White supremacist murders two in Portland

[Torrocca]

Except those past governments weren't communist, they said they were communist, and then completely went against the tenants of communism.

Hence, your argument is pointless.

Different doctrines of communism exist all with different subsequent schools of thought.

Whereas on the other hand, you can see exactly what Nazism is and what exactly it did. The same can be said of Fascism and White Supremacy, actually, because of what their beliefs are and what they actually fucking do. They're actually a problem because what they were is now what they are and is what they will continue to be.

But, you know, let's just keep ignoring that and saying, "b-b-but Communism!" because that's somehow remotely relevant to the actual problem at hand here.

Torroca, if communism supports the dissolution of a state, how can communism even be practiced?

Easy: work with the people, and not any sort of state.

[Mandicoria]

k

[Kubumba Tribe]

Torroca, if communism supports the dissolution of a state, how can communism even be practiced?

Depends on your specific doctrinal beliefs. Communism has many variations.

Many during the Brezhnev era, for example, assumed that strengthening the state would eventually cause it to wither away (somehow). But I think that the essence is that a communist society would be built of free association, where the coercive forces of the state are not necessary.

So an economy not run by the state, yet run by the state? waaat.

Ok, I gotta go, see y'all later.

[Torrocca]

Yeah, no it's not, especially not when the reasoning behind one is, "we're genociding people who aren't like us and we'll keep doing it so long as we're not stopped!" and the reasoning behind the other is, "this is a fucking awful famine caused by shitty policy but it was unintentional!" Unless you propose that the result of both, death, is somehow solved through the same exact means?

That's simply your opinion.

Wow, facts regarding problems and how people died are opinions now?

[Uxupox]

Different doctrines of communism exist all with different subsequent schools of thought.

Not really.

Anything that doesn't follow: A stateless, classless society where workers own the means of production, aren't communist.

Hell, by having states, they already go against the first tenant.

That's if they describe by Marxism if by other hand they follow Marxism-Lenism or it's many derivatives models. As it's described by political scientists there is no such thing as a definite Marxist theory but many principles similar to that of other political schools and economic schools of thought.

[Proctopeo]

That's simply your opinion.

Wow, facts regarding problems and how people died are opinions now?

No, whether or not a specific thing is a matter of opinion is a matter of opinion.
Reading is advised.

[Uxupox]

Different doctrines of communism exist all with different subsequent schools of thought.

Whereas on the other hand, you can see exactly what Nazism is and what exactly it did. The same can be said of Fascism and White Supremacy, actually, because of what their beliefs are and what they actually fucking do. They're actually a problem because what they were is now what they are and is what they will continue to be.

But, you know, let's just keep ignoring that and saying, "b-b-but Communism!" because that's somehow remotely relevant to the actual problem at hand here.

Torroca, if communism supports the dissolution of a state, how can communism even be practiced?

Easy: work with the people, and not any sort of state.

No thanks I'd rather be able to speak with an opinion and not get my head bashed.

[Vassenor]

Nobody denies that the British Empire fucked India up on the other hand.

Yeah they do. Just go to the UK pol forum and ask. A lot of people think we imperialism had a positive effect on India.

Just because we disagreed when Manisdog said it was the most evilest event in human history does not mean we think it was a good thing.

[Torrocca]

Easy: work with the people, and not any sort of state.

No thanks I'd rather be able to speak with an opinion and not get my head bashed.

It must be cool to detract from the actual topic at hand to bash something irrelevant to the actual topic at hand.

[Daeseong]

Depends on your specific doctrinal beliefs. Communism has many variations.

Many during the Brezhnev era, for example, assumed that strengthening the state would eventually cause it to wither away (somehow). But I think that the essence is that a communist society would be built of free association, where the coercive forces of the state are not necessary.

So an economy not run by the state, yet run by the state? waaat.

Ok, I gotta go, see y'all later.

Planned economies aren't the ends but rather the means. The control of the economy under Lenin and Stalin were more of a product of their limited economic output - so they felt the need to take direct control and enact rapid industrialization to achieve the level of prosperity Marx envisioned as necessary to have a successful communist state. The problem is that - at no point thereafter - nobody in the Soviet leadership was entirely willing to let go of their reins, so we see an ushering of periods of Khrushchev's reforms and Brezhnev's managerial Leninism.

[Uxupox]

No thanks I'd rather be able to speak with an opinion and not get my head bashed.

It must be cool to detract from the actual topic at hand to bash something irrelevant to the actual topic at hand.

Where you the one talking about how about we should repress others?

[New haven america]

Not really.

Anything that doesn't follow: A stateless, classless society where workers own the means of production, aren't communist.

Hell, by having states, they already go against the first tenant.

That's if they describe by Marxism if by other hand they follow Marxism-Lenism or it's many derivatives models. As it's described by political scientists there is no such thing as a definite Marxist theory but many principles similar to that of other political schools and economic schools of thought.

While there is no concrete school of thought, the tenants are concrete, but no one follows them and ends up failing.

[Torrocca]

It must be cool to detract from the actual topic at hand to bash something irrelevant to the actual topic at hand.

Where you the one talking about how about we should repress others?

Keeping Nazis, Fascists, and White Supremacists and their ilk quiet isn't repression; it's progressive for a society aiming to achieve progress and helps to prevent the horrible things that happen because of them (like murder) from happening. But, y'know, somehow Communism's at fault.

[Uxupox]

Where you the one talking about how about we should repress others?

Keeping Nazis, Fascists, and White Supremacists and their ilk quiet isn't repression; it's progressive for a society aiming to achieve progress and helps to prevent the horrible things that happen because of them (like murder) from happening. But, y'know, somehow Communism's at fault.

