Tankies reaction to Beehaw removing itself from Lemmy -- "When you adopt an anti-communist stance, you pave the way for unhealthy social trends to takeover" also apparently Beehaw are fascists?
Tankies reaction to Beehaw removing itself from Lemmy -- "When you adopt an anti-communist stance, you pave the way for unhealthy social trends to takeover" also apparently Beehaw are fascists?
You're viewing part of a thread.
So you're saying there's no actual communist countries, and this whole this is just theoretical?
I mean, countries controlled by communist parties themselves would say that. Communist parties generally claim to run a socialist worker's state which will lead to communism.
In reality, it's just a power grab, with little to do with the workers.
There have been socialist polities in the past 100 years, genuinely socialist. None without their faults, but certainly not the totalitarian farce that people think of when they think of communism.
there's no actual communist countries
Correct.
Man, that's really convenient.
There's also no direct democracies either, so what?
Did I say there were?
You're arguing against something I never even said 🤣
I'm asking what your point is, or are you incapable of reading more than 6 words in a reply?
My point is:
"Shit like this is why I don't get (some of) the LGBTQ community's fascination with communism and tankies.
They have proven themselves just as anti-LGBTQ as the fascists."
Okay, and what does that have to do with fact China and the USSR aren't/weren't communist being convenient?
I just think it's convenient that communism gets to live in this little "no true scotsman/communism" bubble where if a state adopts communism and fails, it immedietly gets labeled as "not a real communist" state.
That way, instead of looking if there's something wrong with communism itself, it can get written off as the fault of the state attempting it.
It's not really convenient. It's that communism is an ideal that's literally impossible for large groups of humans to obtain.
There has never been a communist state because there can't be with people involved.
It's that communism is an ideal that's literally impossible for large groups of humans to obtain.
Bingo!
state adopts communism
But no state has actually adopted communism. Communism as a basis of an economy requires communal ownership of all goods; not state ownership, but communal. Which country has ever done that?
I recon the Neozapatista communes in Chiapas come pretty close. Historically, Revolutionary Catalonia during the Spanish Civil War, the Makhnovshina during the Russian Civil War, and a couple others also came very close to the definition of communism, although all of them, because they still had to interact with the outside economy, continued to use some form of money.
In the case of the aforementioned historic governments, they met their demise because they relied too heavily on an alliance with tankies, who then proceeded to shoot them in the back. The Neozapatistas did not ally with any authoritarian groups, which is why the sprung up in 1994 in the form of MAREZ and still exist today in the form of GALs.