∞🏳️‍⚧️Edie [it/its, she/her, fae/faer, love/loves, null/void, des/pair, none/use name]

edit-2 21 days ago

Similarly: Saying we shouldn’t read theory, is akin to saying we shouldn’t learn science. You are going to have a very difficult time doing particle physics if you have no understanding of the world. Exactly as we say that without theory you are just going to be redoing the same stuff, so would every scientist have to rediscover the basics.

edit-2 21 days ago

One might say that Marx is like Newton, describing/discovering many things and setting a foundation for their field. Saying “we shouldn’t read Newton because his stuff is old” or that his ideas are wrong simply because they are old is ludicrous. Both of them probably had things they got wrong, sure, and newer theory corrects this, but they still set the foundations.

While one might not read Newton directly in school, so for some Marxist theory it is too (see Elementary Principles of Philosophy teaching DiaMat), but Marxs books that haven’t been superseded in this way should still be read.

22 days ago

That’s why most countries are what we call “mixed economies”, that mix elements of capitalism and socialism.

No. They are capitalist.

1 month ago

A victory for communism would be far more dangerous to the United States than a victory for fascism.

—Robert A. Taft

(Denna F. Flemming, The Cold War and Its Origins, citing: Foster Rhea Dulles, The Road to Teheran, 1944, p 232.)

edit-2 2 months ago

Yea…

Its really difficult when a communism means two things and both meanings are regularly used in the same context (e.g. a comment), and why the fact that there is at least a distinction between liberalism and capitalism is nice (even if some dont know what liberalism means)

2 months ago

If you “support” communism you are a Communist.

But if you “support” capitalism you aren’t a Capitalist.

Whoever came up with this shit needs to reevaluate some things.

edit-2 2 months ago

almost all of that was built on government subsidies, socialism

Socialism is when the government does stuff, the more it does the more socialist it is, and when it does a whole Lotta stuff, its COMMUNISM

2 months ago

Don’t trust it? Here’s the source code: https://git.encryptionin.space/hackerncoder/comlib

2 months ago

If you aren’t one of these, then what are you? I guess there still is reactionary, off to the right of the image.

2 months ago

Do you really need to read volumes of theory to grasp what is fundamentally a rather straightforward concept?

Yes! The three volumes on shitting are essential reads. (/s)

2 months ago

Political theory. Like this intro reading list

edit-2 3 months ago

Two spaces at the end of a line
Makes a new line

edit-2 3 months ago

So I checked it out… never directly states where the data is from (“PRC state media and data”, “party documents and data reportedly obtained from local public security bureaus in Xinjiang”, it continues to be this vague never specific throughout), most of the dates end in 2021/2022 (for the latter e.g. “the last date for which authorities have issued such reports”, so that doesn’t show it hasn’t ended in 2021)

The closest thing you have in there is

the continued elevated number of indictments in 2022 suggests that the campaign continues

Are there other, better, sources?

3 months ago

I think Lumelore is starting of at anti-communism, and working her way from there. It leads to some weird stuff like this.

3 months ago

It says that anyone could propose a candidate, and that the person elected in that specific election wasn’t part of the [Communist] Party, making it somewhat likely they weren’t a communist.

But a better question, is why is it important that they can vote for non-communists? What else should they vote for? Fascists? Liberals that wish to destroy the Soviet system and institute capitalism, thereby making the lives of the vast majority of people worse? Chapter XVII goes over this to some extent, but I of course do recommend reading the entire book.

3 months ago

No mention of being able to vote for non-communists

???

Anybody present had the right to propose a candidate, the one who was elected was not personally a member of the Party

edit-2 3 months ago

The people of the soviet union, at least as far as Pat Sloan experienced in ~1937, had the most limited choice: any person

I have, while working in the Soviet Union, participated in an election. I, too, had a right to vote, as I was a working member of the community, and nationality and citizenship is no bar to electoral rights. The procedure was extremely simple. A general meeting of all the workers in our organization was called by the trade union committee, candidates were discussed, and a vote was taken by show of hands. Anybody present had the right to propose a candidate, and the one who was elected was not personally a member of the Party. In considering the claims of the candidates their past activities were discussed, they themselves had to answer questions as to their qualifications, anybody could express an opinion, for or against them, and the basis of all the discussion was: What justification had the candidates to represent their comrades on the local Soviet?
As far as the elections in the villages were concerned, these took place at open village meetings, all peasants of voting age, other than those who employed labour, having the right to vote and to stand for election. As in the towns, any organization or individual could put forward candidates, anyone could ask the candidate questions, and anybody could support or oppose the candidature. It is usual for the Communist Party to put forward a candidate, trade unions and other organizations can also do so, and there is nothing to prevent the Party’s candidate from not being elected, if he has not sufficient prestige among the voters.

Pat Sloan, Soviet Democracy: Chapter XIII

3 months ago

deleted by creator

edit-2 3 months ago

The name actually came from British communists that supported the USSR sending tanks into Hungary in '56.

3 months ago

Horrendous take. Fuck off.