Why does Lemmy.ML admire authoritarian regimes ? - AOS for Lemmy.World - A generic Lemmy server for everyone to use.

159274

Why does Lemmy.ML admire authoritarian regimes ?

1d 15m ago by lemmy.zip/u/Valuy in asklemmy

Many people on lemmy.ml deeply respect and admire authoritarian governments and organizations.

Iran, China, North Korea, Soviet Union...

The West has many flaws. But our flaws are nothing compared to these guys.

Iran hangs homosexuals. Iran shot 30,000 people in less than than 2 weeks. The Soviet Union had to build a fucking Iron wall to prevent people from escaping. The Soviets lied about the Chernobyl nuclear explosion. China censors the internet. China wants to eliminate Islam. North Korea is a totalitarian hellscape. Watching anime is a crime.

Why is lemmy.ml so fascinated with authoritarians?

In my experience the attitude of many of the more prolific users there is something like "America and the West are doing evil things, so their enemies must be the good guys". Atrocities by Western-aligned states are readily accepted as facts, but those committed by countries on "their" side never happened and are merely Western propaganda. They'll cite North Korea's constitution to "prove" that it's a free and democratic country, but when you point out reports showing that the reality on the ground is quite different from what's written in the constitution, that's of course just Western propaganda and the people who fled the country are being paid to spread lies. That dismissive attitude makes it impossible to have a serious discussion with them.

That said, I now have a solid blocklist of their "worst offenders" and found that there are plenty of people with way more balanced opinions as well.

Hello, a rational .ml guy reporting in

My political opinions are:

what if we just like were able to eat and stuff like that, that'd be pretty dope

Actually after meaning to do it for a while and constantly forgetting about it I've decided to make myself go ahead and make a piefed account before I once again fall into the loop of "eh I'll make it later" and them promptly forgetting it 2 seconds later

I'll be a bit greedy and add in: Not kill each other over ideological differences and just do our own shit and be happy.

I realize this sounds like Utopia, but one can dream!

That's implying that this is actually controversial and ot supported by other ideologies.

But that's just a pet peave of mine.

Come over to our server 😘

It's honestly suspicious that you haven't been banned yet.

Nah, they fit right in at Lemmy.ml.

“America and the West are doing evil things, so their enemies must be the good guys”

It's illuminating. I used to be a hardcore anarco-capitalist/radical libertarian and that community had exactly the same thought pattern:

Vietnam/Middle East show how USA lies for domination
Snowden showed how CIA/NSA lies for control
Markets showed how the Fed lies for moneyed elites

... and so on, so that it becomes a given truth that everything the government says is a lie, no matter what.

So then COVID comes along and all the libertarians are "FAUCI LIES! COVID IS JUST FLU!"
A few months (and a lot of Russian influence ) later, these people are believing that mRNA vaccines cause heart disease, etc etc etc

ANYWAY, what's interesting to me is how these two diametrically opposed ideological communities -- Tankies and AnCaps -- have almost exactly the same group dynamics pathology.

Wait until you read what real anarchists think of AnCaps.

ofc you understand AnCaps feel the same way about AnComs; that they're fundamentally a contradiction

If one lacks compassion, then of course they won't understand how someone can choose to support their community even without the government making them do it.

it's because they want to feel special.

the root of so much of the people that get caught in these delusional thought pattern is simple massive insecurity. and by clinging to a delusion you can mask it with a feeling of superiority because you KNOW THE TRUTH.

same reason people get recruited into cults. the cultists specifically target insecure people they can emotionally exploit and isolate. they are not interested in secure people who are grounded in reality, because there is nothing for their manipulation tactics to work on.

extremist politics also always become quasi-religions, or merge with fundamentalist religious belief.

superiority because you KNOW THE TRUTH

Oh God yes, this this this!!

The Conspiracy folks all really get off on being Smarter Than You because the have Access to the Secret Knowledge. Once you have seen the evidence (eg "Fahrenheit 451") and started associating yourself with "like-minded people", then you too will become an Anointed One.

Culty culty cult

It is very seductive for people who feel their intellect and insights are not being seen.

Relevant Contrapoints: https://youtu.be/teqkK0RLNkI

Edit: lol at the .mls downvoting this

I can't help but laugh at the absurdity of "anarcho-capitalists". Glad it's past tense for you.

Horseshoe theory strikes again

Atrocities by Western-aligned states are readily accepted as facts, but those committed by countries on "their" side never happened and are merely Western propaganda

You'll never find more staunch and nuanced criticism of socialist mistakes than that which takes place within socialism. It's through communists that I learned and loathed things such as the deportation of ethnic Koreans in THE USSR, the actual scope and mechanisms and functioning of the GULAG system, or the anti-landlord revolts in China.

I highly encourage you to actually go with an open mind, and have an honest conversation with a comrade like @Cowbee@lemmy.ml or @AnarchoBolshevik@lemmygrad.ml about any of those topics. Not an argument, just a discussion to listen to what they have to say. You may be surprised.

Of course those people exist. Heck, I consider myself a socialist and the socialist party in my country has no issues whatsoever criticizing countries like China or North Korea. But those kind of nuanced opinions aren't really the ones you'll find over and over again on the frontpage of ml.

Of the users you named, I only know Cowbee, as Lemmygrad is defederated anyway. He's definitely very knowledgable about communist theory and he's capable of having an actual discussion, yes. Not even close to one of the worst users over there. But from my discussions with him, he's quite obsessed with theory over practice and is perfectly willing to defend the IMO indefensible regime of North Korea.

I don't put theory over practice, they are both crucial. I am perfectly willing to defend the DPRK from Yeonmi Park-style nonsense as it's the most propagandized against country in the world. Is it perfect? No, no country is, but it also isn't literally hell on Earth either, it's a real socialist state that does a lot with how little they have due to sanctions, similar to Cuba (and both Cuba and the DPRK have historically been on great terms, which is a good litmus test to begin with).

the socialist party in my country has no issues whatsoever criticizing countries like China or North Korea

But they exclusively criticise said countries, no praise for their achievements. Assuming you're from the EU/US/Canada/Australia, your "socialist" party offers no alternative to Capitalism, just milquetoast reforming at best and continuation of austerity policy (as for the past 20 years) at worst. If they don't want off capitalism, they can hardly call themselves socialists.

