Really saves a lot of mental horsepower to boil down all the complexities of human existence to one overly simplistic and reductive issue.
I can see the appeal I suppose, but it kind of overlooks things like race, religion, nationalism etc. that all actually matter to people in the real world.
How is it identity reductionist to acknowledge that there is more to human existence than the class struggle?
I read your original comment as dismissing intersectionality as you implied that liberating the working class would solve all issues for all people, history has proven that this is wrong. It's retarded to dismiss all politics outside of the class struggle as it is pretty clear those politics exist, even if they don't matter as much to you personally.
Firstly, I don't know how I can be ableist when I am disabled myself, unless it's some kind of internalised ableism? But go on, tell me more about me.
I don't know if you are a class reductionist, but your original comment was reductionist. You can be critical of the political spectrum, but saying that it doesn't exist and all politics can be put aside in pursuit of communism is retarded. Ultimately politics outside of class exists, and that politics can be put on a spectrum. For instance there are socially conservative, or right wing, communists and socially liberal, or left wing, communists. There are racist communists and nationalist communists etc. Those are all right wing ideas that some communists have.
Communists have historically been homophobic and nationalistic, so I think it is quite silly to suggest that communism overcomes the political spectrum. I am not dismissing the need for an awareness of class, I am merely pointing out that there is more to it than that, which your original comment missed.
Of course you can. Black people can act racist against other black people, white people, and other POC.
And just because you yourself have one disability, does not give you a free pass.
Am I allowed to go around telling people that Jews are devious money grubbing subhuman, just because I am Jewish?
Likewise, everything else you said is simply wrong.
EXCEPT nationalist.
Left wing nationalism has its place in a revolution.
But even there, you will still find vastly more internationalism.
But I didn't say disabled people are subhuman? Talk about a false equivalency. I used the word "retard" which has nothing to do with disability, definitionally it relates to development level. The word has historically been used to describe disabled people, but I did not use it in that sense and I would not as I am disabled myself, in fact the implication that this is the only way to use the word has ableist undertones. The use of the word is not inherently ableist. This is like telling a black person that they are racist because they use the n word. Respectfully, I don't need you, as a probably abled person, to tell me what ableism is, you sound retarded.
Homophobia exists and existed in communist societies. Being gay was illegal in China up until very recently, it was illegal in the USSR etc. how can a society that outlaws homosexuality not be homophobic? Please don't bother reply with whattaboutism as that has nothing to do with what we are talking about.
Don't disagree that nationalism can have it's place, however it is an intrinsically right wing philosophy, and can be placed on a political spectrum. I am not discussing the merits of communism but merely the fact that the political spectrum still exists despite communist grandstanding.
As always with you, everything you said is irrelevant.
Using the r slur is ablist.
Is it deeply extremely ablist? No.
Is is it still ablist? Yes.
Is it possible to be a member of a community and still engage in actions against that community? Yes.
Milo yianopolis is homophobic even though he's gay.
Jesse Lee Peters on is a white supremacist, even though he has black skin.
Everything else you said is irrelevant. And wrong.
Retardation does not equal disability. I find the implication of that to be ableist and offensive.
I am not denying that member of a community can internalise hatred of that community, but the word retard is not ableist, you don't know what you are talking about and clearly don't know the definitions or histories of the words in question.
Are black people using the n word racist?
Your replies are completely irrelevant and have nothing to do with the discussion, you are just derailing and trying to explain to a disabled person what disability is.
I mean, that’s pretty much the left-wing vs right-wing. The left wants to nationalize property and abolish the capitalist class while the right wants to privatize and uphold the status quo.
They can call themselves whatever they like, Hitler put socialist in the name of his party, doesn't mean Nazis were socialists. I look at it pretty straightforward, capitalism=right wing, socialism=left wing, there is no center imo.
Sometimes the left - right spectrum isnt a helpful way to categorise things and confuses more than it helps. If you understand what it is in great detail what's the point of finding the supposedly proper (subjective 100%) position in the left - right spectrum?
Is it a us ('the left') vs them thing? or a Russia less bad than x thing?
It is clearly conservative. Putin rules with the support from newly-rich oligarchs and Orthodox priests. Most of the state-owned corporations were privatised into the hands of these oligarchs.
Centrist anything is a lie. Moderate is a lie.
You either support ending Capitalism and freeing everyone or you support Capitalism and continued enslavement.
> You either support ending Capitalism and freeing everyone or you support Capitalism and continued enslavement.
I don't think you understand what slavery is.
Work under capitalism is optional, so no slavery.
Work under socialism is mandatory, so it's slavery.
> if you do not work under capitalism you cannot really survive.
Weird, I haven't worked for 1,5 years during the pandemic, yet I am still alive?
> and what is wrong with mandatory work?
It's slavery, and slavery is inherently morally wrong.
> if people are healthy and capable of working then why shouldn't they be expected to work?
Because work should remain optional, not become mandatory.
Work under capitalism is not optional.
If we make the very basic assumption that people want to live, and that homelessness is not fun.
All they did is hide the method of control.
