I've come to two realizations recently:
One
The sudden tankie willingness to believe that Trump cares about a cease-fire in Gaza, and got tough with the Israelis and then they capitulated which Biden could have done at any time, sheds some interesting light on how the tankies think. They accuse anyone who disagrees with them of shifting their realities around, such that anything Biden does is good, anything the State Department says is always true, even if it contradicts itself or basic common sense or reality. I always thought that this was just a lazy reality-free arguing tactic, but in retrospect, I should have realized that it's a tell about their own thought process. Just like it's a warning sign if someone constantly suspects their partner of cheating, or is constantly on an absurdly hypervigilant lookout for scams and people trying to cheat them out of money, this is a key revelation about the way Hexbear itself looks at reality.
Trump is a capable diplomat, if believing that lets them trash Biden. Trump cares about Palestinians, if believing that lets them trash Biden. The cart is firmly in its place in front, and everything else including the horse can follow along depending on what the cart dictates.
Two
Hexbear's censorship, and wild hostility to anyone who comes to "their" place and tries not to toe the party line, really does do a pretty effective job of distorting the view of reality and consensus that their users are able to experience.
Take a look at these and compare:
They're brainwashed and also fascists. They don't stand for communism at all and never had.
Communism is pretty much tied to authoritarianism
Okay, if you define "communism" as "whatever the fuck the USSR/CCP/DPRK/etc. is doing" then your statement is sound. However, most people around here (including myself) define the word to mean something like "a classless, stateless, moneyless society" and sometimes then regard the statement "The USSR/CCP/DPRK/etc. is communist" as an outright lie. They often assume that the person making the assumed-lie is ignorant, actively trying to infiltrate leftist spaces by pretending to be a leftist (the way tankies do), or are actively trying to smear leftist ideas.
I'd like to remind everyone that which words we choose to use to express our ideas are usually far less important than the ideas those words express. So long as we agree that the things the USSR/CCP/DPRK/etc. did/are doing are bad, acknowledge that capitalism has caused a great deal of strife, and seek to make the world kinder and more equitable, I think we should be able to agree and work together.
Can you name a country that is communist then?
I'm not trying to smear. However, I'm extremely skeptical of Communism
I'm not here to say whether communism can work nor to explore methods/history of implementing it. The scope of my comment was limited to bringing into focus the semantics being used. You don't need to be a communist to understand the extent to which capitalism has caused and exasperated the problems of the present.
Communism does not equal capitalism
I don't get what you are saying. There is lots of gray. In communism there will always be a little bit of capitalism and in capitalism there will always be a bit of Communism. (Please don't kill me Mr. CIA) Usually you don't call it by those words but the concepts apply. (I suppose it would be socialism but that's a charged word)
I mean, I think you and I agree. The foundational ideology of communism is sound. It’s just that the application is flawed because it relies on that “dictatorship of the proletariat” stage. Whenever during the transition that stateless, classless society the plan is to hand power to people in order to accomplish the stated goal, it’s always going to fail. Its where it always has failed and always will. Because that small group of suddenly very powerful people will not give up that power when the time comes. They will sabotage the progress because…well, powerful people don’t typically give up power willingly or peacefully.
that's like saying socialists are tied to national socialism....
when a power hungry group adopts a title that's incongruous with it's actions, like, DPRK, it's always in an attempt to distract from their actions and policies.
Communism has quite the track record of being authoritarian. I don't know of a single Democratic nation that is communist.
it's a cute title for an authoritarian state. even the soviet union would hardly be classed as communist in anything but label.
Then inform me, what country is properly communist? It seems fascism and communism are not that far apart. They both involve the government seizing control of assets. The USSR was communist even if it doesn't mean your definition.
Communism and Fascism are poles apart… like literally diametric opposites.
Authoritarianism can turn up on either side, although it’s worth noting that Fascism cries out for the “big strong leader” type ~~oppressor~~ saviour.
The Communist Manifesto suggests there have never been any real communist countries. Communism, it proposes, comes after capitalism - according to dialectic theory. Most/all countries that are/were called communist went there straight from agrarianism.
If you want to know how AES (actually existing socialism) countries view this then I suggest you ask one of the theory reading brothers and sisters around here to explain - I’m not really into politics and political theory.
In their mind it is. In theory, no.
In theory no but in practice yes. The problem with communism is that it doesn't provide incentives to drive industry. If something works ok then it will stay the same regardless if there is a better way. The other issue is that to be a part of communism society there needs to be forced conformity. You end up getting controlled by the state. In communism nations many people died from both starvation and because they failed to conform.