It’s especially funny because the biggest examples of landlord/capitalist repression in Actually Existing Socialist states (such as the mass Kulak deportations of the USSR) were not dictated by the state but by local soviets, it should be the wet dream of any anarchist (to which so many western “leftist” claim to adhere)
A paramilitary is still working on behalf of the government, and local bureaucrats [who are still part of the state] certainly mobilized paramilitaries to defend their position, and then there was a much greater degree of violence when the PLA was deployed to “quell” the violence of the conservative/rebel conflict. I think it’s fair to say especially of the earlier “excesses” that while the broad movement was encouraged by Mao, that it was very much up to the rebel faction of Red Guards what exactly they did and the abuse committed by them was thereby pretty “grassroots”.
i’ve been here for a short time and already seen you defend Chomsky’s honor, essentially call everyone here tankies without saying it outright & defend multiple color revolutions. That’s just in 20 days lol. Call me whatever you want, doesn’t change what you are.
It’s a pathetic, intellectually impoverished attempt at a zinger that has nothing to do with what people here or Marxists in general actually believe, which explains why liberals eat it up.
How is it that you’ve been in the community for as long as you have and still are either unwilling or unable to engage with what the Marxists here believe? Granted, the majority of Marxists here are revisionists, but at least they still support the Marxist conception of communism even if their ideas about socialism are inadequate, but that inadequacy is fundamentally not as you portrayed it. Your portrayal was just empty grandstanding with a declaration that is contrary to what people here have said again and again and would readily tell you if asked. But you have surely seen that, haven’t you? So why do you still say it?
I mean, yes, that is true, but I don’t think there’s an alternative. The state is a means for one class to oppress another, until class society is abolished you can’t not have a state apparatus, so even if proletariat states fuck up sometimes and kill people they shouldn’t it’s the only means to end the dictatorship of the bourgeois.
I think the logic is if you’re just a regular asshole, it’s unlikely you’re going to get Luigi’d cuz Luigi’s only Luigi massively powerful CEOs.
A centralized state can take out CEOs more effectively but those apparatuses can be turned on regular citizens.
Not saying I agree but I think that’s the thought process.
regular citizens get killed all the time by random dudes
Yeah but I’m not scared of a Luigi guy doing to me for political reasons.
Since Luigi did his thing there has been like 400 mass shootings
Americans view mass shootings as a force of nature, not political events.
i mean, isn’t it a force of nature for US at this point?
Just a chud in a supermarket
It’s especially funny because the biggest examples of landlord/capitalist repression in Actually Existing Socialist states (such as the mass Kulak deportations of the USSR) were not dictated by the state but by local soviets, it should be the wet dream of any anarchist (to which so many western “leftist” claim to adhere)
Same with the cultural revolution and the excesses there. those were not done by the state by but para-military small cadres.
Yeah, the shit was highly decentralized.
A paramilitary is still working on behalf of the government, and local bureaucrats [who are still part of the state] certainly mobilized paramilitaries to defend their position, and then there was a much greater degree of violence when the PLA was deployed to “quell” the violence of the conservative/rebel conflict. I think it’s fair to say especially of the earlier “excesses” that while the broad movement was encouraged by Mao, that it was very much up to the rebel faction of Red Guards what exactly they did and the abuse committed by them was thereby pretty “grassroots”.
you’re right, paramilitary wasn’t the right word but I agree, that was my point. That the excesses and violence came from below, not above.
Not just can but are turned on them regularly, even in AES states, but that’s a harsh truth not a lot of MLs are willing to face.
oh look the resident squishy lib here to scold the tankies. don’t you have some color revolution to defend?
Found the zposter alt
i’ve been here for a short time and already seen you defend Chomsky’s honor, essentially call everyone here tankies without saying it outright & defend multiple color revolutions. That’s just in 20 days lol. Call me whatever you want, doesn’t change what you are.
So true, bestie. DAE le People’s Stick?
This but unironically
It’s a pathetic, intellectually impoverished attempt at a zinger that has nothing to do with what people here or Marxists in general actually believe, which explains why liberals eat it up.
How is it that you’ve been in the community for as long as you have and still are either unwilling or unable to engage with what the Marxists here believe? Granted, the majority of Marxists here are revisionists, but at least they still support the Marxist conception of communism even if their ideas about socialism are inadequate, but that inadequacy is fundamentally not as you portrayed it. Your portrayal was just empty grandstanding with a declaration that is contrary to what people here have said again and again and would readily tell you if asked. But you have surely seen that, haven’t you? So why do you still say it?
I mean, yes, that is true, but I don’t think there’s an alternative. The state is a means for one class to oppress another, until class society is abolished you can’t not have a state apparatus, so even if proletariat states fuck up sometimes and kill people they shouldn’t it’s the only means to end the dictatorship of the bourgeois.
There is, doing away with the state altogether.
Yeah good luck with the bourgeois counter revolution if you do that.