view the rest of the comments
Informed Tankie
#Communists and MLs Welcome!
#WE SUPPORT AES!
We support all Actually Existing Socialism countries (AESs) and those supporting socialistic movements including (but not limited to):
-
The People’s Republic of China (PRC; including the Communist Party of China (CPC or CCP) and Socialism with Chinese Characteristics (SwCC))
-
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK; including Juche philosophy)
-
Cuba
-
Vietnam
-
Laos
-
The Former Soviet Union (USSR)
-
Former Soviet Countries
-
Nicaragua
-
Venezuela
-
Evo Morales’ Bolivia
-
Santos’ Angola
-
Sankara’s Burkina Faso
#No:
- Racism
- Sexism
- Ableism
- Homophobia
- Transphobia
- Bigotry
- Fascists
- Rape Apology
- Reactionaries
- CIA propraganda
- Trump Supporters
- Lesser Evilism (Clinton, Macron, etc.)
- Supporting Neoliberalism (NATO, EU, etc.)
- Anti-Working Class Rhetoric
- Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
- Imperialism
- Brigades to other subs
- Doxxing
##Shout out to Red Menace and Rev left Radio:
-
RED MENACE - Socialism: Utopian and Scientific by Friedrich Engels
-
RED MENACE - Left Wing Communism: An Infantile Disorder - V.I. Lenin
-
RED MENACE - Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism - V.I. Lenin
-
State and Revolution: Marx, Lenin, & the Dictatorship of the Proletariat
-
Bonus Women Behind the Iron Curtain: Socialism, Feminism, & Soviet Power
I saw this quote earlier today and responded to it there, but I'll also comment here.
If the press is not free, it means the government owns it. This means that they'll use it to manipulate narratives and take control. This is bad because the government is exclusively self-interested and evil. It will not hesitate to perform the worst acts imaginable to secure wealth and power.
The best model for the press (at least, that I can think of) is a free market press. One where people freely and continuously choose which press they'd like to support and the more support a news company receives, the more people it can deliver news to.
Yes, there's a risk that the press is bought and bribed, but it's a guarantee with a government controlled press (in that case, the government is the one to buy the press).
Without government involvement, people can hear both sides of the story and the possibility for new, unbiased journalists exists.
What you are saying is not true. Under socialism, the government is made out of representatives democratically elected by workers who care about the interest of workers. Also, socialism is a system which main goal is to benefit people, so every person in power has that goal. Therefore, news will be more transparent because their point is to show the truth to people instead of just being manipulated information paid off by the wealthy which is the case right now. What you called “both sides” is the same side paying off the two political parties that it owns to write slightly different content.
A dictatorship of the proletariat would be interested in news that help the people and not that help the bourgeoisie.
Who “buys and bribes” the press under the government? The government, of course, but in the name of what? A certain class. Under the bourgeoisie, the press serves the bourgeois state regardless of direct ownership, this is what Lenin is attempting to demonstrate. How do you refute this? You don’t, just as Lenin said you cannot. Instead you say that having direct government ownership is worse. Why? Because “government is evil and market relations are good as a rule”. How is this demonstrated? By you asserting it?
Probably not worth bothering with this one, they seem like an ancap lol
Like, they literally post in a "capitalist questions and discussions" community to make posts praising free market capitalism and complaining about the evils of government intervention (any government intervention)
I want to specialize in converting libs though since we are short on people for the revolution 😅
I'm seriously perplexed what these people think they'll accomplish by trying to bait here.