But they exclusively criticise said countries, no praise for their achievements.

No, that's entirely untrue. They (Die Linke in Germany FYI) have frequently praised China's economic system and social progress, while still criticizing its authoritarianism and aggressive foreign policy.

Die Linke? Die "Israel's right to exist is non-negotiable" Linke? If "socialists" are Zionist they're not socialists.

Also, Germany saying that a country's foreign policy is aggressive is laughable. At least Chinese men below 45 can leave their country without notifying their army lmfao

So instead of staying on-topic (the claim that Western socialist parties never praise China's achievements), you're somehow trying to deflect the topic to Israel when disproven. Then instead of judging China's foreign policy on its own merit, you go all "what about" and with false, outdated information as well. And that's supposed to be the "honest conversation" you were talking about? Yeah no. It's exactly what I described in my initial post. My blocklist grows by 1 today.

Keep supporting "socialist" pro-Israel parties, you keep proving us how much German "leftists" care about non-germans. Bunch of fucking Nazis supporting genocide.

Criticise China, support Israel, what a fucking great socialist party!

And you still think that communism is the way? If so you're just spreading their propaganda.

It did volunteerly kill millions, and still is in its remnants of russia for example. If you need a nuanced person to "open your eyes" for the atrocities made in URSS/USSR why not talk with a nuanced nazi, you might learn that they too did bad things. /s

Those discussions are such shit shows, stop trying to reanimate the old horrors of past, we actually have new interesting theories that might actually work without killing everyone.

It did volunteerly kill millions

Yeah, killing Nazis and landlords is necessary for progress sometimes, not something to criticise. Those are the vast majority of the people communism killed on purpose.

If you need a nuanced person to "open your eyes" for the atrocities made in URSS/USSR why not talk with a nuanced nazi

Because you're committing a fallacy by comparing the two. Socialism has achieved, in practice, lowest inequality where it has been applied, universal healthcare, universal education, guaranteed employment, guaranteed housing, guaranteed state pensions for retirees, redistribution of land from landlords and nobility to peasants... In my homeland of Spain we had fascism, and it literally fought against all those things, we still have plenty of people in their 70s and 80s who cannot even read as a consequence. Communism saved Europe from Fascism, they're literally the antithesis.

stop trying to reanimate the old horrors of past

Stop trying to maintain capitalism by fighting against the only system in history which has proven it can destroy it and improve our lives.

The old: if you're not with me you Must be pro USA/Capitalism.

Is that all you got?

Also the millions killed I referred to were the direct orders from stalin to kill millions of their own people (holodomor included).

But that's just propaganda from "the west" right?

direct orders from stalin to kill millions of their own people (holodomor included).

You're literally making that up, though. Executions in the USSR aren't numbered in the millions during the great terror, and holodomor was an unintentional famine, nobody was "killed", it's the result of unintentional side effects of the first successful mass collectivization in human history. The Soviet leaders knew the process would be chaotic if they embarked in rapid collectivization as they did, but it was a necessary choice enforced by the threat of external invasion and the need for rapid industrialization. It was a hard measure but it worked, and thanks to the rapid collectivization and industrialization, the soviets could create the industry that would 15 years later enable them to defeat Nazism, saving many more tens of millions than were lost in Holodomor.

See? We can do nuanced analysis of the policy. However, if you make ahistorical claims, such as "Stalin ordering the holodomor" (which is untenable under modern historiography), you'll get called out for it.

For clarity, clashes between the kulaks and Red Army absolutely happened during collectivization in the 1930s, and many kulaks were killed as they took up arms to defend their bourgeois lifestyle. I'm not shedding tears for them just like I won't shed tears for Nazis, landlords, etc, but these clashes did happen.

I did specify the great terror, for the most part the destiny of Kulaks in the early 1930s was sentenced by peasant trials, not by the Red Army. If I'm not wrong, most Kulaks who died during collectivization weren't executed, they died during deportation.

Ah, gotcha. Definitely agree that the majority of the kulaks were dealt with by the peasantry that were under their thumb, just wanted to point out that frustrations between kulaks and the Red Army did happen.

Stalin never gave direct orders to kill millions of soviet citizens, nor indirect. Even the Great Purge never exceeded ~700,000 sentencings to death, and was stopped because these sentencings far exceeded what Stalin and Molotov had set at a maximum number, which was around 70,000. The famine in the 1930s was not intentionally caused even if you believe it to have been amplified by mismanagement, either.

Once discovered that a famine was occuring, the soviets did what they could to prevent and alleviate it once it had started. The idea of an intentional famine is simply fringe among contemporary historians, same with claims of white genocide in South Africa. For example, serious bourgeois academic sources tend to say it was a failure of planning, rather than intentional and genocide. For instance, Mark Tauger wrote:

[data] indicate that the famine was real, the result of a failure of economic policy, of the 'revolution from above,' rather than of a 'successful' nationality policy against Ukrainians or other ethnic groups.

Tauger believes it was a failure of economic policy, not an intentional attack on ethnic Ukrainians. The 1930s famine was a combination of drought, flooding, and mismanagement. Further, the Kulaks, wealthy bourgeois farmers, magnified matters by killing their own crops in the midst of a famine rather than letting the Red Army collectivize them. The Politburo was also kept in the dark about how bad the famine was getting:

From: Archive of the President of the Russian Federation. Fond 3, Record Series 40, File 80, Page 58.

Excerpt from the protocol number of the meeting of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist party (Bolsheviks) “Regarding Measures to Prevent Failure to Sow in Ukraine, March 16th, 1932.

