Stop liking militarism and psychopathic rulers, you bootlickers!

just because their Authoritarianism is dressed in "proletarian" colors.
You should know better.

That thinking is exactly why we only seem to have so few options.

deal with it, anarkiddie

Authoritarianism and Libertarianism don't exist. There is just different types of class diactatorship. Fascism = Liberal democracy, "Stalinism" = "Anarchism".

How the fuck isn't this super depressing to you?

Diacatorship of an individual doesn't exist. Only class diactatorship does.

literally feels>reals.

I want the DOTP so we can kill OP.

Sorry kid but the American empire needs to end.

OP to answer your question communism isnt people doing what they want, what you are thinking of is aycrapism

/leftpol/ is in the other direction boyo.

Communism is a free association of producers, in the sense that society is not governed by impersonal economic laws but rather by people and society itself. In a way it is far more free than ancapistan which is just complete diactatorship of the law of value and the bourgoise.

I would prefer a Communist dictator to an infinite number of rational Capitalist democracies. Things don't suddenly become right just because they are supported by many, and if only one man is being reasonable, then only one man should make decisions. Not my fault we are flawed, imperfect people, it's just the way it is. Go cry to someone who cares.

If we are imperfect then what is the point of anything? Since nothing will get better.

lemme guess next you are going to say that the worker should own his labor?

he couldn't even eat breakfast in the morning without the party's permission


How is communism supposed to be incompatible with having freedom of speech, freedom of religion and other basic rights?

Communism is not some vague "movement" that just magically abolishes capitalism
Communism is a state of affairs encompassing all of society,established according to the will of the proletarian Party
This Party must be centralized and defend itself with force of arms against all reactionary elements



What happens if the party stops being a proletarian one? Even ☭TANKIE☭s acknowledge it happened multiple times; it's why they praise the Soviets for sending in the tanks (until it happened to the Soviet party and we got global counterrevolution - complete with former high-ranking party members turning into oligarchs.)

Without democratic accountability, there's no recourse if party leaders/de facto elites decide to look after their own interests at proletarian expense. A dictator might be a (tankie interpretation of) Stalin, but it can just as easily be a Deng or a Gorbachev.


Stop bothering. Guys like these are basically fascists, but instead of fascist/imperialist aesthetics they like the soviet-style imperialist aesthetics.
They would worship Hitler himself, if he made the hammer and sickle his flag.

Inb4 some butthurt ☭TANKIE☭ comes in saying "u compare communism and fascism so ur a dumb liberal!!!"

the deep anarkiddie analysis strikes again

Yep, here we have one already

The fact that you think fascism can be left wing and compare it to the people who sacrificed everything to defeat fascism confirms that you're liberal.

I'm not but where did you get this "fascism can be left wing"?


A centralized party IS free association of producers.


No matter the leftist opinions they may hold in other fields, they basically think of the individual completely in function of the greater picture, and think it's okay to suppress all of his rights and freedoms to an extreme extent if those somehow don't fit with the government's goals or ideals. This is a fascist position.


From Doctrine of Fascism by Mussolini

good riddance


good to confirm once again anarchists are just edgy moralfags rather than materialists


I'm not an anarchist and actually see myself as a materialist too. The point is that persecuting people just because they hold spiritual or politically aberrant views is ridiculous and unjustifiable, and is a fascist practice that communists shouldn't engage in. Under communism people should be free.



wew lad

"authoritarianism" is a fucking meme.

You have that backwards, there would be no improvement if we were perfect. It's is precisely because we are imperfect the that sometimes, the people are wrong. Sometimes people don't have their interests in mind. Sometimes people's interests aren't okay. To prove this, watch a child for an hour, maybe less. It is a shame that in guiding people, the guide themselves can be misguided. This is imperfect, which is ok. It happens, things get messy, and when you deal with big happenings, that mess is real.

This is both factually incorrect, as well as sophomorishly contrarian. Here's why you're wrong:

When you want to sell fruit, you must first till the soil. Failure to do so will grow weeds, not fruit trees. Even if you intended to grow apples, but got a shit-fruit like peaches instead (fuck off southerners, peaches are the devil's pocket pussies and you know it. Who decided to sweeten a ball of yarn, jam a rock in there and call it fruit? Faggots. That's who. Pure-bred, Georgia raised faggots. BUT I DIGRESS) you STILL got fruit. And you ONLY got that much because you tended the orchard.

Republicans understand this implicitly. Why do you think that despite the personal, often conflicting ideologies of Republican individuals, the party has lurched so far to the extreme right over the last 4 decades? Because they understand that that a glass half full is better than no water, and that partial glasses eventually can be added up to a full glass. You lefty-fags refuse to understand this most elementary concept and it's why, despite routinely being the voice of general consensus in the US decade after decade, you lose lose lose lose lose lose lose all day long in elections.

You went full high school nigger last year. Instead of electing someone, you know…ELECTABLE…like Clinton, who would have been corrupt, but also would have kept the ship straight and tended the field more towards the left, you all decided to protest vote like faggots in an age when third parties are literally impossible. You chose a glass entirely empty over a glass partially full, and now you faggots are stuck in a drought. It's amazing you even tak as though there is a future! If you cannot pull off a wave election later this year, it's fucking OVER for the left in the US, and I say that as a dyed in the wool hippie-style leftist with strong socialist leanings.

