Remembering to look for and ignore folks with that telltale indicator has made the fediverse so much more enjoyable.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 10 months ago (21 children)

The communist party is run by the working classes and derives its power from popular support. The people oppressed by communist parties were overwhelmingly fascists, landlords, and capitalists.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 10 months ago (14 children)

    Communists are rich people who are privileged enough to not work and spend all day larping. They dont know working class people they've never met any.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago (13 children)

    I'm a communist and that's false for me and every communist I know IRL that I work with, and is also false on an international scale. Communist parties are working class parties.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 10 months ago (11 children)

    Communists love to wear working class struggle as a disguise. They aren't working class and once they get power they use and abuse them just like every other rich cunt.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago (10 children)

    This is nonsense. Communists seek collectivization of production and distribution to satisfy the needs of all, and when communists take power the first things they do is implement measures like land reform, literacy campaigns, and expropriate property from landlords and capitalists to better serve the interests of the people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 10 months ago (9 children)

    First thing they do is strip rights away from people. Second thing they do is start erasing history. Third is increasing police forces to crack down on any dissent.

    Communists serve the communist party not the people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 10 months ago (8 children)

    Again, untrue. In Russia, for example, life expectancies doubled, literacy rates went from 20-30% to full literacy, working hours dropped while real wages rose, healthcare and education were free and high quality, the economy was democratized and the country went from a feudal backward to space in less than a century, beating the Nazis along the way.

    They dramatically expand rights, teach history, and cracked down on the fascists, capitalists, and landlords.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (7 children)

    Ah yes russia what a great example

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 10 months ago (6 children)

    Yep, and we can use China, Vietnam, Cuba, etc as well.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (5 children)

    Ah yes, those are all countries known for respecting freedom and human rights. Those examples like russia completely prove my point.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 10 months ago (4 children)

    To the contrary, they prove mine, despite your fantasies.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    Thats funny. Not even people from those countries agree with you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 10 months ago

    Most of my friends are some flavor of Anarchist or Socialist. Of the two outright Commies that I've known (who described themselves as such) one was a man of the people and the other was a lazy spoiled phony who's communism expressed itself mainly as sharing memes on facebook.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 10 months ago (5 children)

    Out right lies. The communist parties (the ones that have existed, not the the theoretical ones) derive their power from threat of violence against workers. They're a non-hereditary nobility that oppress workers (except North Korea which is now a hereditary monarchy).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (4 children)

    Incorrect, on all counts. Communist parties derive their power from popular support from the working classes, as they themselves are working class. State violence is used against fascists, sabateurs, capitalists, and landlords. If they truly were a nobility concerned only with oppressing workers, then you have to prove why there was such dramatic improvements in social welfare, poverty eradication, key life metrics, studied Marxism and taught it in universities, and more. Certainly these would have been of no importance to a new ruling class?

    You're dramatically incorrect here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    Communist parties derive their power from popular support from the working classes

    Political power flows from the barrel of a gun, not popular support. But of course strict control of News, Education, public discourse, and suppression of criticism really helps with the popular support.

    State violence is used against fascists, sabateurs, capitalists, and landlords

    as well as the workers

    why there was such dramatic improvements

    A phenomena that has occurred in plenty of other countries

    studied Marxism and taught it in universities, and more

    Priests, much like Bolshevik party officials, exist to maintain the system of control over the working class on behalf of their rulers and religion is widely taught in universities just like Marxist-Leninism was.

    Marx has some interesting things to say, he should definitely be required reading, but Marxists treat Das Kapital like Christians treat the Bible.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Political power does flow from the barrel of a gun, but a revolution is doomed to fail without popular support, including a socialist government. The working classes were not oppressed by socialist states but instead uplifted, dramatically more than capitalist peer countries. The only countries that supercede socialist ones are ones that rely on imperialism.

    The implication that Marxism-Leninism is a religion is baseless, the purpose of Marxism-Leninism is to abolish classes, not to maintain a ruling class like liberalism is.

    Why are you going through old comments of mine to reply to?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (1 child)

    but a revolution is doomed to fail without popular support

    Which is why almost all of them ultimately collapsed. East Germany famously got to a point where they were spending more money on the Secret Police than on the military.

    the purpose of Marxism-Leninism is to abolish classes

    Todays home work assignment is to look up "Defacto and Dejure"

    Why are you going through old comments of mine to reply to?

    Don't flatter yourself. You churn out comments at an incredible rate and you're on half the Posts I look at.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago

    Sure, so in instances where socialism continues we can tell that it enjoys popular support. The soviet union dissolved, but we have billions living in socialism happily. I'm aware that one can say something and not mean it, but the fact that that's possible does not mean that it's always the case. You in particular never make any meaningful points, you cast a silly phrase or two and then act like everyone else is unreasonable.

  • source
  • parent