The Political Bureau believes that shortage of seed grain in Ukraine is many times worse than what was described in comrade Kosior’s telegram; therefore, the Political Bureau recommends the Central Committee of the Communist party of Ukraine to take all measures within its reach to prevent the threat of failing to sow [field crops] in Ukraine.

Signed: Secretary of the Central Committee – J. STALIN

Letter to Joseph Stalin from Stanislaw Kosior, 1st secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine regarding the course and the perspectives of the sowing campaign in Ukraine, April 26th, 1932.

There are also isolated cases of starvation, and even whole villages [starving]; however, this is only the result of bungling on the local level, deviations [from the party line], especially in regard of kolkhozes. All rumours about “famine” in Ukraine must be unconditionally rejected. The crucial help that was provided for Ukraine will give us the opportunity to eradicate all such outbreaks [of starvation].

Letter from Joseph Stalin to Stanislaw Kosior, 1st secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine, April 26th, 1932.

Comrade Kosior!

You must read attached summaries. Judging by this information, it looks like the Soviet authority has ceased to exist in some areas of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. Can this be true? Is the situation in villages in Ukraine this bad? Where are the operatives of the OGPU [Joint Main Political Directorate], what are they doing?

Could you verify this information and inform the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist party about taken measures.

Sincerely, J. Stalin

Muggeridge and Jones reported on the famine. Völkischer Beobachter reported on it as intentional, and then spread the story around further. Why would the soviets try to starve their own people? It was because of the soviets and collectivization of agriculture that famine was ended, and that's why outside of wartime the 1930s famine was the final famine in those regions, with life expectancies doubling.

Overall, trying to hold on to red scare historiography does absolutely nothing to help the cause of socialism. The soviet archives have provided a wealth of knowledge largely affirming the communist narrative, and debunking liberal and fascist narratives about existing socialism. If you consider yourself a leftist of any sort, then you'll inevitably run into people using the red scare against you too, so perpetuating their mythos just shoots your own movement in the foot.

Wow, one minute and downvoted.

Guess that's all you have left.

And you still think that communism is the way? If so you’re just spreading their propaganda.

Socialism in real life has achieved the absolute highest rates of improvement for the working classes in terms of life metrics, immense social equality, and has presented a path forward in an era of dying capitalist imperialism. You're spreading propaganda too, knowingly or not, given that propaganda is merely agitating for your own beliefs.

It did volunteerly kill millions, and still is in its remnants of russia for example.

The "millions intentionally killed" by socialism consist of landlords, capitalists, fascists, the Nazis, etc. Socialism has never killed people willy-nilly, but has run into conflict with the old ruling classes time and time again, as socialism is the establishment of working class power over the former ruling classes.

If you need a nuanced person to “open your eyes” for the atrocities made in URSS/USSR why not talk with a nuanced nazi, you might learn that they too did bad things. /s

This implies the communists and Nazis are equal evils, a form of Holocaust trivialization called Double Genocide Theory. Communists, upon gaining politucal power, did and do their best to uplift the lives of working people. The Nazis on the other hand built industrialized mass murder, and attempted to colonize Europe the way Europe had colonized the world.

Those discussions are such shit shows, stop trying to reanimate the old horrors of past, we actually have new interesting theories that might actually work without killing everyone.

What are these theories? Any establishment of socialism will necessarily put you into conflict with the ruling classes of capitalism. Socialism historically has not been a "horror" for the working classes, and as such has been popularly supported by them. A theory being "interesting" doesn't make it practical, nor is socialism "killing everyone."

Above all, here, you cling to vagueposting. You erase class analysis, weeping for killed Nazis, and when it comes time to present a solution, you just say "other things might work" without elaborating. It's sterile and negative "left" criticism that serves nobody.

Lol ok genocide lover, if it's the URSS doing it, it's okay.

Blocked.

I despise genocide, what the hell is that pivot? The USSR never committed genocide, this is backed up by modern historical analysis. Are you calling killing Nazis "genocide?"

The Holodomor was a genocide

No, it was not. Once discovered that a famine was occuring, the soviets did what they could to prevent and alleviate it once it had started. The idea of an intentional famine is simply fringe among contemporary historians, same with claims of white genocide in South Africa. For example, serious bourgeois academic sources tend to say it was a failure of planning, rather than intentional and genocide. For instance, Mark Tauger wrote:

[data] indicate that the famine was real, the result of a failure of economic policy, of the 'revolution from above,' rather than of a 'successful' nationality policy against Ukrainians or other ethnic groups.

From: Archive of the President of the Russian Federation. Fond 3, Record Series 40, File 80, Page 58.

The Political Bureau believes that shortage of seed grain in Ukraine is many times worse than what was described in comrade Kosior’s telegram; therefore, the Political Bureau recommends the Central Committee of the Communist party of Ukraine to take all measures within its reach to prevent the threat of failing to sow [field crops] in Ukraine.

Signed: Secretary of the Central Committee – J. STALIN

There are also isolated cases of starvation, and even whole villages [starving]; however, this is only the result of bungling on the local level, deviations [from the party line], especially in regard of kolkhozes. All rumours about “famine” in Ukraine must be unconditionally rejected. The crucial help that was provided for Ukraine will give us the opportunity to eradicate all such outbreaks [of starvation].

Letter from Joseph Stalin to Stanislaw Kosior, 1st secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine, April 26th, 1932.

Comrade Kosior!

You must read attached summaries. Judging by this information, it looks like the Soviet authority has ceased to exist in some areas of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. Can this be true? Is the situation in villages in Ukraine this bad? Where are the operatives of the OGPU [Joint Main Political Directorate], what are they doing?

Could you verify this information and inform the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist party about taken measures.

Sincerely, J. Stalin

Nice copy paste of r/communism talking points you got there

If I have spoken about something before, then there's no advantage to rewriting the same information, is there? Do you dispute any of the evidence I brought? Do you have any of your own? It seems like you're using the fact that this topic has been discussed before as proof of not needing to look at existing evidence, which is blatantly wrong. The fact that communists tend to agree on something is not evidence of it being "false," no matter how much you frame agreement as "talking points."

