the_dunk_tank

You tankies allied with the Nazis when you had an interest in doing so, saying the contrary is the actual revisionism.

… wait for it …

Ever heard of Ribbentrop-Molotov ?

I think that you're ignoring once again on purpose that my critic is not against communists, but against people like you, tankies, that are as communist as the nazis were socialist.

Yes, I'm ignoring it because you haven't demonstrated that there's a difference.

You tankies allied with the Nazis when you had an interest in doing so, saying the contrary is the actual revisionism. Ever heard of Ribbentrop-Molotov ?

Yep, fully aware that the Soviets bided their time while trying to get the Western Powers to form an alliance against the rising Nazi threat.

You also indirectly sided with Franco in Spain by only sending resources to sabotage revolutionary efforts by the anarchist because it was a threat to the communist illusion that you made. That's also why you purged actual communists, anarchists and other -ist whenever you could. Saying the contrary is also revisionism.

The Soviets supplied the Anarchists, and you say that helped Franco? Lmao. You're deeply unserious.

No, I do, and I think you realize that's the problem. You just are not communists, you're cosplaying.

Read the book, Anansi. You haven't made any points on us not being Communists and refuse to read literature disproving you.

You'll find the explanation on this in the other comments, which you will chose to ignore or not believe because once again that shows your illiteracy and/or double standards.

I've read your justification, it's more like obfuscation.

This is a fascinating document that merits detailed research and discussion.

My whole point on the Xinjiang topic was that you all chose to ignore chinese history that goes pretty much as far as we have written history of it, explaining the whole way of dealing with minorities by forced assimilation, coming from the clanic and dynastic organization of Chinese provinces for millenias.

Ahh, yes, the devious Oriental and their ancient murderous ways. Come the fuck on, this is Klan shit. Contemporary Chinese people are genocidal because the fucking Yuan dynasty was genocidal? Because Cao Cao was a shithead? Because Kublai Khan was a jerk?

I'm also pushing for the Xinjiang to reach the independence they're fighting for for almost a century now

This is like the State Department's in-house version of the Chronicles of Narnia.

Meanwhile, while you're being armchair leftists just spreading your ignorance online, people like me, actual leftists, are outside forming people in popular education associations, working in unions and syndicates to actually change the political discourse.

We need to do research on how "I, the only true Lefists, actually goes outside while you, redfash-libero-tankie-jerklords, do not have any subjective understanding of the color green" and how people just develop this absolutely iron-clad believe that they or their in-group are the only people who do any kind of activism. This has to get down to some primal construction of in-group / out-group dynamics

By your logic you'd have sided with the nazis because they were fighting against most western countries while ignoring the fact that they were also kind of putting jews in ovens. Your stance is nonsense.

You guys are red-fash tankies just like the Soviets who bore the overwhelming brunt of fighting against the Hitlerites, liberated the death camps, and along with the Dominican Republic were the only country in the world that didn't establish quotas on Jewish refugees and accepted everyone who managed to reach the borders!

Sure, the nazis didn't justify their actions by saying they were fighting against a global elite that oppressed the poor german people.

Anti-Capitalism is exactly the same as Anti-semitism. I am a real leftist and I am very well read and have a good concept of theory

I can continue dunking on your ignorant asses all day if you want

Honestly, this is possibly the most fascinating thing every posted on Hexbear. This isn't just brainworms, this is like brain Shai-Hulud. This is the grandfather brainworms. Just reading this I've got a contact high of the awareness-spectrum narcotic the spice melange. I'm pretty sure I could drive to Chicago without GPS maps and without getting stuck in construction right now.

For starters, this is largely gish-gallop. You never back up any of your claims, and you strawman claims I have never made. These two logical fallicies make up the structure of your comment, gish-gallop a bunch of claims I never made and then "dunk" on them. I'll go section by section.

I think this is just projection because nothing in my history of posts defends empires and colonialism, and my whole point is that you actually do when you think it's the good guyses doing it ... You are the one agreeing with colonization of provinces, settlements aimed at erasing whole cultures, accepting imperialist tactics when it comes from a country you like. You're projecting.

This is the "China Bad" section. You begin by making racist claims that "Chinese assimilation" is so core to Chinese identity that it is an inevitability. You also at one point side with the British Empire with respect to Hong Kong, and again provided no evidence that the majority wish to break away from the PRC in any case.

Anansi, I need you to carefully consider any subject that leads you to side with the worst Empire in the world in a way that you materially benefit from. Be hyper-skeptical, don't just side with the West and accept its narrative whole cloth, because you have every material reason to.

No, I'm also pushing for the Xinjiang to reach the independence they're fighting for for almost a century now, the same way I push for Palestine to be free of the colonial power trying to erase them from the map and history ... Meanwhile, while you're being armchair leftists just spreading your ignorance online, people like me, actual leftists, are outside forming people in popular education associations, working in unions and syndicates to actually change the political discourse.

