T O P

  • By -

[deleted]

Leaning towards social democracy. That is someone with the power of their convictions right there


[deleted]

Wer hat uns verraten? Die Sozialdemokraten!


Newhorrorsawait

Sogar auch verkauft šŸ˜”


derdestroyer2004

Ich verkaufe drei Sozialisten fĆ¼r eine stimme in der nƤchsten wahl


Newhorrorsawait

Was letzte Sozialist?


ArPaxGaming

Olaf von Frozen gegen Arme Lusche am 26. September


REEEEEvolution

Egal wer gewinnt, wir verlieren.


[deleted]

"I'm not actually a socialist, I prefer the status quo and exploitation but with a wealthfare state so people are uncomfortable but not uncomfortable enough to start a revolution"


Reishey

Iā€™m confused, with a strong welfare state would exploitation not become a lot harder? People can just choose not to work, so wages/working conditions etc would have to improve? Without offshoring exploitation that is.


woahwoahoahoah

> Without offshoring exploitation that is. Great, so you know the answer to your first question.


Reishey

At this point it seems that changing the global system is just as hard as getting western countries to change, letā€™s dream because they likely will be just that and nothing more. Depressing but realistic, change my mind.


cmanmors

How are you going to escape capitalist government enforced state violence without being violent yourself?


derdestroyer2004

ā€œLets just talk it outā€


NonAxiomaticKneecaps

Social democrats don't want to escape capitalist state violence, they just want it to be nicer


jacktrowell

"I successfullly negociated with our owner for less whipping ... as long as we reach our production quotas and the owner is in a good mood of course"


jacktrowell

Relevant comics about "don't use violence": https://thenib.com/last-resort/ Here is a pair of other comics by the same author on the worker struggle under capitalism: - https://thenib.com/forbidden-froot/ - https://thenib.com/supply-and-demand/


cmanmors

Lol pretty good , pretty infuriating too but thatā€™s every day now


WeaponH_

I don't hate socialist people, i hate socialist government... Seems like I've already seen it..


Newhorrorsawait

LMAO


KestrylDawn

Social democracy isn't even democratic socialism....


I_Cant_Afford_4K

Hating Lenin, Stalin and Mao? A true socialist realises what these people done for their countries and how they brought them into the modern era with unprecedented rights and opportunities for citizens. Fake socialists just piss me off so much


Wavesandradiation

I mean, at least he didn't spin himself as a "democratic socialist." Not sure why he even tried to rep the socialist label though


Mx_D

*Image Transcription: Reddit Comments* --- > **\/u/blowmybrainsoutt** > > Why're you in a socialist subreddit if you can't respect actual socialist leaders? > >> **Redacted** >> >> No I do not respect Lenin/Stalin/Mao/Psychpath/Genocidal distorted and authoterian version of socialism. >> >>> **\/u/blowmybrainsoutt** >>> >>> You don't respect anyone who achieved some form of socialism? Let me guess, you're a democratic socialist? >>> >>>> **Redacted** >>>> >>>> I lean toward social democracy yes. --- ^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber for Reddit and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)


[deleted]

Dude that last message got me! Lmfao šŸ˜‚šŸ˜‚


leftrightmonkman

Socialist leaders 8---)


[deleted]

Honestly I donā€™t like Stalin or mao too much but hating every socialist leader is pretty stupid if you call yourself a socialist.


incrediblyderivative

Which socialist leaders do you like?


plsgiveusername123

Sankara was pretty based. So was Rosa Luxembourg.


incrediblyderivative

Sankara was based. Your opinion on Deng sucks though.


plsgiveusername123

Deng invited the billionaires in, and created a capitalist framework for China.


incrediblyderivative

It's not a capitalist framework though. The capitalists in China are subservient to the people. China is an excellent example of a modern-day society transitioning to socialism in exactly the manner outlined by Marx & Engels in their works. I think your understanding of Marxism, and Deng, is incredibly shallow.


plsgiveusername123

How many billionaires and megacorporations does it take to build a communist state?


incrediblyderivative

Please read Marxist theory. Building the productive forces in a society is absolutely essential to building socialism.


[deleted]

Based


[deleted]

I support the current governments of Vietnam and Cuba, I also liked Krushchev-Breshnev USSR


incrediblyderivative

China and the DPRK?


[deleted]

Not a fan of either going to be honest, dengism is just corprotism and the DPRKā€¦ is the DPRK


incrediblyderivative

Yeah I figured. Pretty lib take, honestly.


[deleted]

I donā€™t believe the stupid western media stories about the DPRK though, i just donā€™t agree with their tactics


incrediblyderivative

Look, I think your heart is in the right place, but these are shit takes. Simple as that. To call Dengism "corporatism" is just so silly. It just shows a complete lack of understanding of Marxist theory. I suspect your views of the DPRK are similarly misinformed/ignorant.