So they aren't people now?

[Torrocca]

Keeping Nazis, Fascists, and White Supremacists and their ilk quiet isn't repression; it's progressive for a society aiming to achieve progress and helps to prevent the horrible things that happen because of them (like murder) from happening. But, y'know, somehow Communism's at fault.

So they aren't people now?

I never said that; I just said they shouldn't be allowed their time of day. It already happened once, you know: bad things happened because of that.

[Uxupox]

That's if they describe by Marxism if by other hand they follow Marxism-Lenism or it's many derivatives models. As it's described by political scientists there is no such thing as a definite Marxist theory but many principles similar to that of other political schools and economic schools of thought.

While there is no concrete school of thought, the tenants are concrete, but no one follows them and ends up failing.

No. They actually try to follow the Communist manifesto as seen by Lenin with his Vanguard party.

[Uxupox]

So they aren't people now?

I never said that; I just said they shouldn't be allowed their time of day. It already happened once, you know: bad things happened because of that.

Shouldn't allowed? That's repression of people freedom of speech.

[Daeseong]

While there is no concrete school of thought, the tenants are concrete, but no one follows them and ends up failing.

No. They actually try to follow the Communist manifesto as seen by Lenin with his Vanguard party.

Hence the failure part.

Though I think it's dubious Lenin sought to follow the Communist Manifesto. Leninism was, at best, an extreme adaptation of Marxism to Russian conditions and at worst tantamount to becoming an ideology in its own right.

[New haven america]

While there is no concrete school of thought, the tenants are concrete, but no one follows them and ends up failing.

No. They actually try to follow the Communist manifesto as seen by Lenin with his Vanguard party.

And we see how well the USSR went.

Yeah, no, they don't follow communist tenants, and end up failing.

[Uxupox]

No. They actually try to follow the Communist manifesto as seen by Lenin with his Vanguard party.

And we see how well the USSR went.

Yeah, no, they don't follow communist tenants, and end up failing.

Which communist tenants they didn't specifically follow from the manifesto?

[Torrocca]

I never said that; I just said they shouldn't be allowed their time of day. It already happened once, you know: bad things happened because of that.

Shouldn't allowed? That's repression of people freedom of speech.

This is a fucking ridiculous argument. You'd rather people that would very literally - if given their time of day again, commit all sorts of atrocities and dismantle all the values of any democratic society - have a voice than shut them the fuck up because of their past actions, their current beliefs, and their current intentions (AKA replicate their past actions). It's literally insanity to want to give Nazis and white supremacists any avenue to have their voices be heard.

[Uxupox]

Shouldn't allowed? That's repression of people freedom of speech.

This is a fucking ridiculous argument. You'd rather people that would very literally, if given their time of day again, commit all sorts of atrocities and dismantle all the values of any democratic society, have a voice than shut them the fuck up because of their past actions, their current beliefs, and their current intentions (AKA replicate their past actions). It's literally insanity to want to give Nazis and white supremacists any avenue to have their voices be heard.

You are the one with the ridiculous argument that we should be REPRESSING people's right for thinking DIFFERENTLY from you. Their bullshit can be heard just as well as communist bullshit can also be heard. Respect other's people damn right to speak.

[Torrocca]

This is a fucking ridiculous argument. You'd rather people that would very literally, if given their time of day again, commit all sorts of atrocities and dismantle all the values of any democratic society, have a voice than shut them the fuck up because of their past actions, their current beliefs, and their current intentions (AKA replicate their past actions). It's literally insanity to want to give Nazis and white supremacists any avenue to have their voices be heard.

You are the one with the ridiculous argument that we should be REPRESSING people's right for thinking DIFFERENTLY from you. Their bullshit can be heard just as well as communist bullshit can also be heard. Respect other's people damn right to speak.

So let me get this clear, perfectly clear, because I think you're missing the key point here: what you want is for people, who believe in ideologies that advocate for murder, have murdered in the past to the point of genocide, and most certainly would do it again if they get a large enough foothold, to be able to tell people what their beliefs are and try to sway over impressionable people who might be conflicted in their own beliefs and end up siding with these same monsters?

Because if that's the case, then you very literally need to take a step back and reevaluate yourself, because you're advocating for people that somehow think slavery and genocide is an alright thing to do. And that's not alright.

[New haven america]

And we see how well the USSR went.

Yeah, no, they don't follow communist tenants, and end up failing.

Which communist tenants they didn't specifically follow from the manifesto?

Is it stateless? No, the USSR was totally a state, and was made up of states too.
Classless? Hahahaha, fuck no.
Workers owning the means of production? Considering they weren't really able to own anything without the government's permission (Even though they wouldn't have to deal with that in an actual communist society), I'm gonna go with no.

[Uxupox]

You are the one with the ridiculous argument that we should be REPRESSING people's right for thinking DIFFERENTLY from you. Their bullshit can be heard just as well as communist bullshit can also be heard. Respect other's people damn right to speak.

So let me get this clear, perfectly clear, because I think you're missing the key point here: what you want is for people, who believe in ideologies that advocate for murder, have murdered in the past to the point of genocide, and most certainly would do it again if they get a large enough foothold, to be able to tell people what their beliefs are and try to sway over impressionable people who might be conflicted in their own beliefs and end up siding with these same monsters?

Because if that's the case, then you very literally need to take a step back and reevaluate yourself, because you're advocating for people that somehow think slavery and genocide is an alright thing to do. And that's not alright.

If people want to advocate for these shits than it's their damn right to do it.