Either way, I am curious how long it will take you to become a Marxist, given you seem more curious about theory than most anti-communists.

Also some people have complete and utter, naive faith in the written law and intent.

Care to PM this list of offenders, please? I'm also trying to sanitize my feed.

I blocked the entire lemmy.ml. After a few months of paying attention I found that there were no thoughtful or interesting posts or comments from any user there, only glorification of authoritarians.

i blocked them because .ml users constantly harass me, telling me what a brainwashed idiot I am for not thinking China is a utopia.

That is a good summary.

I don’t block them. I just keep pressing them for an explanation of their personal philosophy. Not regurgitated, preconstructed points, actual personal philosophy. It usually goes “accusation of fascism/zionist”, “bad faith/strawman/red herring/I don’t have to explain it to you”, “you’re a nihilistic anarchist”, non-sequitur, list of actions they’ve taken irl but can’t/won’t break anonymity to prove (anybody can claim they’ve done anything in an anonymous forum), and finally inform me they’re blocking me. I mean, that’s great, block me online. I still exist in the real world and you’re going to have to face me someday. Unless of course you empower your own authoritarian regime that will keep my constant demands for your individual opinion and “nihilistic anarchist” viewpoints blocked from society. Which is what I think they want, zero challenge from any source or counter philosophy.

i feel like thier accusation of zionism, is just the same thing as being anti-semetic in a way too.

I see this refrain a ton but have not had the same experience and I fairly regularly get into arguments with them. I'm perma banned from some communities on those instances cause of the PTBs they are. The worst I received was my first ever "kys" message from one member's alt(but them and their main were handled in pretty short order). But that was one message of harassment, out of the probably hundred or so people I've pissed off so far.

To be very clear, I don't go into their communities looking for fights. But I have 2 big principles I'm not willing to waiver even a tiny bit on. Those being Hasan absolutely shocked his dog, and Harris would in fact have been better than trump.

They just hate me because I have a basic grasp of economics and I don't think businesses and landlords are inherently evil.

Who is Hasan? Some dumbass tiktoker?

don’t think businesses and landlords are inherently evil.

Literally every capitalist theory, from Adam Smith's to Mill, from Hayek to Henry George:

Landlords are inherently evil.

Streamer they worship like maga worship trump.

Why did he shock his dog? Not that there is any reasonable justification, I just want context.

She got up from the bed that was in frame, to walk out of frame.

right, so an abusive narcissistic POS person they wish they could be.

make sense he'd abuse his dog rather than train it. god forbid you like... have empathy or compassion for another living thing and use that to bond with it... lol

i blocked the triads, hexbear, lemmygrad, ml. lemmygrad is less of a problem since i dont see thier posts as much anyways, usually its mostly ml or hexbear, and they have taken over some other instances too.

like israel/palestine being a terrorist is a totally fine resistance against 100 years of apartheid and colonialism

but they don't support terrorism

authoritarian mass murderers are the logical class struggle government of resistance against the war mongering, CIA backed coup colonials

but they don't like stalin some of the time

having cake and eating it - no accounting for the intellectually diverse/broken

Well I can't speak for others, but I'm on lemmy.ml because the instance says it's "A community of privacy and FOSS enthusiasts, run by Lemmy's developers". And in my experience that pretty much checks out, for all the talk I see from others about how it's a den of authoritarianism and whatnot the actual amount of that I see on the actual instance is minimal. Yeah moderation sucks sometimes, but so it does on most every other instance though. Their approach to defederation seems to be avoiding it, and I don't have to see any Nazi stuff or shit like that, so I'm good for now. Pick your poison.

The West has many flaws. But our flaws are nothing compared to these guys.

Well if you look a bit closer at the history of the cold war you will find that "the West", mostly in the form of the CIA, destroyed a lot of nascent communist or even just social democratic governments worldwide through covert means, and sometimes even militarily. In the face of such a threat you are basically forced to become even more authoritarian, if you want your communist government to survive that is. So "the West" instituted a process of selection through political (and military) pressure if you will. Hence why there are no surviving liberal communist states left to discuss.

Anyway, I don't think there is much of consensus here on lemmy.ml whether these countries are good or bad (or even something more nuanced). What I think often happens is that someone voices "critical support", as in they say something like "Iran has a right to self-defence" although they don't agree with everything else Iran does, and someone from another instance comes along to read it and confirmation-biases that into "typical lemmy.ml user, fully supports that theocratic regime".

I mean just look at the straw man you build in your OP, supposedly I'm supporting the Islamic regime in Iran, and the anti-Islamic regime in China!? Bit of a stretch there mate...

You haven't been paying attention then. Dessalines, the head admin, regularly instance bans people for speaking about the genocide in China in .ml communities.

I mean I have seen that accusation thrown around a lot, but from what I remember it was a few cases a long time (years?) back. But yeah to be honest I haven't really been paying attention, so if you have evidence to the contrary feel free to let me know. The goals and rules of the server as stated seem fine to me, and I haven't seen anything that really deviated too far from that.

Anyway, like I said I may not agree with every moderation decision, but I probably wouldn't on other instances either. Didn't your instance just defederate the Germans for their heavy-handed moderation of anything remotely antisemitic? I mean I would get it with any other instance I guess, but your users didn't get why the Germans would be a bit iffy with this stuff?

This is part of why ml users get a bad rap. Both of your core statements/assumptions here are false, to a degree that it would be easier to assume bad faith and move on with my life than to type this response up.

So Dessalines's continued and ongoing banning of any negative talk about China or Russia:

I'm not a particular fan of !meanwhileongrad@sh.itjust.works, but what I see when I look at that community for the past month is mostly a running log of questionable at best bans that lemmy.ml admins, including Dessalines, have handed out.