This section is categorized by the running stream "Marxism bad." Anansi, you make it extremely clear that you have never read Marxist theory beyond perhaps the Manifesto, because you make numerous foundational errors in this section.

1. Equating Xinjiang to Palestine when they are entirely different situations. Here's an idea: compare approval rates for the CPC and/or the PRC in Xinjiang and approval rates for Israel in Palestine.

2. The claim that Communists have sided with fascists against Anarchists is unsubstantiated, when we know for a fact the USSR supplied the Spanish Anarchists materially.

3. The idea that the State "withering away" means that at some point the government needs to dissolve itself and "give itself back to the people," when Marx's idea of Communism is a fully centrally planned publicly owned economy and that the Marxist idea of a State is different from the Anarchist idea of a State

4. The claim that Anarchists are "more" left than Marxists, which is nonsense ideology measuring and has no materialist basis, both Marxism and Anarchism are left regardless

5. The idea that we do not organize is false, many of us are members of Communist or Anarchist orgs and do good work on the ground

All utterly nonsense and unbacked.

Yes

You fully believe that Marxists support Marxism because they are power-level scalers? Why then do they side with national liberation movements like in Palestine, Hawaii, the Sahel States, the Aztlan people, and more? This claim is additionally unsupported, an "I believe it so it's true" claim.

You side against western imperialism and colonialism, while siding for anything else that goes against it, because you're just contrarians with no political backbones ... Also power is relative. By your logic you'd have sided with the nazis because they were fighting against most western countries while ignoring the fact that they were also kind of putting jews in ovens. Your stance is nonsense.

See, that's not my stance. This is you, yet again, demonstrably failing to analyze Marxist positions. If you just pretend Marxists purely side against the West, you can make the false claim that Marxists would... support the west? It's farcical. Here's a hint: the Communists sided against the fascists committing the Holocaust and liberated Aushwitz, doing far more of the fighting than any Western nation that would have had the Nazis and Communists kill each other off.

Communists yes, what you call communism no. You are only revolutionary until you seize power, then it's business as usual until you built enough capital for you and your friends that you can liberalize the economy until your "communist" state gets destroyed, have an excuse to leave the country to capitalists while you live your life in Cancùn.

Remarkable, no actual analysis of Marxist history. The Soviets could have liberalized at any time, but did so later in their existence, why? The PRC is a mostly publicly owned economy with strong central planning despite reintroducing foreign Capital, why? Cuba is still Socialist despite brutal sanctions because of it, why? You have no analysis. Here's an excerpt from Engels with respect to Markets, from Principles of Communism:

Question 17 : Will it be possible to abolish private property at one stroke?

Answer : No, no more than the existing productive forces can at one stroke be multiplied to the extent necessary for the creation of a communal society. Hence, the proletarian revolution, which in all probability is approaching, will be able gradually to transform existing society and abolish private property only when the necessary means of production have been created in sufficient quantity.

Marxists don't advocate for Socialism because of any moral reason, but because Capitalism itself forms large monopolist syndicates ripe for central planning and public ownership. You cannot simply "will" these structures into existence, that's why Communists can't abolish Private Property outright. A good article on this is Why Public Property?

Democratic Centralism in practice in your MLs countries irremediably end up as a farce because actual democracy would challenge power structures, so you only allow partial democracy after you literally purged anybody that would not agree with what you want to be the result of the vote.

Democratic Centralism is not a "farce." It is not farcical to state that the group is bound to the results of democratic votes. Socialist states have made great democratic strides, even if they haven't been perfect immediately. A good article on this is Why Do Marxists Fail to Bring the "Worker's Paradise?" It goes over the materialist basis for democratic structures, and how they must be built, not simply commanded into existence.

Ever heard of Stalin take on communism ? Or the CCP one ? Your brand of communism is internationalist as long as it means colonizing and assimilating other countries lmao

You could read works like Marxism and the National Question or The Right of Nations to Self-Determination, or look at how the USSR supported national liberation movements in Palestine, Algeria, Cuba, Korea, and more. Or, you could just smugly gesture and make no points, I guess.

Sure, the nazis didn't justify their actions by saying they were fighting against a global elite that oppressed the poor german people.

You can look at history and see who was served by the Communists and who was served by the fascists. Again, read Blackshirts and Reds. Equating the Nazis with the Communists is fascist apologia.

Also it's true that your tankies regime never had any way of putting any dissenting people into submission using the state apparatus.

Socialist States have used starw power to continue to exist, yes.

I can continue dunking on your ignorant asses all day if you want, but you should spend your time actually reading theory, but also academic literature so you can do your autocritic brother, because you're pretty cringe.

You didn't "dunk" on anyone. You gish-galloped, acted smug, and offered no reading nor analysis. I have read roughly 3 dozen Marxist works and history books on the subject, including academic works. Smugly acting like I haven't and offering no theory or academic works you think would be helpful is worthless grandstanding.

The fact is, I disagree with you because I've read academic literature, history books, and Marxist theory, and nothing you've said meaningfully challenges it.