Left-Wing Discussion Thread III

[Genivaria]

I don't think that is quite what they said. I doubt they would deny the Eat never had empires (Dynasties were a big thing that spread across large swathes of land).

They specifically said the West, and gave the US specifically as an answer. I’m merely telling them that the West isn’t the only culture to have exploitabtivw powers. If they didn’t mean that they should be clearer next time.

They have a history of calling the United States an 'empire' despite how silly it makes them sound.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

So you don't like the bill of rights?

Not unless the bill of rights would be internationalized, the U.S. would be entirely eliminated in its current form, and the rights would be modified to accommodate the requirements of the 21ˢᵗ century.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

Uh huh. Empires exist beyond single cultures, you know that, correct? China is currently trying to get its fair share of the world market, and to call it ‘Western’ would be a lie, and to believe that no other culture can produce an empire save for the West is either ignorant or racist, likely both.

Chinese aggression is a reaction to U.S. imperialism.

However, I certainly would not defend China (or any country). I am a communist internationalist.

[Genivaria]

Uh huh. Empires exist beyond single cultures, you know that, correct? China is currently trying to get its fair share of the world market, and to call it ‘Western’ would be a lie, and to believe that no other culture can produce an empire save for the West is either ignorant or racist, likely both.

Chinese aggression is a reaction to U.S. imperialism.

However, I certainly would not defend China (or any country). I am a communist internationalist.

Bullshit.

[Republican Corentia]

Okay, pray tell, what is fascism and how did the Soviet Union embody this? inb4 authority is fascist

totalitarian, one party, militaristic state under the helm of a Great Leader

All of the characteristics that political scientists use to determine whether a regime is "fascist," and why Salazar's Portugal and Metaxas' Greece were not. The similarities don't end there.

Given the opportunity, Mussolini would have been glad as late as 1920-21 to take under his wing the Italian Communists, for whom he felt great affinities: greater, certainly, than for democratic socialists, liberals and conservatives. Genetically, Fascism issued from the 'Bolshevik' wing of Italian socialism, not from any conservative ideology or movement.

If only fascism were just as simple as a few lazy adjectives strung together.

The Soviet Union was different from fascism utterly and completely when you consider the functional reasons for things like authoritarianism or militarism in the Soviet Union. Fascism is objectively a more brutal form of social democracy and arises when capital is in crisis. How does it enact this more brutal, militaristic and authoritarian form of social democracy while attaining popular support while the economy is in shambles?

Well, you of course use pseudo-left platitudes, talks of national rejuvenation through jingoistic patriotism, etc. Look at Goebbels' wikiquote page, it's almost as if you're looking at a communist sympathizer's. But we know of course that the NSDAP was not pro-worker, in fact the early armed wing of the NSDAP, the SA, came into fruition precisely to stomp out pro-worker activism in the forms of social democratic and communist rallies and organizing. In fact this early armed-wing was soon to be crushed itself for harboring socialist (the Nazis claimed it was homosexuality) elements precisely because of the pseudo-left rhetoric, which attracted a fair few working-class Nazis to fascism. The same can be said for the Italian case where rhetorically fascism tried to pair itself with the anti-capitalism of communist politics, but as soon as state power was achieved, or there was a big fat paycheck to arm the fascist police bands, there was an immediate rush to suppress any sort of working-class activism. The destruction of unions, wages, working conditions, the empowerment of armaments industries and the ruling class in general, jingoistic wars, they're all evidence of this. It's phenomenal how you think an ideology which empowered Krupp and other assorted capitalists and literally put communists in concentration camps with Jews is actually, just communism with different colors. No, communism was the complete antithesis to this ideology which posited that hierarchy was natural, that socio-economic classes could live in harmony and "have" some sort of mystical nation together, and that racial superiority was simply apart of what made someone German. Not to mention the personal ambitions of both Hitler and Mussolini, who both lived lavishly in contrast to people like Stalin, who was noted by people like Winston Churchill as being extremely modest (to say the least - he called him a pollack IIRC).

The Soviet Armed Forces on the other hand? Or the Red Army before that? Or the Communist Party in general? They were attacked by 10 nations before they had even invaded Finland for leverage against the Nazis. Soviet society was not militaristic in any sense that the NSDAP was - the NSDAP was interested in making a society where every man, woman and child would be subservient to the idea of supremacy of their state and race, nor was the communist party actually interested in making this sort of society. If that had been the case, the Soviets would not have made millions of engineers and scientists after returning from the rubble of the 20s, and then again in the 40s. What it was actually interested in was matching up with NATO and the United States' military power, especially leading up into the late 70s and mid 80s, where the arms race had eventually put the Soviet Union's economy to rest. The militarism of the Soviet Union can be summed up in the siege mentality that was formed by several invasions on-part due to its' socialist society and to a lesser extent, the willingness of the Soviet Union to give military aid to places like Afghanistan, Vietnam, and Cuba so readily.

Also this shouldn't come as a surprise but the "great leader" complex wasn't a Soviet communist thing. I've heard arguments from biographers of Stalin that it was actually a Russian cultural trend that tended to praise "patriarchs" and single rulers. Stalin himself wasn't a fan of his cult of personality and the only reason why he was put into power was because the party could trust him to that position, the praises of Lenin or not. Neither was Fidel a fan of his cult iirc, but nonetheless people like to paint millions of people admiring someone as actually some clever narcissistic scheme, as if it just doesn't form on it's own sometimes.