I picked out some that stand out to me, but please peruse that community and your own instance's mod logs at your leisure. You should be able to filter the mod logs themselves by action, and I believe by the mod or admin that took the action.

https://infosec.pub/post/45516756
https://infosec.pub/post/45465185
https://infosec.pub/post/45126301
https://lemmy.cafe/post/33294487
https://lemmy.cafe/post/32620981

That poster clearly has a bone to pick, and that community does especially, but there is a concerning pattern there as well.

Didn't your instance just defederate the Germans for their heavy-handed moderation of anything remotely antisemitic?

That is... quite an interpretation of what happened. Anti-semitism is not tolerated on db0. You see it, go report it and tell us what happens. Anti-zionism is not anti-semitism.

From the db0 admin team's mouths, their take on what happened: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/63525728

Funny enough, they don't look kindly on Meanwhile on Grad/MoG. And I downvoted that post, voting that I did not want to defed from feddit.

You seem way too knowledgeable about lemmy sever bans and federations for being "just some casual ml dude".

Defending the TERF dessalines too ... Bravo

I had my first account on .ml because "hey this is the official instance run by the devs, that sounds like a solid starting point" but after seeing how strong the anti-west, pro-authoritarian nonsense is on there (especially leading up to the 2024 election, the apathetic "both sides" people were out in full force), I decided to move to a different instance.

I'm not denying that there are such people around, but I don't really think they are in the majority. Most of the specific things you mention I saw coming just as much if not more from other servers.

Certainly the most vocal

A table with an unopposed Nazi is a nazi table.

Same goes for stalinists.

The Nazi bar example comes to mind.

.ml Is made by and ran by Marxist-Leninists.

Marxist-Leninism being an entirely made up bullshit ideology from Stalin to paint any and all actions he committed as "communism" or "progress to communism".

Its also the adopted "ideology" of every self proclaimed communist state such as China, North Korea, Vietnam, etc. Any contradictions of the ideology between how these states practice it is brushed off by M-L fans as "Marxist-Leninism with <INSERT COUNTRY> characteristics".

To a M-L fan, none of the core principles of communism actually matter, and are never actually pursued. They don't care about::

Proletariat ownership of the means of production
Elimination of the system of Capital
Proletariat rule of society

And both hilariously and bafflingly, they will point to what benefits a respective M-L country has as "proof" that that country is following or pursuing communism, even if that country blatantly shows it refuses to adopt those big three above. They also blame the West, specifically the USA for those faux communist countries failing to achieve communism.

I.E. M-L fans fall for bread and circuses very easy as long as they're told its a communist bread and circus

So TL;DR, .ml's are Marxist-Leninists who don't actually care about socialism or communism and are voluntary NPC propaganda machines for authoritarian regimes that abandoned a pursuit of communism long ago.

my favorite part was when you pointed out corruption and capitalism so rife in every country that is supposedly communist, they say it's 'necessary for the transition'... right.

some of them are still under the delusion that Russia still a ML state...

necessary for the transition

Eerily similar to the MAGAs who are happy to suffer the "temporary" pain of tariffs today, since it's going to "Make Us Great" in the ill-defined future

There's a reason M-Ls are called "tankies" and "red fascists".

They just simply are. They are fascists in Che Guevara t-shirts.

Or the Brexiteers convinced that the sunlit uplands are just around the corner of the "short term pain" of abandoning the UK's closest and largest trade partner.

Fucking morons, happily led around by their prejudices.

Whenever I come across a post like OP describes, and I check the instance, it's ml (with a bit of hex in the mix). It seems fair to me to ask this question.

But then I guess the discrepancy is: "90% of a specific kind of users are on this instance", which is absolutely not the same as "90% of this instances users are of this kind"

That handful includes the admins though.

Wait... Do you think the Iron curtain was a literal iron wall?

It was mostly tin and zinc, that's why it was not very efficient.

A note on my biases: I am a leftist. I am generally "anti-authoritarian", but I have read some theory and listened to enough commentary to understand why folks are pro-authoritarian (and why Authoritarian is a label only applied to enemies of american hegemony). I am on .ml - which I don't think matters, anyone's account can be anywhere: fediverse, baby.

Lemmy.ml is a website hosted on a server. Why do its mods and some users hold those beliefs?

Many of those people are communists. Opposition to american hegemony is the main reason, or critically supporting other actually existing socialist states. They may think China isn't perfect, but they're attempting socialism and are standing up to the US and have the best shot at success. In the case of North Korea, they may think that attempt at socialism is genuine and much of the bad stuff they do is falsified or exaggerated for propaganda or just be giving critical support to a country that has been destroyed by the US via war and sanctions.

Or, in the case of Russia & Iran, they have stood in firm opposition to American hegemony, military bullying, etc. even though they are not Communist/Socialist. So, even though they do a lot of bad things and don't have socialist values, they are a lesser evil than America. For Russia, them pushing back against NATO is seen as a direct war against the advance of global capital, even though Russia is capitalistic and fascistic (much like a weaker version of the US).

In all of these cases, when a person supports these governments, they are not really saying "Country good". They are saying "I critically support Country in opposition to American hegemony and global Capital". There's a lot of memes and jokes, and some people just really support Russia and NK uncritically - humanity is a rich tapestry - but that's the gist of it.

Understanding this POV requires an understanding of history (re: socialism & US interventionalism), critical theory (re: media), and an ability to be generous to edgelords online who are not always the best messengers of this (valid) viewpoint. It is socialist realpolitik, not idealpolitik - a view where current events can be interpreted in a way that their outcomes may foment the material conditions favorable to socialism.

Now a question for you: How can a democratic & socialist country exist in a world where American hegemony exists and America is hell-bent on maintaining the global capitalistic order?

