Leftcoms BTFO?

youtube.com/watch?v=kQoEqBx70ts

So this guy finally buries ultras by coherently and succinctly showing how the USSR did in fact not work under the laws of capital, was not state capitalist, but a socialist system.

Other urls found in this thread:

marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1885-c2/ch01.htm
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1885-c2/ch02.htm
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1885-c2/ch04.htm
offen-siv.net/Lesenswertes/stal-tro.shtml
offen-siv.net/Buch-Kubi-Stalin.pdf
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1859/critique-pol-economy/preface.htm
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1877/anti-duhring/ch24.html
marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/ch05.htm
marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1921/apr/21.htm
marxists.org/subject/economy/authors/pe/
marxists.org/subject/economy/authors/pe/pe-ch23.htm
marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1951/economic-problems/ch03.htm
ia800506.us.archive.org/1/items/WorkersParticipationInTheSovietUnion/Workers Participation in the Soviet Union.pdf
twitter.com/AnonBabble

...

Right off the bat he calls leftcoms "rightcoms." Either a silly typo, or he is suggesting leftcoms are somehow right wing, which is itself only a hop skip and a jump from pulling the old ☭TANKIE☭ trick of "anyone I don't like is a fascist."

test ☭TANKIE☭ test

Huh. I guess this is new, but the word ☭TANKIE☭ on its own is normal. Mixed in with other text, the wordfilter makes it capitalized and puts some hammer and sickles around it.

Ok brainlet.

it'd be too long even if it were 30 seconds, but still, i'm not the one who talked about it being succint.

Do you think you could approach such a complex topic with a three minute hot take?

He seems to be suggesting that the governance of the USSR was not authoritarian, that the people ruled. He does this by saying that the Supreme Soviet of a given SSR had to approve economic plans, and thus these pans had the mandate of the people. However, were the supreme soviets actually expressive of the authentic will of the people? Who were the delegates elected to them accountable to? For them to be actually representative, the delegate must play the role solely of messenger. They are elected by the people, they go to the meeting, they send a message back about what is to be voted, and the people send back their wishes. If rather than this the delegates vote however they wish, then this is merely parliamentarianism with a red coating. If the delegates technically vote only in accordance with the wishes of the people who voice they carry on to the soviet, but the will of the people is whatever the central committee dictates from on high, then this is merely democratic forms to mask party rule. I'm thinking Endymion is letting confirmation bias blind himself to the rubber stamp nature that the supreme soviets had.

He actually makes some arguments in the video. Leftcoms and AnComs lash out against Marxist-Leninists quite heavily ("Left-wing of Capital", "Red.Fascist") so they can take heat?