers become aware of their role in the system.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 hours ago (1 child)

    Without a state they would have much less effect though as the means of production would be serving the people only and not exploiting them for profit.

    ...

    Thanks for not reading what I wrote. People relying on subsistance farming are even more vulnerable to natural disasters leading to famine, which by definition is a shitty material condition.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 8 hours ago

    I kinda lack the language capacity to properly explain what I mean, so I won't try to continue this discussion here.

    Thanks for the debate though, it has been very friendly and open-minded. See you Around!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 13 hours ago (5 children)

    Communism was never achieved by the two countries you're thinking of. They only claim to have achieved socialism.

    Communism was achieved in Australia, 60,000 years ago. It was enabled by advanced psychological and sociological technology.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 13 hours ago (4 children)

    Yes comrade, and I'm sure that once the tankies get rid of capitalism, it will cause an LGBT utopia the likes of which has never been seen.

    The comment is meant to be food for thought : blaming capitalism on social ills is unwise and idealistic about what will happen after the current economic system.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (3 children)

    Tankies? Those arseholes will never manage to get rid of capitalism. They couldn't get rid of capitalism in Russia, and they still haven't got rid of it in China. An elite class of billionaires still own the means of production, because tankies can't do shit to improve the world.

    Anarchists are one of the only groups with a track record of successfully implementing communism. We did it in Catalonia during the Spanish Civil war, and we'll do it again. The other group is Indigenous people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 12 hours ago (2 children)