this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2025
32 points (60.5% liked)
Memes
52160 readers
911 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
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
Cuba has sent doctors and other medical support to countries of many different ideologies. They would 100% assist an anarchist group if asked and it’s something they could provide.
Currently China and Vietnam are both willing to trade with countries of any ideology.
You’re latching on to a couple examples in the past and saying nothing else can happen besides that. If that’s going to be the extent of your argument no point in continuing this since there’s nothing left to talk about then.
That thought terminating cliche doesn't even make sense in this context
Are you just going down a list of rote lines?
You're not even trying to have a conversation though, for that you'd actually have to read what people say, rather than just going down the list of pre-prepared thought terminating cliches.
What's the next rote line on your list?
Keep going
Most Marxists do not "love" Stalin. We understand his role as the first long-term leader of the world's first long-term socialist state, appreciate his synthesizing of Marxism and Leninism into Marxism-Leninism, and uphold him as a genuine Marxist that, while not free from sin, absolutely has been systematically demonized by the west in a manner that distorts reality and erases the far worse nature of his contemporaries, such as Churchill. Mao famously gave him a final "score" of 70% good, 30% bad, a "score" that is generally orbited around by the various Marxist-Leninist orgs worldwide.
Demystifying Stalin
[8 min]
[6 min]
[30 min]
[16 min]
[42 min]
[38 min]
[9 min]
[5 hr 51 min]
[5 hr 25 min]
Stalin's Major Theoretical Contributions to Marxism
Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR
Dialectical and Historical Materialism
History of the CPSU (B)
The Foundations of Leninism
Marxism and the National Question
Rejecting any and all comparative analysis in favor of a simplistic "countries bad" stance is just a willing desire to cede decisionmaking to the status quo, recusing yourself of any genuine input or responsibility. The truth is that Churchill, Jefferson, and Washington are all whitewashed by bourgeois historians despite being far worse than Stalin and Mao.
I'll defend good actions and condemn bad ones. Defeating the Nazis? Very good. Doubling life expectancies? Very good. Tripling literacy rates, providing free, high quality healthcare, affordable housing, rapid economic development? Very good. Re-criminalizing homosexuality? Very bad.
It's incredibly easy to just say "everything is bad and I support nothing," but that just cedes all input to others.
This is basically eco-fascism. You get that, right? Not only is it wrong, but it's a vapid statement that again cedes all agency.
So open eco-fascism, got it. You do have agency, you can join an org and try to contribute to building a better world, but instead you just say everyone is evil and all deserve to die. It's nonsense.
The struggle is neither easy nor impossible, but merely very difficult. We aren't Sisyphus, the world is changing, and we can make a difference. Eco-fascism is the wrong answer.
it's a surprise anyone could take in any sort of information with a mind that tightly closed.