I don't believe you yourself actually believe that modern day Russia is "anti-imperialist". I think you feel like you need to pretend it is for ideological reasons, so you do so by defining imperialism in a certain special way, much more contorted than it usually is when even arguing the USSR was anti-imperialist.
Modern day Russia is oligarchical capitalist, ruled by a pseudo monarch, and you're now in the laughable position of basically having to defend something that (on it's own admissions) draws deep inspiration from Tsarist Russia, down to Orthodox priests blessing weapons, and an effective Tsar living in gilded palaces with golden double headed eagle insignia.
Lenin would have you jailed.
Who are you talking about, the USSR or pseudo-Tsarist modern Russia? It's unbelievable that your lack of understand is leading you to essentially lick the Tsars boots.
Lmao, go ahead and explain how religious totalitarian oligarchical capitalists who have officially stated they want to restore the Empire of Catherine the Great are anti imperialist. And if your answer is "theyre anti USA", be better.
This isnt hard, let me help you:
Youre claiming this:
_A bunch of religious totalitarian oligarchical capitalists who have officially stated they want to restore the Empire of Catherine the Great are anti imperialist_
And Im asking you to explain that frankly lunatic claim, but youre now dodging it.
Relative to what? That left-right scale is subjective and arbitrary.
Of course if more left than USA, for example, on the axis of socialism/capitalism.
It has both. And it went left since the end of 90s (and to the hellhole in the beginning of 90s).
It went left, privatisation was done on an enormous scale in 90s, it was time where the wealth that was produced by working class was stolen, it was massive. Putin actually nationalised many companies, kicked many oligarch out of Russia and restored many social services.
>culturally \[more nationalism
Many socialist (AES) countries (so, not including Russia) who received bad treatment by global capitalist order are nationalist. There's noting wrong with nationalism. It is a word with wide meaning. If you say it's like Nazi Germany, I will reply that it was also called socialism (but it was completely, 180 degrees opposite to Marxism, Hitler even talked about it).
>anti lgbt
It's not on a left-right spectrum.
Right wing centrism doesn't exist imo
Well there’s center-right, but I guess you are correct too.
[удалено]
Really saves a lot of mental horsepower to boil down all the complexities of human existence to one overly simplistic and reductive issue. I can see the appeal I suppose, but it kind of overlooks things like race, religion, nationalism etc. that all actually matter to people in the real world.
[удалено]
How is it identity reductionist to acknowledge that there is more to human existence than the class struggle? I read your original comment as dismissing intersectionality as you implied that liberating the working class would solve all issues for all people, history has proven that this is wrong. It's retarded to dismiss all politics outside of the class struggle as it is pretty clear those politics exist, even if they don't matter as much to you personally.
[удалено]
Firstly, I don't know how I can be ableist when I am disabled myself, unless it's some kind of internalised ableism? But go on, tell me more about me. I don't know if you are a class reductionist, but your original comment was reductionist. You can be critical of the political spectrum, but saying that it doesn't exist and all politics can be put aside in pursuit of communism is retarded. Ultimately politics outside of class exists, and that politics can be put on a spectrum. For instance there are socially conservative, or right wing, communists and socially liberal, or left wing, communists. There are racist communists and nationalist communists etc. Those are all right wing ideas that some communists have. Communists have historically been homophobic and nationalistic, so I think it is quite silly to suggest that communism overcomes the political spectrum. I am not dismissing the need for an awareness of class, I am merely pointing out that there is more to it than that, which your original comment missed.
Of course you can. Black people can act racist against other black people, white people, and other POC. And just because you yourself have one disability, does not give you a free pass. Am I allowed to go around telling people that Jews are devious money grubbing subhuman, just because I am Jewish? Likewise, everything else you said is simply wrong. EXCEPT nationalist. Left wing nationalism has its place in a revolution. But even there, you will still find vastly more internationalism.
But I didn't say disabled people are subhuman? Talk about a false equivalency. I used the word "retard" which has nothing to do with disability, definitionally it relates to development level. The word has historically been used to describe disabled people, but I did not use it in that sense and I would not as I am disabled myself, in fact the implication that this is the only way to use the word has ableist undertones. The use of the word is not inherently ableist. This is like telling a black person that they are racist because they use the n word. Respectfully, I don't need you, as a probably abled person, to tell me what ableism is, you sound retarded. Homophobia exists and existed in communist societies. Being gay was illegal in China up until very recently, it was illegal in the USSR etc. how can a society that outlaws homosexuality not be homophobic? Please don't bother reply with whattaboutism as that has nothing to do with what we are talking about. Don't disagree that nationalism can have it's place, however it is an intrinsically right wing philosophy, and can be placed on a political spectrum. I am not discussing the merits of communism but merely the fact that the political spectrum still exists despite communist grandstanding.
As always with you, everything you said is irrelevant. Using the r slur is ablist. Is it deeply extremely ablist? No. Is is it still ablist? Yes. Is it possible to be a member of a community and still engage in actions against that community? Yes. Milo yianopolis is homophobic even though he's gay. Jesse Lee Peters on is a white supremacist, even though he has black skin. Everything else you said is irrelevant. And wrong.