Your identity politics and purity test mentalities are auto-cannibalistic. YOU are the enemy. Not Trump. Not republicans. Not end-stage capitalism and globalists. YOU sabotage you, because you can't get your own dicks out of your mouths long enough to stop slurping up that ego-cum long enough to…you know…not literally lose your culture to a bunch of hill billy fascists.

Say whatever you want about these American Nazis…they WIN. They win despite being objectively wrong about basically everything. They win despite not even bothering lie well anymore. They win despite their ideology being fringe even by retard american standards. They win even though most Americans whole heartedly agree with at-least moderate leftist ideas.

Because they're not so full of their own shit that they refuse to till the motherfucking field. They slurp down a few peaches while they wait for their apple trees. And YOU get thrown in history's waste basket.

Great job, lefties.


Oh yeah, I forgot. You faggots also never took a civics or economics 101. It's blindingly obvious you know basically nothing about basic civics. If this weren't so, you'd understand that the current voting paradigm systemically precludes the possibility of third party candidates from winning. That's why people like Sanders and Trump have to run as democrats and republicans. By definition, though I'm not certain I'm tin foil enough to say by design more so than by happily exploited accident, a vote for a third party candidate is inherently a vote for the guy who is ASS OPPOSITE of your ideology in the races. This goes right back to tilling the field. We'd all love it if we could retire the D vs R paradigm. But it CAN NOT be done by voting third party. We first have to move the players on the field left, eventually left enough that voting reform can become a political reality. THEN, after much work and effort, we may have a viable system where additional parties ar epossible. But again, you have to not be contrarian faggots to achieve this. You have to put aside your retarded ideologies and accept the fucking goddamn elementary truth that an "all or nothing" mentality is not just a fallacious way to try and view and opperate within the world, but damn juvenile as well.

This is why you'll never win. Ever. You can't get over yourselves. I know it in my heart. You lack the brain development to put yourselves aside. Your whole generation grew up hearing that you're special, and you fuck-o's bought into it!

How about making a thread about this instead of posting un-related shit in a M-L vs Anarchists fight thread?

military jackets are soo sexy tho :3

How about eat shit. I'll post what I want, where I want.

Well thats fine i guess
Literally almost no-one here voted for the Green Party


Stop being a faggot, nothing will change regardless of who you vote for. Third parties get nowhere (especially in a system as retarded as the one you have in burgerland) and the major parties have no incentive to change the system that favours them.

""Clever"" way to cover you didn't understand a thing of what's being said in here. Good job nigger.

Wrong. USA and it's citizens are the enemy. The enemy of humanity.
Clinton..left? Pal…the right wing in my country all wanted Clinton to win and the left wing said it was indifferent between Clinton and Trump because they're the same thing.
USA is an hivemind that must be stopped.

dead wrong. Fascism is a very specific mode of governance with specific aims and concerns. A dotp is not inherently fascistic unless it took up fascist concerns. Totalitarian sure, fascist no. Fascism is concered with;

"Fascists saw World War I as a revolution that brought massive changes to the nature of war, society, the state and technology. The advent of total war and the total mass mobilization of society had broken down the distinction between civilians and combatants. A "military citizenship" arose in which all citizens were involved with the military in some manner during the war.[10][11] The war had resulted in the rise of a powerful state capable of mobilizing millions of people to serve on the front lines and providing economic production and logistics to support them, as well as having unprecedented authority to intervene in the lives of citizens.[10][11]

Fascists believe that liberal democracy is obsolete and they regard the complete mobilization of society under a totalitarian one-party state as necessary to prepare a nation for armed conflict and to respond effectively to economic difficulties.[12] Such a state is led by a strong leader—such as a dictator and a martial government composed of the members of the governing fascist party—to forge national unity and maintain a stable and orderly society.[12] Fascism rejects assertions that violence is automatically negative in nature and views political violence, war and imperialism as means that can achieve national rejuvenation.[13][14][15][16] Fascists advocate a mixed economy, with the principal goal of achieving autarky through protectionist and interventionist economic policies.[17]"

spaghetti man is not the authoritative "intellectual" on the subject of fascism. There are many other more prominent (actual) philosophers like sorrel.

diamat is dumb. It is positivistic. I don't even mind marx's das kapital but dialectical materialism is the dumb. It's bad historiography and is no way to predict the future.

literally drumpfcuck tier replies

Dialectics in general is hermetic bullshit imo, I haven't read enough material yet but supposedly late marx's historical materialism is more scientific and consistent.


You're right, there are cooler things.

reason why we have so few options is because idiots who cant stand strong leader have systemically made it impossible for them to emerge again, ergo socdems are ruining socialism

this is the kind of thinking that allows liberals to claim whites are the true ruling of america and not the bourgeoisie

let this stillborn thread die already ffs

Not really. The people on the left who claim that skin color or gender have more weight than class in relation to your place in the social hierarchy are influenced by Foucault and Frantz Fanon rather than Debord. Debord didn't care much about both of those things.

Debord said that the bureaucracy were the only body in the Eastern bloc who made decisions when it came to labour, and therefore they effectively replaced the bourgeoisie as the sole manager of the means of production.
Debord thinks the Paris Commune is a much better example of what communism should be than the USSR. The word "communism" is a direct reference to this event, after all.

why even bother with communism if thats how you think?

clean your room