• randint@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, the Chinese government is totally very democratic and is receptive to the criticism of its citizens! They never censor words and topics they don’t like on their social media platforms!

    • BigNote@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      You know, that actually makes sense. 14-year-olds. It would explain a lot about hexbears.

    • Someonelol@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Just got banned from Hexbear for saying something negative about China and the US at the same time. They have no tolerance of any discussion that challenges their preconceptions.

  • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Very interesting how all those “pretend socialists” only exist in the third world, and all the “real socialists” existin the west. Yet all the successful revolutions have been done in the third world by “pretend socialists”, and the so called “real socialists” in the west have accomplished nothing. Their biggest success of the “real socialists” in the west being capitalist welfare states or social democracies that rely on old school imperial relationships to fund their welfare in a select few areas.

    No Eurocentrism present to this line of thought here at all…

    What do you think of Nelson Mandela OP? He was a very good leader, right? You know that he considered Cuba an ally and supported their revolution as Cuba sent troops to fight against the apartheid government in the border wars, took inspiration from Mao and called the Chinese revolution a miracle, thanked the Soviets for giving unending support in the fight against apartheid while receiving the a Lenin Peace Prize? So is Nelson Mandela now a fascist according to your meme?

  • axont [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    us-foreign-policy

    Westerners deciding who’s doing real socialism or not. Westerners expressing their most vile sentiment for foreign countries rather than their own imperialism. Westerners praising the words of their own imperialist intelligence agencies. Westerners unironically praising their own nations for civil liberties like the freedom of fascists to assemble, freedom of racists to express themselves, freedom of parents to own their children, and freedom of school districts to continue racial segregation. Westerners praising imperialist nations like Norway as socialist while using bold language like fascism to describe places under that same exact threat of imperialism, like Cuba and Vietnam.

    Westerners claiming foreign governments are merely pretending to be socialist, while claiming unorganized misinformed chauvinistic westerners are the true heirs to socialism, despite all they do is post online and complain about foreign nations.

    Westerners praising anarchist movements from 100 years ago despite having no common cause with those movements, no connection to the circumstances within them, and probably no actual admiration of them. Westerners praising a bastardized, sectarian, perverse form of anarchism rather than attempting unity with organizations in their areas. Westerners refusing to speak with actual anarchists in their area, who by and large don’t give a shit and just want to hand out food or help at shelters. If Buenaventura Durruti were alive today he’d be regarded with scorn by western chauvinists.

    Westerners continuing to bring up Trotsky of all people, who wasn’t relevant to world affairs for the last 15 years of his life and certainly not the past 80 years. Westerners not reading a single word of Trotsky’s work, westerners focusing entirely on Trotsky’s feud with Stalin, westerners not knowing that Trotsky was a literal military commander. Westerners calling themselves Trotskyists in 2023 for some reason. Westerners deciding they have a feud with Joseph Stalin, a man who died in 1953.

    Westerners attempting to praise their own socialist leadership, who happen to be a scattered group of imperialist-aligned social democrats, Twitch streamers, and actual antisemitic grifters such as in the case of Caleb Maupin.

        • PatFusty@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I dont want to be a victim of hexbear road rage thanks. You guys just vomit out material in hopes that you can string it together to form a cogent argument. Then you come back smug as ever asking why i didnt respond to the 10k talking points as if I was a human encyclopedia.

          • AntiOutsideAktion [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            How would I distinguish you, based only on your reply, from someone who took one look at two whole paragraphs and decided you weren’t going to read that but had to keep arguing no matter what and spewed out some sour grape nonsense?

              • raven [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                How should we frame our arguments in response to a meme that paints every single prominent socialist and socialist country as fascist without addressing each one?
                Really the burden of proof should be on the one making the claim, shouldn’t it?

                • Apollo@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  People confuse facism and authoritarianism all the time, and people respond to this as if they’ve never figured this out.

