• 0 Posts
  • 11 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 16th, 2023

help-circle







  • sure, it’s a war and violence might be necessary, but it’s a question of proportionality. you don’t meet a peaceful protest with artillery fire either

    you also seem to be under the belief that anyone who dissents or in any way acts against the will of the state are doing so because of foreign interference instead of simply from their own volition. in neither case do deserve to be killed unless they are themselves violent or otherwise explicitly soldiers. i guess a more common issue than powerhungriness among communist leaders is the related issue of extreme paranoia which leads to tons of innocent people being killed or imprisoned. this is an example of something that can be triggered by CIA, but not excused by CIAs actions

    why do leninist states even have a singular leader in the top if they’re trying to abolish hierarchy? why not cap it off with a committee with some further safeguards to prevent the power from getting to their head instead?

    i doubt you yourself believe that all the actions of people in the top of the party represents the class of the proletariat that they are trying to represent instead of a hybrid between that an actions to further the class they themselves are now in as elite party members. this issue is furthered by corruption which all communist states are vulnerable to (especially since they are initially centralizing a lot of power) and which a very large amount of precautions need to be taken against to prevent it from collapsing the system on its own even without outside interference. now, capitalism isn’t better with corruption since the system is essentially a case of legalizing corruption under a formal system, but that’s also why it doesn’t collapse from corruption


  • wait, so you’re saying that even the fascist states (e.g. the nazis) were only trying to defend themselves against foreign powers trying to destabilize their state? or am i misinterpreting you?

    a state doesn’t have a mind of its own, it consists of people and those people are often power-hungry and do actively want to suppress dissent regardless of what would be good for the state. the whole point of socialism is to dismantle hierarchies, but by placing a powerful leader without accountability on the top you have undermined the whole concept

    maybe cia actions were what caused them to be authoritarian, but that doesn’t excuse their actions in any way. the moment they became authoritarian, cia had already defeated socialism

    suppressing “dissent” in the form of e.g. refusing to follow laws about distribution of resources (within reason) is one thing, but suppressing dissenting voices is a whole different thing altogether and those two shouldn’t be lumped together in one category. the former is a part of the normal job of a state while the latter is authoritarianism