Given the US' massive power and history of destroying socialist movements with tremendous violence (military and economic), can a country maintain its status as a real democracy without the US:

covertly funding extremist groups to coup the democratic government (Iran),
committing direct election tampering to elect a pro-US party (Venezuela, unsuccessfully),
launching proxy wars to murder their people (Vietnam, North Korea),
destroying the country's economy with sanctions and completely disconnecting them from global trade - causing mass starvation and poverty (North Korea, Cuba)

The answer is that without the aid of a country capable of standing up to the US, they do not. These countries that still have socialist goverments have to hold on to power in a world where US hegemony is a fact.

Thank you for sharing and clearly being one of the people able to hold two ideas in their head at the same time, even when the ideas don't jive.

opposition to American hegemony and global Capital

Everybody who feels this way should be celebrating Donald Trump. He's almost finished a job in 1 year that many thought would take generations.

I think they don't completely diverge. I am sympatetic to this viewpoint, I just don't fully endorse it. I think as leftists we should be generous to other leftists and their ideas.

Some do feel that way. Others feel that he isn't a strong departure from where we were already heading. I think accelerationism is bad and we should never put ourselves in a position where fascism wins. Fascism needs to always be playing defense until it is totally defeated. Especially when it supports american hegemony, genocide, global poverty, etc.

Allow me to play Devils advocate. Can you give me an example of a country getting corporate money put of government without fascism?

The answer is that without a country capable of standing up to the US, they do not. These countries that still have socialist goverments have to hold on to power in a world where US hegemony is a fact.

Maybe a naive question but is there no way to have a country that stands strong against the US and its interference without being repressive/authoritarian against your own people? What's the point of being a socialist dictator for many years/decades if you're not allowing the people to gain collective control of the land/resources/means of production/etc. for their own benefit?

Socialist countries are generally more liberating for their working classes than oppressive, hence high public support, but necessarily curb absolute freedoms such as those of capitalists.

What's the point of being a socialist dictator for many years/decades if you're not allowing the people to gain collective control of the land/resources/means of production/etc. for their own benefit?

The point is you're making that up. Example: USSR.

The USSR reduced inequality to the lowest levels in history, redistributed the land to the peasants from the nobility and the landowners, guaranteed healthcare for everyone for free, free education to the highest level, guaranteed employment and abolished unemployment, guaranteed housing (at an average cost of 3% of monthly income), high quality public transit at affordable prices, heavily subsidized basic foodstuffs, and arguably most importantly, LITERALLY DESTROYED NAZISM saving tens of millions of lives in the process.

Did the system have mistakes? Of course it did, and you won't find richer criticism than within communist circles, because people actually read about the topic instead of getting our information from the CIA. But despite its flaws, it was still the most liberating and anti-imperialist project in human history, it uplifted hundreds of millions from literal destitute poverty under tsarist autocracy and these people gave themselves all of this progress, importantly, without exploiting the global south.

How can you hate in 2026 the main system that has shown itself capable of facing and destroying fascism?

I think the trouble is that "freedom of speech", "freedom of expression", etc. can be and are weaponized by colonial/hegemonic forces.

But, that said, that's why I am not 100% supportive of this view. Possibly naïvely on my end, I think those sorts of freedoms are important not only for individuals but also as a check on state power. That said, I see how manipulative the US state department can be - and for that matter how manipulative foreign govts have been to the US - especially in recent election cycles... so I think it is a double edged sword.

That's part of the reason I am also not a full blown anarchist/libertarian socialist. I can see the value in centralized state power when it comes to defending the state and people

"As a leftist" lol yeah good one that.

Oh, the old Whatabout the USA (/west).

Nah, historical communism is fascist (so URSS, China, NK. Russia is just a dictatorship nowadays).

Socialism and fascism are entitely different, both in theory and historically. In socialist countries, the working classes are in power and public ownership is the principal aspect of the economy, while fascism is the violent assertion of power in capitalist countries to prevent the working classes from taking power.

The problem is that "critical support" effectively boils down to affirmative defense for being a hypocrite, and the entire framework has literally nothing to do with any particular economic system or theory of statecraft. It's literally just being mad about the cold war in a very weird way which insulates them from self reflection. It's the exact baggage which keeps leftist ideas marginalized in most of the world.

It's no accident that .ml is banned in China. Even the world's most ostensibly successful socialist state understands that this tankie extremism is not helpful.

Define authoritarian in a way that excludes the US and Europe but includes any country you listed.

The mistake you're making is thinking that criticising other authoritarian regimes means supporting the one you live in.

It's not a zero sum game.

It is a valid point, though. Some people don't even realize they're in it. Like frogs in a pot of water, they've been boiled and are unaware.

I think a lot of Americans are under the assumption that post-Trump we just go back to freedom^tm. And I hope that's the case, but I'm skeptical.

I keep hearing equally unrealistic things that hinge on magical one-off situations. "What if he has a stroke?" or "The Dems will win and it will all change." It won't. They're not going to self-regulate any more than they did in the past.

In order to get close to freedom we'd at bare minimum have to go back to before Reagan.

OP's post literally says "our flaws are nothing compared to these guys", it's not the commenter above who brought the west up.

Also, that's not what "zero sum game" means, you're maybe thinking false dichotomy?

No, the mistake I'm making is pretending any person using the word 'authoritarian' has thought for two seconds about the word or what it means. Hence why I'm trying to encourage those to think beyond the propaganda and instead actually dive into the philosophy it's trying to obscure.

Authoritarianism, also known as 'any two or more humans living together,' is a meaningless buzzword invented in the 1940s to try to differentiate American and Fascist societies to get Americans on board with fighting their ideological clones across the Atlantic.

It has no static definition that meaningfully separates any society from any other society.

"Authoritarian regimes are actually just regimes, actually!"

What a stupid take to protect the fascists lol.

Still not seeing any meaningful difference posted besides your tautological reasoning. All government is inherently authoritarian. That is how government inherently works and is defined. It can't not be.

Saying some governments are magically different because they are isn't anything logical. It's repeating 1940s era propaganda made exclusively to make Americans feel like they weren't so bad.