[Uiiop]

nvm

[Oil exporting People]

Chinese aggression is a reaction to U.S. imperialism.

*Starts to argue, but then checks name*

[The Widening Gyre]

They specifically said the West, and gave the US specifically as an answer. I’m merely telling them that the West isn’t the only culture to have exploitabtivw powers. If they didn’t mean that they should be clearer next time.

They have a history of calling the United States an 'empire' despite how silly it makes them sound.

The US definitely has economic, political and military imperium throughout the world. Not silly at all.

[Aillyria]

So you don't like the bill of rights?

Not unless the bill of rights would be internationalized, the U.S. would be entirely eliminated in its current form, and the rights would be modified to accommodate the requirements of the 21ˢᵗ century.

I think the world should be unified under the United States Constitution or a constitution based loosely on it, tbh. The important part is the Bill of Rights. But how do you mean "modified to accommodate 21 century requirements"?

[Aillyria]

They have a history of calling the United States an 'empire' despite how silly it makes them sound.

The US definitely has economic, political and military imperium throughout the world. Not silly at all.

The US technically is an empire, though. It's not expansionist anymore, but it is a hegemonic empire by nature.

[Oil exporting People]

The US definitely has economic, political and military imperium throughout the world. Not silly at all.

Let them hate, as long as they fear.

[The Parkus Empire]

What's wrong with that? Western culture is, for the most part, superior to that of other cultures. Some form of pan-Western civilization is what should be aspired to for all of humanity. All cultures aren't equal or valuable.

I want to see the total destruction of Western culture.

Hence you are my enemy.

[The Widening Gyre]

The US definitely has economic, political and military imperium throughout the world. Not silly at all.

Let them hate, as long as they fear.

So you want America to be stabbed to death by its own bodyguards?

The US definitely has economic, political and military imperium throughout the world. Not silly at all.

The US technically is an empire, though. It's not expansionist anymore, but it is a hegemonic empire by nature.

I'm agreeing with you. And I'd argue that it is expansionist - just through more indirect means.

[Aillyria]

I want to see the total destruction of Western culture.

Hence you are my enemy.

I just want to figure a way to bring love for God (swt) back into western life, western civilization sans atheism and materialism = heaven on Earth.

[The Parkus Empire]

And culture and way of life. It certainly makes more sense than your seeing humanity as monolithic. What works changes according to people, way of life, place and time. There is no one size fits all

Oh I've never said anything of the sort, I believe that the INDIVIDUAL should be free to make their own choices, you on the other hand condemn individualism so it's a little late to pretend you're trying to protect anything.

Sure I do, individualism is nothing but, "Fuck duty."

[Oil exporting People]

So you want America to be stabbed to death by its own bodyguards?

> Implying we have bodyguards

[Aillyria]

Let them hate, as long as they fear.

So you want America to be stabbed to death by its own bodyguards?

The US technically is an empire, though. It's not expansionist anymore, but it is a hegemonic empire by nature.

I'm agreeing with you. And I'd argue that it is expansionist - just through more indirect means.

Derp....ah, sry didn't realize the sarcasm in your post.

Oh I've never said anything of the sort, I believe that the INDIVIDUAL should be free to make their own choices, you on the other hand condemn individualism so it's a little late to pretend you're trying to protect anything.

Sure I do, individualism is nothing but, "Fuck duty."

Eh, I think I fall somewhere between you two........I'm generally more collectivist, but individualism does have its place in a healthy society as well.

[Genivaria]

So you want America to be stabbed to death by its own bodyguards?



I'm agreeing with you. And I'd argue that it is expansionist - just through more indirect means.

Derp....ah, sry didn't realize the sarcasm in your post.

Sure I do, individualism is nothing but, "Fuck duty."

Eh, I think I fall somewhere between you two........I'm generally more collectivist, but individualism does have its place in a healthy society as well.

That's actually my view as well, Parkus is simply incapable of nuance.

[Genivaria]

Oh I've never said anything of the sort, I believe that the INDIVIDUAL should be free to make their own choices, you on the other hand condemn individualism so it's a little late to pretend you're trying to protect anything.

Sure I do, individualism is nothing but, "Fuck duty."

He says to the person who supports universal conscription.

[Aillyria]

Derp....ah, sry didn't realize the sarcasm in your post.


Eh, I think I fall somewhere between you two........I'm generally more collectivist, but individualism does have its place in a healthy society as well.

That's actually my view as well, Parkus is simply incapable of nuance.

I'm still just really confused by Parkus' views......

[Kubra]

Oh I've never said anything of the sort, I believe that the INDIVIDUAL should be free to make their own choices, you on the other hand condemn individualism so it's a little late to pretend you're trying to protect anything.

Sure I do, individualism is nothing but, "Fuck duty."

I interpreted "fuck duty" way diferently than you intended

[Aillyria]

Sure I do, individualism is nothing but, "Fuck duty."

I interpreted "fuck duty" way diferently than you intended

I had to double take on that too.

[Thermodolia]

Sure I do, individualism is nothing but, "Fuck duty."

I interpreted "fuck duty" way diferently than you intended

Reporting for fuck duty sir!!

[Genivaria]

Sure I do, individualism is nothing but, "Fuck duty."

I interpreted "fuck duty" way diferently than you intended

"GODDAMN THESE ARE SOME GOOD LOOKING PRIVATES PRIVATE!"

[Kubra]

Oh good I'm not the only one who saw it that way
thought I had some freudian shit going on