this post was submitted on 08 Jun 2025
289 points (92.4% liked)
Communism
2315 readers
27 users here now
Welcome to the communist Lemmy community! This is a community for all Marxist.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The US and EU are also authoritarian and consequently have a history of doing bad shit to people as well, even currently as both are actively supporting the genocide of Palestine in order to protect their Imperialist super-profits. I think your point is very under-developed, you grabbed some talking points out of a bag and rolled them out on the table without giving any of them support, context, or applying them to a further analysis. Taken critically, your point is just "Russia/China/Iran bad because they are Russia/China/Iran," not a systemic critique.
What the world needs is certainly Communism, eventually, but the way to get there is through Socialism, as found in the PRC, Cuba, etc. The regulated Capitalism of the EU runs on Imperialism, just like the US. The EU super-exploits the Global South through unequal exchange, perpetuating the underdevelopment of countries in Africa and South America in order to support vast systems of plunder. The EU is a problem, not a solution, one that needs Socialism and greater industrialization so as to not be reliant on plunder.
I don't think you know what authoritarianism is, also the idea of paying a scientist of any kind the same as a cashier at a gas station is ridiculous.
I think we do know what you think it is: “horseshoe theory”; Arendtian “totalitarianism.” https://lemmy.ml/comment/17774014
This isn’t even a straw man; it’s an allusion to an unstated straw man. No one is suggesting that everyone should be paid the same, and AFAIK no socialist state has ever done it.
I know what it is, authoritarian is when not ruled by westerners
I think that's a poor counter to my argument, I do know what authoritarianism is. All states are authoritarian, all are instruments by which the ruling class oppresses the other classes. In the US and EU, those are the Bourgeoisie, specifically the Monopolist Imperialist bourgeoisie. In Russia, the ruling class are the Nationalist bourgeoisie, in the PRC the ruling class is the Proletariat, as it was in the USSR as well. Each ruling class uses the power of the state, the power of authority, to cement itself, and displays greater use of force the more that status is called into question.
The way to move beyond authoritarianism is to move beyond class society. The way to move beyond class society is through Socialism, by which all property can be sublimated into common ownership and direction, to fulfill use rather than need. This is the path to Communism. Countries like the PRC that are already Socialist exert their authority to enforce the interests of the Proletariat, and thus their use of authority is more progressive than the US and EU, who use their authority as Imperialists to keep the system by which the West plunders and brutalizes the world for profit to keep going.
Russia and Iran play the role of self-interested nationalists working against the Imperialists, just as the small business owners, ie petite bourgeoisie, can side with the Proletariat out of their own self-interest in revolution. They are certainly not world leaders of Socialism by any stretch of the imagination, but work with Socialist countries as they have no other option than surrender to Western Imperialism and be decimated like Russia was following the dissolution of the USSR before the Nationalists kicked out the West.
Your last point about equal pay for a scientist and a cashier is a non-sequitor, Marxists are not equalitarians.
Incredible comeback, Marxism has been destroyed.
Thanks, though just another point my previous comment was just deleted by admin cause communism likes to destroy all dissent when something doesn't go their way.
More non-sequitors, I guess? You didn't "dissent," you just called me stupid. You didn't even have productive criticism attached to your comment, it was a low-effort insult and thus broke the rules. Your other comments are still up.
I thought about replying directly to that user, but they would be unable to see my replies given how I am banned from their instance.
Lemmy.world also defederated from Lemmygrad.ml, so there's another layer of invisibility. No grad user is visible to .worlders, period, to my knowledge.
Are you gonna try to argue that communism doesn't have a history of crushing dissent?
Communists and Socialists have faced struggles with color revolutions and counterrevolutions, and have met those struggles with force, yes. However, it's worth engaging with what the counter revolutionaries wanted. Well, they succeeded in the 1990s with the dissolution of the USSR, and what happened next was a collapse in life expectancy and 7 million excess deaths. Dissent is allowed in Socialist countries, what isn't allowed is the Bourgeoisie acting freely and inciting violence against the people.
Further, your comment was hardly "dissent," it was you insulting me without engaging with the arguments. It's toothless. It's unfortunate that you don't live up to your username, fascism and anticommunism are twins.
My "Fuck Fascism" T-shirt has people asking a lot of questions already answered by the shirt.
Who woulda guessed the liberal anticommunist turned out to be toothless when it comes to opposing genuine fascism?
They've met them with mass killings not just with "force" see Tiananmen square massacre for content.
The riots surrounding Tian'anmen Square resulted in hundreds of deaths of protestors and PLA officers alike, it wasn't a rampant slaughter but the suppression of a western-backed color revolution. The student leaders admitted to inciting violence in order to provoke a violent response, hopefully triggering more widespread revolt in their eyes, but fled the scene to other countries like the US before the PLA was sent in.
They broke free from a regime that regularly stuck innocent people in gulags and denied freedom of speech.
They did not "break free." 7 million people died, life expectancy plumeted, social safety nets were destroyed, poverty skyrocketed, sex trafficking skyrocketed, and the large majority of people who lived in the Soviet Union prefer it over modern Capitalism.
Nostalgia vs logic is no argument
You didn't have logic. You said they were "freed from oppression," by which I can only assume you mean the freedom to starve and die as wealth inequality skyrocketed and the former Socialist state was plundered. The majority of people who lived in the USSR want it back, and this is well-documented.
Imagine wanting to be put in a gulag. Have fun with that.
Why do anti-communists like you always act like this? No arguments, just deliberate bad faith evasions?
What on Earth are you talking about?
That reminds me of something that I coincidentally read earlier today:
(Source.)
Yes, I can see the obvious: I am well aware that being unfairly suspected of anticommunist espionage and then sent to a labour camp fucking stinks. On the other hand, there was the alternative…
Indeed. We certainly have a duty to learn from the failures of our predecessors just as much as the successes, and to minimize excess wherever possible, but even then the character anticommunists ascribe to the Soviet prison system is wildly off-base. Again, thanks for the work you do!
Again you're saying stupid shit, fascism and communism are not the only two political ideologies in existence democracy has been around for a long time and has been more successful than both communism and fascism.
Communism is democratic. Liberalism, which you are likely referring to, is tied to fascism. Fascism is liberalism when the conditions of society necessitate the bourgeoisie's use of unrestrained violence to prevent changes to the status quo.
To my knowledge there are five communist countries in existence and none are democratic.
There are several Socialist countries run by Communist parties, generally all of them are democratic. They have different models of democracy from liberalism, ones that are usually far more comprehensive. You should do some more research and try to actually understand the concepts you are arguing about, every time you're proven mistaken you ignore it and find a new talking point. It's better to hold your tongue and read up more than it is to waste your own time talking about that which you don't know nor understand.