• OprahsedCreature@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    Yes, being crushed by the weight of your own poor arguments, comprehension, and philosophy is probably quite an accurate way to describe arguing against a communist.

  • Deestan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    The authoritarian left and the liberal left have so little in common that it’s frustrating the term “left” encompasses both.

  • fl42v@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    You can argue with communists, you can’t argue with fanboys or those who accepted Marx as the one and true Messiah and tell you to read ze book instead of providing any points. But that’s applicable to pretty much every topic (oop bad, for example).

      • fl42v@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Sorry to disappoint, but I’m not exactly into Marxism-Leninism, I’m more of an anarchist myself (the idea of dictatorship, be it of a working class or anyone else, doesn’t sit right with me). And ml was chosen at the time just due to it being hosted by the Lemmy devs

        • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          The Dictatorship of the Proletariat isn’t a literal dictatorship, but an establishment of Proletarian supremacy over Capital. It’s still democratic.

          • fl42v@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Allrighty, a poor choice of words, then. What I meant was more or less along the lines of “while I like the idea of communism, I think maintaining vertical power structures while trying to make it happen is more or less doomed to result in yet another autocracy”

            • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              You may be interested in the article Why do Marxists Fail to Bring the “Worker’s Paradise?” Marxists disagree with the idea that AES states are autocracies, while acknowledging that AES certainly isn’t a wonderland.

              Additionally, Marxists don’t have an issue with hierarchy, but classes. The Marxist and Anarchist notions of the state are different, and as such judging AES by how well it advanced goals it never had is a bit silly.

                • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  No problem! Let me know if you have any questions, it’s a short article so it’s lighter on details for tangentially related topics for the sake of brevity.

      • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Ironic that you’re using the comic about using bad faith debates in order to shut down this thread complaining about bad faith debates on ML.

        Ever heard of horseshoe theory?

          • Achyu@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            I recently saw a video on it, saying that it’s true, but in tge context of US politics
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWy8EEqXbBg

            As an outsider looking at America, the vid makes sense. I saw some comments on the net say that RW Trump was the first US president to go to Nk and meet Kim rather than some LW one. I don’t know whether the meetings were useful tho

            • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              US politics has no left. It only exists as very small groups that, when they start having influence, get shut down by the feds. That video is super slow so I only watched 15 minutes but I would guess they are referring to a rejection of liberalism emerging from degrading material conditions being the main force of peeling off a left and right, and thus there us a similarity. Is that about right?