726
both pretty extreme
(lemmy.blahaj.zone)
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/23485321
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2025
726 points (100.0% liked)
Political Memes
7900 readers
1498 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
@FenrirIII
That's more like "center left".
At least some definition of "Far Left" would be more: "we're gonna get everyone's basic needs meet by exterminating entire social groups because they're impure". It's not the only one, but it's the one that "centrists" would say it's no different from the "far right".
What the hell are you talking about? "Exterminatidg entrire social groups because they're impure" sounds very right-wing to me.
Are you trying to peddle some weird horseshoe bullshit?
people will refer to landlords as a 'social group' rather than advocate for anything non-milquetoast its par for the course
Change "impure" for "bourgeoisie", "imperialistic", "exploitative", or some other arbitrary bs
That would also mean that poor people choose to stay poor. They did not choose to be born into a class, but they do choose their futures.
You're strawmanning again.
How comes?
They didn't say anything about thee poor chosing to be poor.
They literally said that while people are born into a class, they decide their future and whether to stay in that class. I literally quoted it word for word.
They were talking about the exploiter class. The thing about class war is that one class takes the freedom to chose away from the other class.
You're claiming that people chose to be bullied after someone says that being a bully is a choice.
Oh really? But that would mean that proletarian revolution is impossible since proletarians can't choose to conduct it, bc they have no freedom to choose. I wonder what Marx thinks about that.
How does that follow in any way?
Can exploited proletarians choose to start revolution and stop being exploited, or not? If yes, they have freedom of choice and being exploited is their choice, If not, then proletarian revolution is impossible.
Ydu write as if there wasn't a power imbalance between the classes.
Yeah, you're still talking no sense. What do you mean by "social group"?
Get your strawman out of here.
I didn't use the term "social group" anywhere. Come back when you're sober.
Ok, let me rephrase the question, then:
Why do you engage in a conversation that you weren't a part of, if you're going to ignore the context of the conversation? That conversation contained the following, two comments before you entered:
No reason to get rude.
You asking me what did I mean by social groups when I didn't mention social groups is "ignoring the context of the conversation". Just admit you were a lil bit drunk and took me for the wrong person.
I think it's fair to assume that you were the one who wrote "social groups".
Even if you didn't yourself say that term: You accepted the terminology, so I'll ask you: how are landlords a "social group" that the "far left" wants to "exterminate".
How about we skip this step and you just tell us your definition of "social groups" and it will turn out that people "far right" want to "exterminate" are social groups, but people "far left" want to "exterminate" aren't social groups (and aren't really fully fledged humans, if you ask me (dehumanizing you enemies is important)).
I'm actually more opposed to the term "exterminate". The far left would actually rather "expropriate" that certain "social group".
To "exterminate a social group" means genocide done by the exterminators. To expropriate the wealthy class usually means that the to be expropriated class shoots first.
But you centrists usually can't tell the difference between violence and expropriation.
Edit: I've been looking through your comments. "I never said 'social groups'! uwu" my ass!
Oh, but somehow they ended up exterminating that social group instead of expropriating. Given the experience of the 20th century.
Yep.
I'm not a centrist. I'm right-wing. I'm so far right, that I consider nazis to be far left.
I'm not here to defend bourgeois revolutions. Explain how e.g. Nestor Makhno or the CNT/FAI "exterminated" the bourgeoisie.
Yeah. I figured that you didn't have an internally consistent worldview.
Ah, so you're a communist with the real-communism-was-never-tried flavor. Ok then.
What about him? He was bourgeoisie himself, participating in bourgeoisie revolution. He's irrelevant to the question.
Where's the inconsistency?
Your ignorance amuses me.
Tell me you just did a quick google without telling me...
And the CNT/FAI?
In your worldview. You said yourself that you think nazis are left-wing.
Tell me you did a quick Google without telling me
Dunno wtf this is, but I bet another bunch of bourgeoisie
You said my worldview is internally inconsistent. Nazis being left wing contradicts some of my other beliefs? Or is it that my worldview contradicts your cringe communist worldview? Well, fuck your worldview then. You're wrong and I'm right.
Lol, afraid to admit that you have no idea who Nestor Makhno was?
I thought that they "exterminated" the bourgeoisie, get your story straight. Also: shouldn't you be in favour of exterminating the boprgeoisie, if you "despise democracy"?
I guess you've got me there: your worldview might be internally consistent. It just probably clashes with fundamental truths of reality. I've yet to meet someone who claims that the Nazis were "far left" where that's not the case.
Prove it. Make an argument.
@Prunebutt
China? Khmer Rouge in Cambodia?
I know the horseshoe theory is problematic, but it's fact that some nominally "left" groups in practice resemble the "far right"; today's China specially in practice resembles more Nazism than Communism.
I don't consider China to be very left. It's a capitalist country. The same goes for other state-capitalist projects.
While there are authoritarian leftists, I think it's wrong to act as if these where the only part of the so-called "far left". How many genocides were committed by anarchists?
There are more figures on the far left than anarchists. You can't just No true Scotsman Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot.
Did those people try to deconstruct existing power structures while in office? That makes them counter revolutionary. The state is counter revolutionary.
You can't abolish maters by using the master's tools.
That's just a No true Scotsman argument. Their (alleged) end goal was the creation of a classless, stateless communist society. They haven't achieved that, and they wouldn't have claimed to have achieved that. But they would've claimed that their crimes were a necessary step towards that goal. You can't just brush aside the people most associated with the "far left" label, regardless of whether or not you personally feel like they are "undeserving" of it.
I didn't think voters had access to "exterminate the rich" type representatives though. I can vote for neoliberal with a dash of mildly left (the Radical Left™)... or GOP which are actually far right.
Tax the rich, restructure police, equality at a snail's pace. That's the far left in reality for voters. Centrists really are bastards.
@mhague
The problem with the US political system is that it's so far skewed to the right that the moderate right Democrats are called "far left", and by hearing "far left" people will associate it with Stalin and Mao...