this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2023
149 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13447 readers
1145 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Vaush posts go in the_dunk_tank

Dunk posts in general go in the_dunk_tank, not here

Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from the_dunk_tank

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 55 points 1 year ago (2 children)

On a related note: If you're a lib looking to educate yourself on what exactly communism is read Principles of Communism, also by Engels. It's literally an FAQ describing the very basics, and a much better starting point than the manifesto which is what most people tend to start off with.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Principles of Communism is great, the best introductory text. Incredibly clear and short.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 48 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"It's very short", you say, oh please, how short could it possibly-- oh.

That actually is pretty short.

Huh.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Alright is nobody gonna remark on how much this sounds like an innuendo

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Throwback to when Va*sh said of this work "I hate that book"

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Frankly, at no stage in my ideological development have I ever been able to comprehend how anyone can like Vaush.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I kinda had an epiphany today. Liberals use the word "authoritarian" to mean "lack of representation from a plurality of interests, instead all representation is done by a single interest"

That would mean every single socialist country by default, since communist parties represent working class interests and disenfranchise capitalist interests. Since liberals dismiss a Marxist understanding of economic class, they can only see administration by a communist party as needlessly strict and dictatorial, since they literally do not see a difference between capitalist and worker. They can only surmise a communist party takes power for no reason at all except to be evil. Authoritarian might as well just mean "bad." It's when bad things happen.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, they can't even actually describe what they mean by authoritarian. They name countries, but not describe what it means. It is just bad to them, that's how they're encouraged to use it and understand it by propaganda

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

I'm coming to understand what they mean by authoritarian is "unfair." There are unfair circumstances that don't allow liberals to take power through their preferred democratic theater mechanisms. There are restrictions on things like large business interests involving themselves within the political sphere. There's only a single party, meaning a liberal/capitalist party can't gain representation. There are restrictions on media that prevent a liberal viewpoint from dominating. And since they're liberals they can't just say they want to overthrow socialism because it's contrary to their interests. Instead they have to invent this complex mythology about authoritarian abuses of power that would justify the advocacy of overthrowing a foreign country.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think you're really onto something with this. "Unfair" really does seem to sum up their objections to single party states, and not allowing reactionaries voices.

In the US for example free soeech brainworms are drummed into young peoples heads with the idea of fairness. KKK member has to have free speech too or maybe you wouldn't. It has to be fair. The content if the speech doesn't matter.

That example isnt hyperbole for anyone who doesn't know, thats the literal court case they use to talk about free speech. A KKK member had a show on local access cable and sued when he was kicked off air. Got to be fair. It would be authoritarian to not let reactionaries speak

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Yeah, the ACLU sued on the behalf of the KKK to march through a majority black neighborhood where kids could see them. Just all around lack of empathy from free speech warriors.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago

Yeah, another foundational case was allowing Nazis to march through a Jewish neighborhood in Skokie Illinois, where some of the people living there were Holocaust survivors.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But why can't you defeat the ruling class with niceness?

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If they can read our dunks, they can read Engles

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

if federation has taught me anything, it's that they can't read anything longer than a sentence or two.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago

fidel-salute fantastic reccomemdation comrade corgi. It may keep some of us from having to repeat "all governments are authoritarian"

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago

I do agree with the argument of the text, but I don't think it is a good introductory read for someone who doesn't already have an understanding of how historical materialism works.

I would recommend this video first since it explains a lot of the same material, along with the general basics of historical materialism, and does so in terms that should be much more familiar to someone with a more mainstream understanding of politics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nPVkpWMH9k

load more comments
view more: next ›