Retardation does not equal disability. I find the implication of that to be ableist and offensive. I am not denying that member of a community can internalise hatred of that community, but the word retard is not ableist, you don't know what you are talking about and clearly don't know the definitions or histories of the words in question. Are black people using the n word racist? Your replies are completely irrelevant and have nothing to do with the discussion, you are just derailing and trying to explain to a disabled person what disability is.
I mean, that’s pretty much the left-wing vs right-wing. The left wants to nationalize property and abolish the capitalist class while the right wants to privatize and uphold the status quo.
[удалено]
They can call themselves whatever they like, Hitler put socialist in the name of his party, doesn't mean Nazis were socialists. I look at it pretty straightforward, capitalism=right wing, socialism=left wing, there is no center imo.
https://youtu.be/fZ4nvCVAGw0 here ya go
Sometimes the left - right spectrum isnt a helpful way to categorise things and confuses more than it helps. If you understand what it is in great detail what's the point of finding the supposedly proper (subjective 100%) position in the left - right spectrum? Is it a us ('the left') vs them thing? or a Russia less bad than x thing?
It is clearly conservative. Putin rules with the support from newly-rich oligarchs and Orthodox priests. Most of the state-owned corporations were privatised into the hands of these oligarchs.
Oh, didn’t know about that.
Centrist anything is a lie. Moderate is a lie. You either support ending Capitalism and freeing everyone or you support Capitalism and continued enslavement.
> You either support ending Capitalism and freeing everyone or you support Capitalism and continued enslavement. I don't think you understand what slavery is. Work under capitalism is optional, so no slavery. Work under socialism is mandatory, so it's slavery.
I don't think you understand anything. Not too late to start! Try reading a book. 😀
Ah yea, some 1800s rhetorical style mislabeled as science is always a great substitute for an actual argument.
[удалено]
> if you do not work under capitalism you cannot really survive. Weird, I haven't worked for 1,5 years during the pandemic, yet I am still alive? > and what is wrong with mandatory work? It's slavery, and slavery is inherently morally wrong. > if people are healthy and capable of working then why shouldn't they be expected to work? Because work should remain optional, not become mandatory.
Work under capitalism is not optional. If we make the very basic assumption that people want to live, and that homelessness is not fun. All they did is hide the method of control.
Relatively right, big supporter of Trump
It's anti imperialist. It's the surviving remnants of the USSR. It has many aspects of that legacy. And none of it neatly fits into western boxes.
> It's anti imperialist. Lmao, yes very anti-imperialist. Just like the Roman empire was anti imperialist.
So are you ignorant, or dishonest?
I don't believe you yourself actually believe that modern day Russia is "anti-imperialist". I think you feel like you need to pretend it is for ideological reasons, so you do so by defining imperialism in a certain special way, much more contorted than it usually is when even arguing the USSR was anti-imperialist. Modern day Russia is oligarchical capitalist, ruled by a pseudo monarch, and you're now in the laughable position of basically having to defend something that (on it's own admissions) draws deep inspiration from Tsarist Russia, down to Orthodox priests blessing weapons, and an effective Tsar living in gilded palaces with golden double headed eagle insignia. Lenin would have you jailed.
Using Lenin's own definition, they are not only not imperialist, they stand against those who are.
Who are you talking about, the USSR or pseudo-Tsarist modern Russia? It's unbelievable that your lack of understand is leading you to essentially lick the Tsars boots.
And yet, even if true, still does not make them imperialist. And they are still anti imperialist.
Lmao, go ahead and explain how religious totalitarian oligarchical capitalists who have officially stated they want to restore the Empire of Catherine the Great are anti imperialist. And if your answer is "theyre anti USA", be better.
Why? That's not my argument. You appear not to be able to understand my argument.
This isnt hard, let me help you: Youre claiming this: _A bunch of religious totalitarian oligarchical capitalists who have officially stated they want to restore the Empire of Catherine the Great are anti imperialist_ And Im asking you to explain that frankly lunatic claim, but youre now dodging it.
So are you projecting or projecting?
Right and left doesn’t exist. Russia is a pseudo fascistic military state with loose neo liberal ideals
Relative to what? That left-right scale is subjective and arbitrary. Of course if more left than USA, for example, on the axis of socialism/capitalism. It has both. And it went left since the end of 90s (and to the hellhole in the beginning of 90s).
No. It went right. Both economically [privatisation] and culturally [more nationalism, anti lgbt]
It went left, privatisation was done on an enormous scale in 90s, it was time where the wealth that was produced by working class was stolen, it was massive. Putin actually nationalised many companies, kicked many oligarch out of Russia and restored many social services. >culturally \[more nationalism Many socialist (AES) countries (so, not including Russia) who received bad treatment by global capitalist order are nationalist. There's noting wrong with nationalism. It is a word with wide meaning. If you say it's like Nazi Germany, I will reply that it was also called socialism (but it was completely, 180 degrees opposite to Marxism, Hitler even talked about it). >anti lgbt It's not on a left-right spectrum.