700

Not sure how the girl's skin tone is relevant, but apart from that... (lemmy.ml)

submitted 2 years ago by adam_kadmon@lemmy.ml to c/memes@lemmy.ml

96 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Pieresqi@lemmy.world 48 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Ah yes, "communism". Op show me 1 country with communism. Dictatorship with 'communism' in their name don't count.

[-] Sami_Uso@lemmy.world 50 points 2 years ago

Wait are you telling me the Democratic Republic of North Korea is neither Democratic or a Republic?? Like they'd just lie?

[-] jcg@halubilo.social 9 points 2 years ago

You can't do that???

[-] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 14 points 2 years ago

I can name several countries that tried to do a communism, and wound up being what communists insist doesn't count.

[-] Rolder@reddthat.com 4 points 2 years ago

Such as?

[-] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 19 points 2 years ago

Such as the Russian revolution that modern communists have mixed praise for until a dictator emerged and so it doesn't count.

Or the Chinese revolution that modern communists have mixed praise for until a dictator emerged and so it doesn't count.

Or the Cuban revolution that be serious you know goddamn well what we're talking about. I wasn't being coy. People call these dictatorships communist because they're the only countries that were ever called communist, and - generally speaking - they became dictatorships after genuinely attempting to implement communism.

If you want to say it's like shitting on democratic republics because of the French revolution, hey great sure, that's an attempt gone terribly wrong. Revolutions are pluripotent and dictatorships can emerge from nearly anything. But advocates of secular democracy can point to examples that went right.

[-] Aux@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

[removed by mod]

[-] Murais@lemmy.one 10 points 2 years ago

Tell that to anarchocommunists.

I'm sure it will be news to them that they will want to hear.

[-] ReakDuck@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 years ago

I thought that dictatorship masked themself as Communism

[-] TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 years ago

Communism, especially Marxist-Leninism, seems to require some sort of benevolent dictator who is willing to work towards destroying their own power, which obviously never seems to happen. ML theories state the need for a Vanguard state, which is a dictatorship that is supposed to be there to simply enforce the rule of the working class until a time when it is no longer needed.

So the idea of dictatorship is built into the major form of communism that has been tried, basically. One of the main problems with this is that the steps a nation has to take before it gets to "true communism" in ML theory are ripe for abuse, and hard to get through without someone corrupt seizing power.

I think there are some good theories in Marx writings, it's just the methods for attempting to implement it definitely need to be reexamined because they don't work.

[-] Murais@lemmy.one 7 points 2 years ago

This is where I tend to disagree with Marx as well.

Capital is a fantastic book full of scathing and prophetic analyses of capitalism and its innate degradation of value and connection.

The Communist Manifesto is a book with some good ideas but some implementation that I find flawed. And that's not a knock on Marx-- critiquing problems is a significantly easier prospect than offering solutions.

But a lot of Marx's proposals for the implementation of Communism are rooted in authoritarianism, even if their end goal is the dissolution of the state and capital. Also, for an ideology versed in the formation and interdependence of worker communities, the Day of the Rope is kind of antithetical to establishing solidarity and mostly serves, I believe, as masturbatory schadenfreude.

But hey, I'm willing to fix some of the stuff that doesn't work instead of throwing more fuel into the machine that over-harvests people and our planet to the point of destruction.

I really like this nuanced take, btw. Thanks for posting it.

[-] bouh@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

The vanguard state is a mean to reach communism, it is not communism itself. That's a pretty big difference.

The difference is the same with the gouvernement révolutionnaire in France during the revolution, and you can make parallels with US revolution too. I'm pretty sure the US government is very different from what it was during its war against UK.