                  So instead of anything productive these threads churn out:

                  Omg communist countries are fascist!

                  actually no socialist!

                  lol oppression

                  Vs

                  hey why do so many socialist states end up being super authoritarian?

                  hey yeah thats a huge problem, but lets ignore it because west bad

          • BigNote@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes, because engaging with hexbears is a waste of time. They are not here in good faith. Either that or they don’t know any better, which in practice amounts to the same thing.

              • BigNote@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                That’s a fair question and in all honesty the answer is no, because based on what I can easily see and understand of hexbears, they aren’t intellectually serious people and to the contrary are more akin to a kind of 4-chan trolling community than anything worth actual intellectual engagement.

                I could be wrong, but so far I have yet to see any evidence as such.

        • BigNote@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Said no one. Except you. You either know what a Gish gallop is, or you don’t. A long comment is not necessarily a Gish gallop. In this case the charge is entirely accurate.

            • BigNote@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              As if it’s somehow impossible to make a long comment in support of a single argument? As if Gish galloping comments don’t actually exist? Do I follow your logic properly? What part about this do I not understand?

                • BigNote@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  What argument? 20+ arguments were made. Which one am I meant to address?

                  If I focus on one you’ll jump on me for not addressing the 19 others, which is why it’s a bullshit tactic.

      • BigNote@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s precisely the point. These guys have a toolbox of fallacious arguments and techniques that they regularly trot out. The Gish gallop is one of them. Another, that you see being put to wide use in this thread, is redefining words and terms to fit their narrative.

  • Cyclohexane@lemmy.mlM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I agree. Fascist countries like Denmark, Germany and Canada often get called “socialist” and they have been disastrous for the reputation of socialism.

      • Comment105@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why the fuck do both authoritarian sides use “liberal” as an insult?

        It’s because they both think the common man should be submissive or forced to submit to their brand of authoritarianism.

    • Annakah69 [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Libs are subconsciously uncomfortable thinking about real politics. Too many contradictions with their world view. Leftists are not. Hence a lot of us engage with these threads, it gets to the top of our all, and more engage.

    • figaro@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      As they get banned from more instances, the instances they are not banned at start seeing a higher concentration of them.

      • Annakah69 [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Have fun worshipping the machinery of enslavement and death. As it crushes you, I hope it comforts you knowing at least you weren’t a tankie.

      • carl_marks_1312 [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Too bad instances can’t defederate HB.

        Can you please elaborate?

        They seem to not understand that they’re tankies.

        Tankie is a social construct and is used to lazily discredit everyone to the left of bernie. It functions to libs the same way as “woke” functions for chuds. As a term it’s basically meaningless to anyone outside of the internet.

        • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I have only seen it used in reference to people who support dictatorial regimes with socialist aesthetics, mostly MLs. I have yet to see an anarchist be called a tankie. Also you can hear it IRL, not commonly though since most MLs are on twitter and the like and not IRL.

          • Annakah69 [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Based on your answer, I’ve discovered what tankie means: Tankie = Marxist.

            Successful Marxist movement results in a dictatorship of the proletariat. Dictator = tankie.

            Hence tankie is a term used to describe any Marxist.

            Thanks for contributing to this scientific breakthrough!

            • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Nah, first premise is false in more than one way. You are conflating the ideology Stalin made with Marxism.

              The second error is that there has never been a dictatorship of the proletariat, every time it has been a political party that seizes power for themselves and not the workers. In doing so they become the ruling class with differing class interests than the workers.

              Marx must be rotating in his grave with the speed to power the whole globe at this point.

              • Annakah69 [she/her]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                You didn’t do the reading :(. Dictatorship of the proletariat is a concept Marx and Engles adopted. Stalin didn’t create it.

                I don’t know what you think the proletariat taking control of the state is suppose to look like, but there will always be a communist party involved. The mechanisms of power exist to be ruled by a party.