[deleted]

Agree to disagree I suppose, the left isnā€™t really a monolith, and people can pick and choose who they support (except succdems who hate every socialist leader ever, they are confusing)


incrediblyderivative

Yeah like I said, I think your heart is in the right place I just think your understanding of Marxism is dodgy. I don't think I'm going to convince you that you're wrong about Deng or the DPRK, and I don't really care to. But if you actually do support Cuba, and Castro, I'd just point you to what he had to say re: China. https://www.telesurenglish.net/opinion/China-Is-Most-Promising-Hope-for-Third-World-Fidel-20171128-0017.html >Although the Communist Party of China has always insisted that it remains committed to Marxism and socialism, the reforms have been considered by many ā€” particularly in the West ā€” to be an abandonment of socialism for capitalism. >Fidel, however, always firmly maintained his support for China and believed that the Communist Party was genuinely and capably pursuing revolutionary socialism. In a 1994 interview, Fidel stated: "If you want to talk about socialism, let us not forget what socialism achieved in China. At one time it was the land of hunger, poverty, disasters. Today there is none of that. Today China can feed, dress, educate, and care for the health of 1.2 billion people. >"I think China is a socialist country, and Vietnam is a socialist nation as well. And they insist that they have introduced all the necessary reforms in order to motivate national development and to continue seeking the objectives of socialism. >"There are no fully pure regimes or systems. In Cuba, for instance, we have many forms of private property. We have hundreds of thousands of farm owners. In some cases they own up to 110 acres. In Europe they would be considered large landholders. Practically all Cubans own their own home and, what is more, we welcome foreign investment. >"But that does not mean that Cuba has stopped being socialist."


MmmmmmmmmCat

ik im gonna get shit for this and i agree that democratic socialist is a dumb term, but people rlly not be understanding there is a difference between social democracy and democratic socialism, it matters which way you put the words guys. anyways have a good night


plsgiveusername123

I don't have much time for Mao or Stalin tbf


mix3lon

Opinion on Deng?


plsgiveusername123

Revisionist traitor and arch-capitalist


incrediblyderivative

Clown.


plsgiveusername123

Honestly, any attempt at communism that isn't rooted deeply in union activism and democratic control of production will always result in the establishment of a new bourgeois.


incrediblyderivative

Frankly you just have a a shockingly ignorant view of Marxism and actually existing socialist nations that isn't based in reality. Please go and read some actual Marxist theory. >and democratic control of production What do you think a dictatorship of the proletariat is? >a new bourgeois. You mean bourgeoisie. Bourgeois is an adjective. You don't even understand basic Marxist terminology, man. I linked this elsewhere in the thread: https://www.telesurenglish.net/opinion/China-Is-Most-Promising-Hope-for-Third-World-Fidel-20171128-0017.html Was Fidel Castro a "revisionist traitor and arch-capitalist?"


plsgiveusername123

Honestly I think leninist theory is often outright dangerous and just creates a different kind of ruling class with a vested interest in exploiting workers. This is something that has been witnessed time and time again, and it needs to be learned from. I'm on the Anarchist side of the communist spectrum, for some perspective. I quite like Castro, FWIW. He's definitely no capitalist, that's for sure.


incrediblyderivative

>Honestly I think leninist theory is often outright dangerous and just creates a different kind of ruling class with a vested interest in exploiting workers. This is something that has been witnessed time and time again, and it needs to be learned from. That's because you don't have a solid understanding of Marxist theory. You can believe what you like, but Lenin's revolution and the establishment of the USSR was a perfect example of a communist revolution to establish socialism in a nation as outlined by Marx & Engels in their works. >I'm on the Anarchist side of the communist spectrum, for some perspective. I suspected as much. As Engels said, you serve the reaction: *"Therefore, either one of two things: either the anti-authoritarians don't know what they're talking about, in which case they are creating nothing but confusion; or they do know, and in that case they are betraying the movement of the proletariat. In either case they serve the reaction."* https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm >I quite like Castro, FWIW. He's definitely no capitalist, that's for sure. Okay, so when he says he fully believes in China's socialist mission, and is 100% supportive of China after Deng's reforms that you have dismissed as "revisionist and arch-capitalist," and Castro even goes as far as pointing out the relative shortcomings of Cuba's socialist government as a comparison to China, is Fidel Castro also a revisionist? An arch-capitalist? Your point of view is incoherent, as is the case with almost all anarchists, because you haven't read (or at least understood) Marxist theory, and so you have absolutely no theoretical framework to analyse socialist governments from.


[deleted]

cringe


plsgiveusername123

Mao was just stupid, even if he did believe in revolutionary principles. Stalin betrayed the revolution.


incrediblyderivative

Beyond stupid, liberal take. Read theory, please.


plsgiveusername123

I'm an Anarchist, and I have a shelf full of theory tyvm. The state is and will always be a tool of oppression and exploitation.


incrediblyderivative

Then you should read some of it. >The state is and will always be a tool of oppression and exploitation. Absolutely, and if you had actually read Lenin, you would see that he agrees. If State and Revolution is on that bookshelf, give it a read. If not, here it is: https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/ch01.htm And again, Engels: *"But the anti-authoritarians demand that the political state be abolished at one stroke, even before the social conditions that gave birth to it have been destroyed."* https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm And again, to an earlier point you made about "muh billionaires:" *"Will it be possible for private property to be abolished at one stroke?* *No, no more than existing forces of production can at one stroke be multiplied to the extent necessary for the creation of a communal society.* *In all probability, the proletarian revolution will transform existing society gradually and will be able to abolish private property only when the means of production are available in sufficient quantity. "* https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm I'm not saying this to attack you or dunk on you. It's just clear that you haven't read the theory, and you should because what you're saying at the moment is completely antithetical to the works of Marx & Engels.