Oh, "everyone's bad so I can side with who I want". What a thought.

No, quite the opposite. I would encourage you to learn how to read one day.

Authortiarianism is a made up concept to separate the American public, who during the 1940s very much wanted to side with Nazi Germany and did not want to enter the war, and the 'Axis of Evil;' so that the American Military Industrial complex, against the wishes of its people and despite having the exact same ideology as the average fascist, could enter the war and make one of the largest transfers of wealth from poor to rich in world history happen.

It has no actual definition that excludes any government. Meaning it's a meaningless distinction when you cut through the propaganda Nothing an 'authoritarian government' has ever been accused of doing is exclusive to them; and by a prima facie reading of the term gives you the difference between lower case a anarchism and actual society -- i.e. nothing useful when discussing the merits of ways to run a society, just the fact a society exists.

Cuba is a democracy. China is a democracy. There's plenty of propaganda that says otherwise because they do not do their government in English and Americans are the least linguistically capable peoples in the history of the world so it's difficult for you people to check anything. Because learning spanish is just too difficult. There's plenty of differences in how those democracies function compared to 'liberal western democracy' or US democracy. None of them are more 'authoritarian' than the others.

Cuba is a democracy.

So black is white and white is black.

Blocked.

No democracy. Single leader with cult following. Vanguard partyism.

The US and Europe aren't democracies, while many of the listed countries are democracies.

Lol

The USSR had steady and consistent economic growth, and provided free, high quality education and healthcare, full employment, cheap or free housing, and fantastic infrastructure and city planning that still lasts to this day despite capitalism neglecting it. This rapid development resulted in dramatic democratization of society, reduced disparity, doubling of life expectancy, tripling of functional literacy rates to 99.9%, and much more. Living in the 1930s famine would not have been good, but it was the last major famine outside of wartime because the soviets ended famine in their countries.

Literacy rates, societal guarantees in the 1936 constitution, reports on the healthcare system over time, and more are good sources for these claims.

The USSR brought dramatic democratization to society. First-hand accounts from Statesian journalist Anna Louise Strong in her book This Soviet World describe soviet elections and factory councils in action. Statesian Pat Sloan even wrote Soviet Democracy to describe in detail the system the soviets had built for curious Statesians to read about.

The Kim family does have outsized influence, but the DPRK is not a hereditary monarchy. For example, the position of President, held by Kim Il-Sung, was abolished and split into multiple positions upon his death. This is why he is remembered as the “Eternal President.” As such, both Kim Jong-Il and Kim Jong-Un have held different positions. Both have held high positions, for example Kim Jong-Il had the title of General Secretary of the Worker’s Party of Korea, a position held by Kim Jong-Un presently. However, this is not the whole story.

The DPRK has a much more distributed level of power, and the Kim family is both widely supported due to its influence, and yet is not the undisputed top-dog, so to speak. What’s more, the Kim family is so venerated precisely because the legacy of Kim Il-Sung and Kim Jong-Il is lived memory, imagine if Lenin had survived and raised his children as successors. It would be no wonder that the soviets would have elected his children, but it would not be a monarchy either.

Finally, class. Class is not a level of material wealth, but a relation to production and distribution. The DPRK is overwhelmingly publicly owned and planned, administration is not a distinct class in and of itself but a subset of broader classes, same with intellectuals. What determines class is based on that key aspect, the Kim family does not own capital but instead recieves wages from the state. Kim Jong-Un is largely used as a symbol, one that is democratically elected and directly trained by his father for the position.

This is why it’s important to actually study the real systems at play, rather than coast on pre-formed opinions drilled into us about the DPRK from western media. The Black Panther Party maintained good relations with the DPRK, visiting it and teaching Juche to Americans.

From Professor Roland Boer's Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance:

The DPRK’s electoral democracy relates primarily to the people’s assemblies, along with local state organs, assemblies, and committees. Every eligible citizen may stand for election, so much so that independent candidates are regularly elected to the people’s assemblies and may even be elected to be the speaker or chair. The history of the DPRK has many such examples. I think here of Ryu Mi Yong (1921–2016), who moved from south to north in 1986 so as to take up her role as chair of the Chondoist Chongu Party (The Party of the Young Friends of the Heavenly Way, formed in 1946). She was elected to the Supreme People’s Assembly and became a member of the Standing Committee (then called the Presidium). Other examples include Gang Ryang Uk, a Presbyterian minister who was a leader of the Korean Christian Federation (a Protestant organisation) and served as vice president of the DPRK from 1972 until his death in 1982, as well as Kim Chang Jun, who was an ordained Methodist minister and became vice-chair of the Supreme People’s Assembly (Ryu 2006, 673). Both Gang and Kim were buried at the Patriots’ Cemetery.

How do elections to all of the various bodies of governance work? Elections are universal and use secret ballots, and are—notably—direct. To my knowledge, the DPRK is the only socialist country that has implemented direct elections at all levels. Neither the Soviet Union (in its time) nor China have embraced a complete system of direct elections, preferring—and here I speak of China—to have direct elections at the lower levels of the people’s congresses, and indirect elections to the higher levels. As for candidates, it may initially seem as though the DPRK follows the Soviet Union’s approach in having a single candidate for each elected position. This is indeed the case for the final process of voting, but there is also a distinct difference: candidates are selected through a robust process in the Democratic Front for the Reunification of the Fatherland. As mentioned earlier, the struggle against Japanese imperialism and liberation of the whole peninsula drew together many organisations, and it is these that came to form the later Democratic Front. The Front was formed on 25 July, 1949 (Kim Il Sung 1949), and today includes the three political parties, and a range of mass organisations from the unions, youth, women, children, agricultural workers, journalism, literature and arts, and Koreans in Japan (Chongryon). Notably, it also includes representation from the Korean Christian Federation (Protestant), Korean Catholic Federation, and the Korean Buddhist Federation. All of these mass organisations make up the Democratic Front, and it is this organisation that proposes candidates. In many respects, this is where the multi-candidate dimension of elections comes to the fore. Here candidates are nominated for consideration from all of the mass organisations represented. Their suitability and merit for the potential nomination is debated and discussed at many mass meetings, and only then is the final candidate nominated for elections to the SPA. Now we can see why candidates from the Chondoist movement, as well as from the Christian churches, have been and can be elected to the SPA and indeed the local assemblies.