                Communist parties should be judged by what they do for their poorest citizens. With that in mind, AES countries are doing a decent job. Things get better when they are in power, and get way worse if they are overthrown

              • WideningGyro [any]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yeah, clearly the Soviet, Chinese and Cuban workers had completely different interests than being raised out of poverty and squalor. Damn those dastardly political parties and their… diligent work towards eradictaing poverty while promoting actual, decentralized democracy.

                • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Well, Cubans still live in pretty close proximity to squalor. They can’t even afford to maintain their own buildings, don’t have a functional transportation system, and people live on what, $20 a month? The one saving grace is out there health care system is decent. And by that, I mean much more equitable than in the United States.

                • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Do you believe capitalism is good because it helped some people? The whole point of socialism is to put the means of production into the hands of the workers and not a vanguard party. Yea, the USSR did quite a lot of imperialism which it used to reduce income inequality of the Russian people but it was never socialist.

              • uralsolo [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                the ideology Stalin made

                I would say Lenin was more instrumental in the creation of Marxism-Leninism, Stalin was just the guy who happened to be in charge when they named it. It’s also a tendency that has evolved a lot from what it was in the 40s.

        • BigNote@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I love how you guys have decided that your definitions are the only correct ones. It’s your primary weapon here, for obvious reasons.

          • carl_marks_1312 [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I love how you guys have decided that your definitions are the only correct ones.

            You’re strawmaning hard here, because I never said it’s a definition or that it’s the only one. It’s just my understanding of the term. What part of it is wrong in your opinion? I want to consider it

            It’s your primary weapon here, for obvious reasons.

            Because it’s obvious that when you’re challenged on your understanding of words you have nothing to say?

        • oatscoop@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The term originates from Soviet and aligned regimes sending in tanks to brutally crush protests and rebellions. E.g. The Hungarian Revolution, The Prague Spring Uprising, Tiananmen Square, etc. Some communists were disgusted at their fellows for cheering on said oppression (“Send in the tanks!”) and started calling them Tankies.

          Tankies fellate oppressive regimes and dictators. They’re the smooth-brained “communists” that live in a binary world where anything “their side” does is good and anything the west does is “evil”. They’ll claim any criticism of historically “communist” countries like China and Russia is a CIA talking point … because they’re idiots.

          TL;DR – they’re the MAGAts of the left.

          • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Random observation but I find it kind of interesting how the talking points anti-tankies tend to bring up are things that, even if the worst allegations are accepted, are relatively minor compared to some other events you could bring up. I’ve heard so much about Tienanmen Square under Deng, but much less about the Cultural Revolution under Mao. And the Hungarian Revolution and the Prague Spring happened under Khrushchev and Brezhnev respectively, when there’s much worse stuff you could bring up about Stalin.

            I can’t help but think that this conflicts with the supposed definition of tankie of just knee-jerk defending anything someone does if they wave a red flag. If that were actually true, wouldn’t you focus on the most extreme examples by the most extreme leaders? The fact that there’s so much focus on people like Khrushchev and Deng, who were both more moderate than their predecessors, seems more like the point of the word is specifically to attack people who might have a more favorable view of those more moderate figures, while being critical of their predecessors’ actions.

            Which is to say, tankie isn’t actually meant to be directed towards someone who knee-jerk defends anyone with a red flag, but rather, it’s meant to be directed towards someone who defends anything at all about anyone at all with a red flag, by accusing them of being the former. In other words, it’s a word that demands the exact kind of knee-jerk response it’s supposedly criticizing, just in the other direction.

            In fact, it’s particularly interesting that these accusations of ideological rigidity and blind loyalty are in reference to Khrushchev, who did nothing but criticize Stalin, and Deng who controversially said that Mao was “70% good, 30% bad.” I don’t think it’s even possible for someone to defend everything done by both Stalin and Khrushchev

            • BeamBrain [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              “An actual communist is someone who hates any communist movement that has actually managed to successfully overthrow its country’s ruling class and take power,” I say without a hint of irony

      • JokeDeity@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s such a fucking pain in my ass to have to block every single community from Lemmygrad and Hexbear. I’m so tired of seeing their dumbass 7th grade love of fascists and racism.

