you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 22 points 3 years ago (25 children)

Communism focusses too much power in too few positions

Literally the opposite of communism

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago (13 children)

    The ideal of communism, maybe. Yet every country that called itself communist became authotarian. Why is that? Evil tongues might suggest that the ideal of communism simply fails to prevail when confronted with reality.

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

    Reality being imperialist countries bombing you back into the stone age for not licking their boots.

    Stuff must get done to achieve ideals, building a strong state to defend from imperialist threats is basic marxist theory, literally 101 stuff. Marxism is built on materialism not idealism.

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

    No country has claimed to have achieved communism. Many other places have tried but it's usually crushed by capitalist or sometimes even by states claiming to be socialist. It's also a really simple and tbh ahistorical explanation to claim that communism didn't work simply because "it was confronted with reality".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 3 years ago* (7 children)

    No country has claimed to have achieved communism

    That may be your interpretation of that matter. But going with your interpretation, why is that? Maybe because communism fails every time anyone tries to make it a reality?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 3 years ago (6 children)

    Do countries exist in a vacuum?

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

    A country never exists in vacuum. So when would this work?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (3 children)

    Exactly countries do not exist in a vacuum. Every single country that has worked for national sovereignty (not even explicitly socialism) has been subject to brutal aggressions from imperialist countries.

    Economic blockades, terrorism, invasions, coups, etc...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (2 children)
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (10 children)

    In theory yes, and you are going to say all communist countries were not "real communism" now ? The USSR was known for its ruthless and violent political scenes. Leaders condemning their opponents' families to discredit them for example. North Korea gives all power to the supreme leader (a communist monarchy lmfao). Communist China is the closest to what you might you believe in but it's insanely violent in the backstage. The closer you are to higher seats of power, the more in danger you are.

    On top of that any individual at the top can effectively enact their preferred policies over everyone. Millions died simply because the supreme leader ordered so.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 years ago (5 children)

    Communist China is the closest to what you might you believe in

    Either you didn't read what I said or you know nothing about communism. Also like what is with people not understanding that no country has ever claimed to have achieved communism? It's just an objective fact China or the Soviet Union for example never claimed they achieved communism.

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

    No country has ever achieved it for the rather obvious reason that it's impossible. It's a nice idea, but it's a pipe dream.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    No country has ever claimed to achieve it but there are societies both past and present that have created similar societes. Like chiapas in Mexico and Rojava today.

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

    You have to be embarrassingly ignorant of the reality on the ground in Chiapas to imagine for a second that this is true.

    Unfortunately for your argument, I happen to know a thing or two about Chiapas, lived and worked there for upwards of a year in the mid 90s, and have no idea WTF you're talking about.

    Do tell?

    If you're on the Subcommandante Marcos bandwagon, I cordially enjoin you to go fuck yourself.

    Marcos was no more than an opportunistic interloper who tried to jump into a much older indegenio fight as a self-aggrandizing and self-appointed power grab.

    At no point in time was it ever the case that he was accurately representing the Lacandon as an honest and disinterested party.

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

    Maybe take a couple of deep breaths and calm down before you post on the internet? It's an example of self-governed autonomous and democratic communities. If you disagree with that maybe you can explain why it's wrong instead of throwing a fit. Also, maybe you should read up more on what you're talking about because you didn't even use the correct name nor seem to know the meaning of the word Subcommandante.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -5 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)