          • ikiru@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m guessing you’re an anarchist, which I appreciate and so I totally understand why you may not like these instances, but do you ever feel like some of the people criticizing Lemmygrad and Hexbear are Right-wingers themselves?

            I fully support Leftist critiques but some of these claims are kind of wild. Someone claiming hexbear is racist? How would it be racist, from a Leftist perspective? It just seems to me like Right-wingers are attacking them with these ridiculous claims to get them to be defederated or at least to get people to stay away and not understand the humor. If someone critiqued them for defending the State when communism should include the dissolution of the State apparatus, the recuperation of initially revolutionary movements by global capitalism, etc. then I’d appreciate the Leftist critiques but it doesn’t seem to me to be the case. And it doesn’t seem to me like there is any monolithic position at hexbear either. I actually was further pleasantly surprised to see they had an anarchism community and also a Christianity community at hexbear, it doesn’t feel to me like they have a hard Stalinist party-line and don’t accept differences among the Left.

            I do get the feeling they don’t like Right-wingers though.

            • socsa@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Hexbear unironically defends Russia, which is an extremely racist and homophobic place. Likewise, China is also an extremely racist place, which is increasingly opposed to LGBT advocacy as “western degeneracy.” And of course, they fall over themselves to defend tyranny, as long as it pays lip service to socialist ideals, while denigrating social democrats as insincere “shit libs.” Then they post their little arms crossed emoji thinking they’ve made some point.

              By and large these people are children who legitimately have an extremely narrow view of the world they seek to critique. They see Lenin write that “imperialism is something everyone other than Russia does” and that’s about as far as they look into the underlying philosophy of imperialism.

            • cooljacob204@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m just gonna talk about your first paragraph. No they are not right wingers lmao. I fucking hate that you can’t be centrist or democratic socialist without some asshole (not you, you’re just asking) saying you’re a right winger.

              I believe the west has better equality, stability, quality of life, rights, morals, so and and so forth.

              And I think we need to greatly expand our social programs.

              However if I defend the west then suddenly I’m a right winger? Fuck off with that classification shit. I just don’t subscribe to Russia and China somehow being better then the US or the west in any sort of way.

              This is why these social movements never get any movement in the US. They’re too busy self hating and worshipping facists in the East.

              • ikiru@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Thanks for your response and I appreciate the thought you put into it. I agree we need to greatly and desperately expand social programs. I also don’t think Russia or China are perfect, much less socialist, but I wouldn’t say the West—including the US—is categorically and unquestionably better in every sort of way. That being said, the Left does need to be broader in the West and everywhere else, which is why I think I’d rather hold solidarity with Leftists in these instances who I may not fully agree with rather than attacking them alongside Right-wingers and fascists.

                And, sorry, but, no offense, a centrist is a Right-winger to me and it proves my point.

                • cooljacob204@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  My point is I’m only a right winger in a small niche bubble which is completely not the reality of things.

                  To most of the world I’m a lefty and to actual right wingers they would probably call me a communist (and sure incorrectly but not my point).

                  Right winger means maga idiot to most of the ppl in the US not democrat who wants to greatly expand our social programs and nets.

        • Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          One of the many things I love about Blahaj is that we’re no longer federated with Hexbear, there was a bit (frankly a shit ton)of drama getting there but those days when we were federated I blocked more Hexbear users than users from any other instance.

          Join us on Blahaj, we’re explicitly queer friendly and we don’t have to deal with Hexbear anymore.

          Of course once we can migrate accounts that will likely be a far easier sell.

          • rjs001@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Blahaj is run by far-right nut jobs and used by them as well. They hate anyone left of Regan

          • JokeDeity@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            This is what I mean, nothing you guys say ever makes even the remotest of sense. I can’t fucking stand that channel and everyone on your instance talks like their typical fans. MAKE IT MAKE SENSE.

            • rjs001@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Why are you promoting their anti socialist talk points then? You have clearly fallen for the Fox News bullshit

  • Annakah69 [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    You have a lifetime of anti communist propaganda to overcome. You’re close, take the last step and realize you’ve been lied to about AES countries. No place is a utopia, but those countries are lights in the dark.

    • randint@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re the one that tells everyone you don’t agree with to go watch Fox News. Just in case you didn’t know, that is not a compelling argument at all.

      • rjs001@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        If they just want to hear they are right and the conservatives are correct then I think they ought to go engage with those nuts on that “news”. You lot obviously have fallen for that bullshit so may as well continue to waste your life watching it since it’s obviously true to you. You are just some conservative roll who can fuck right off

      • rjs001@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Saying Marx’s dream at all shows a complete and utter lack of understanding on your end

        • Comment105@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Right, cause commies don’t dream of a better future. They seize the means of production, put you to work, and then creatively fuck with you and forcibly shut your whiny ass up if you try to say something stupid.

            • BigNote@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              How is this acceptable discourse? Do you even see yourself? Why are you even here?

              • rjs001@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                If people werent Ukraine defending Nazis then there might not be an issue. If you can’t handle someone having a different opinion then get off the internet

                • BigNote@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  That’s not what I said though, is it? I’m talking about you, your anger, and the fact that whatever your position may be, lashing out at people with such vitriol is counterproductive and shows you to be completely un-self-aware.

                  As they say, go touch grass. You are completely off your rocker.

                • Comment105@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I’m not even conservative.

                  I’m pro-tax, pro-welfare, pro-lgbt rights and protections, anti-theistic, pro-environment.

                  I’m liberal, as in I fundamentally think actual freedom is important.

                  Unlike tankies, who think surveillance and persecution of teenagers saying “free hong kong” is fair and good.

  • JamesConeZone [they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The pure (libertarian) socialists’ ideological anticipations remain untainted by existing practice. They do not explain how the manifold functions of a revolutionary society would be organized, how external attack and internal sabotage would be thwarted, how bureaucracy would be avoided, scarce resources allocated, policy differences settled, priorities set, and production and distribution conducted. Instead, they offer vague statements about how the workers themselves will directly own and control the means of production and will arrive at their own solutions through creative struggle. No surprise then that the pure socialists support every revolution except the ones that succeed.

    • mimichuu_@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Look, I agree that it’s dumb to call yourself a socialist and have zero respect for most attempts at socialism, especially when your critique doesn’t come from anything serious but just parroting of cold war propaganda. I agree that these countries weren’t literally the devil, nor fascist, not “pretending”, that’s all fine.

      But it’s still so dishonest of MLs to dig for quotes and smugly boastbout how “libertarians never succeed”. Even if we completely ignore all the very explicit and deliberate attempts at sabotage anarchists had to endure from their statist “comrades” (which we shouldn’t but we always casually seem to be forced to do in the name of “unity”), it doesn’t change the fact that vanguardist revolutions have all been incredibly flawed too.

      You all are very often willing to recognize your failures, most of the people like you I have talked to seem to agree that at some point the revolution was “hijacked”, usurped, corrupted, lost aim, usually coinciding with a figure they don’t like taking over the revolutionary government and messing things up.

      The supposed “strong state that crushes all opposition” being taken over by the reformist opposition and then the capitalist one in the case of the USSR and Leninists. The market reforms of Deng in the case of China and Maoists. But you all never seem to ask yourselves the question “Why was that allowed to happen?”. Why am I supposed to put my trust in some authoritarian bullshit solution specifically justified as a means to protect the revolution when it failed at doing so? Why do you have to be so smug and condescending at me for not trusting in things that didn’t work?

      Why do you instead of learning from the mistakes in your methods that most of the time you yourself recognize and trying to come up with new ideas and systems for the current age, insist on still clinging to material analysis of the world of a hundred years ago as the gospel, the sole undying and absolute truth on how to Make Socialism, merely saying “it’ll totally work right this time” instead? Why do you insist on mocking and “”“dunking”“” on anyone who refuses to do that?

      They do not explain how the manifold functions of a revolutionary society would be organized, how external attack and internal sabotage would be thwarted, how bureaucracy would be avoided, scarce resources allocated, policy differences settled, priorities set, and production and distribution conducted.

      This is all completely false. It genuinely is just lies. You can disagree with the explanations, but to claim there literally aren’t any is just ignorance and a complete lack of good faith. Look, if you’re a socialist in the internet, you probably have dealt with confidently incorrect liberals whining about strawmen that you don’t believe, because they haven’t read anything about it - and it’s probably been incredibly frustrating. So why do you never think twice before doing the same thing with anarchists?

      I’m always told to read Lenin and a ton of authoritarian essays and I always do in good faith, but it’s extremely rare for me to ever be afforded the same honour, and then all the conversations I have end up with people telling me shit like this and me having to explain anarchism 101 to them because they genuinely don’t actually know anything.

      No surprise then that the pure socialists support every revolution except the ones that succeed.

      I am also always told to be charitable and nuanced about the failures and mistakes of vanguardist revolutions, but no one ever has the same honour with anarchist ones.

    • ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Cuba is failure but you could easily argue that outside forces made that happen, and it least it’s not a giga corporatocracy calling itself communist like China is. China feels like late stage ultra capitalism with shortcuts. Yay corporations are married to the government…Pretty much where the US is headed.

      • brain_in_a_box [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Wtf does “Cuba if failure” mean? What a bizarre thing to say.

        Also telling that you spent 95 percent of a comment that was supposed to be about Cuba ranting about China.

      • somename [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Why is Cuba a failure in your eyes? It seems to be doing better than other countries in the region. It has a higher life expectancy than the US even, and standards of living have risen dramatically since the revolution.

        • ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Have you ver been to Cuba? It’s worse than any other country I’ve been to in the Caribbean in terms of standard of living/HDI with way more of the authoritarian garbage you weirdos seem to like.

          Move there. Send me a pic of your house. I will visit.

          • somename [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You’re actually just wrong lol. Cuba has a larger HDI than most countries in the region. And that’s while being economically strangled by the United States.

            And what’s this authoritarianism you’re talking about with Cuba? It’s a democracy. And it’s got better rights for minorities than the United States.

    • ShranTheWaterPoloFan@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Cuba is an interesting one.

      The problems with Cuba are political prisoners and their handling of AIDS. And a huge chunk of issues intertwined with the trade embargo.

      As with all nations, it could be better, but it’s far from the worst nation in the world.

        • ShranTheWaterPoloFan@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Each year around a 100,000 Cubans are willing to risk their lives for a chance to live in the US.

          The US is far from perfect, but people don’t get on rafts hoping to make it to Cuba.

            • ShranTheWaterPoloFan@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Notice how when confronted with facts the hexbear has no real argument but assumes being obnoxious is the same as making a coherent argument.

              Cuban refugees carry a higher level of risk than other countries, and yet they still come. Ignoring facts doesn’t make a country better. You wouldn’t let a fact like that slide from the US. Hexbears lack intellectual honesty.

                • ShranTheWaterPoloFan@startrek.website
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  No, it’s that saying one place is worse doesn’t make it so.

                  Human development index and quality of life studies put the US ahead of Cuba. Cuba isn’t a hellhole that many people make it out to be, but that doesn’t automatically make it better than the US.

                  Cuba has better healthcare and lower cost of living, but Americans aren’t on rafts to Cuba.

                  One of the problems with enacting good and lasting change in the western world is that life is pretty darn good on the whole. It could be a lot better, but just shouting that the US is bad is mindless propagada. Be better than that.