To sum up the electoral process, we may see it in terms of a dialectical both-and: multi-candidate elections take place in the Democratic Front, which engages in extensive consideration of suitable candidates; single candidate elections take place for the people’s assemblies. It goes without saying that in a non-antagonistic system of class and group interaction, the criterion for election is merit and political suitability

As for the bodies of governance, there is a similar continuity and discontinuity compared with other socialist countries. Unlike the Soviet Union, there is a unicameral Supreme People’s Assembly, which is the highest authority in terms of laws, regulations, the constitution, and all leadership roles. The SPA is also responsible for the national economic plan, the country’s budget, and foreign policy directions (Han 2016, 47–48). At the same time, the Democratic Front for the Reunification of the Fatherland has an analogous function to a second organ of governance. This is a uniquely Korean approach to the question of a second organ of governance. While not an organ of governance as such, it plays a direct role in electoral democracy (see above), as well as the all-important manifestation of consultative democracy (see below). A further reason for this unique role of the Democratic Front may be adduced: while the Soviet Union and China see the second body or organ as representative of all minority nationalities and relevant groups, the absence of minority nationalities in a much smaller Korea means that such a form of representation is not needed.

The form of democracy and the mode of production in China ensures that there is a connection between the people and the state. Policies like the mass line are in place to ensure this direct connection remains. This is why over 90% of the Chinese population supports the government, and why they have such strong perceptions around democracy:

The Chinese political system is based on whole-process people’s democracy, a form of consultative democracy. The local government is directly elected, and then these governments elect people to higher rungs, meaning any candidate at the top level must have worked their way up from the bottom and directly proved themselves. Combining this consultative, ground-up democracy with top-down economic planning is the key to China’s success.

I highly recommend Roland Boer’s Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance. Socialist democracy has been imperfect, but has gone through a number of changes and adaptations over the years as we’ve learned more from testing theory to practice. Boer goes over the history behind socialist democracy in this textbook.

Lol like I'll read your kremlin propaganda.

Blocked.

None of this is "Kremlin propaganda," unless you count the soviet constitution as "Kremlin propaganda." It seems more that you can't actually dispute historical fact, so it's easier to preserve your worldview by shutting fact out of your view.

Vanguard partyism

Might as well just define it as, "Has socialist in the name" at that point.

I live in Spain. We have a literal monarch and royal family.

In the previous decade, a leftist party called Podemos appeared, and started to poll very high. Because this is unacceptable in Europe, the state came up with a solution:

A far-right wing of the police started to fabricate false evidence of funding of Podemos by Iran and Venezuela (history rhymes huh?), leaked it to capitalist media, and the media, ALL media, ran stories for YEARS about Podemos and Venezuela, about how they wanted to turn Spain into a Bolivarian republic and create hyperinflation... They destroyed a party from the state + media apparatus through an illegal lawfare psyop, and literally nobody has gone to jail for this.

Tell me again in how much of a democracy I live, where far-right parties are free to promote hate and leftist parties are literally destroyed by the state and media apparatus.

So you failed given every European country and the US also has that. (as much as China or Cuba at least.)

our flaws are nothing

Completely true if you don't consider Palestinians as equals. Or Vietnamese. Or Koreans. Or Black people. Or Ukrainians. Or women. Or the entire continent of Africa. Or the entire continent of South America. Or the entire continent of Asia.

Literally unbelievable you'd be saying this during genocide in Palestine and western invasion of Iran.

They do it for the same reasons you vehemently defend Israel and their genocide of the Palestinians.

Whataboutism

Eh that's relevant to the discussion since OPs argument is that they're worse.

My arguing point is that at least the US has a free enough press to keep track of most of their bullshit.

The US never did. The American media has been lying to people for over a century and people have been pointing that out just as long. Now the media is so horrifically corrupt that everyone is starting to notice it, not just minorities or queer people.

people have been pointing that out just as long

exactly

just because people can give criticism does not mean the system actually accepts criticism or even that it does not retaliate against such criticism. yes there are instances where criticism has led to genuine change (easy example is "The Jungle"), but for every instance of successful criticism i argue there are hundres, thousands, even millions of instances where said criticism has led to the harassment and discrimination; tenfold if the person was a minority in any capacity. by and large american media, industry, government, and society has suppressed any and all forms of criticism or even nonhegemonic thought until its existence has been so normalized amongst cishet white peoplr that they finally let it exist in a heavily moderated and monetized manner. this can be seen time and time again with hayes codes, mccarthyism, the civil rights movement, the suffrage movement, queer acceptance, trans acceptance, the war on drugs, 9/11 and the wars in the middle east. we are actively seeing it right now; you cannot look at the NYT, Time magazone, the WSP, CNN, or any major American media institution and tell me that they are actually free press. At best they are controlled opposition. this is not a conspiracy theory, these are documented facts¹. This has only gotten worse as more tech CEOs have bought more and more news and media companies. anyone who actually reports on important, topical information in a way that is contradictory to the Americam hegemonic system of thought has been target, oppressed, and even sanctioned². Mainstream media has enjoyed a degree of freedom allowed by the understanding that maintaining the visage of a free press was important, the current high profile cases as of late³ are realistically the exception correcting itself.

America is not free, has never been free, and will never be free until the system is radically and fundamentally changed. The ideals expressed in the Bill of Rights and the Constitution are noble, but the implementation of those beliefs were created by entitled white men who encoded racism, misogyny, bigotry, and hatred into the DNA of the country. At one point there may have been an opportunity to change the direction of America to actually align with the values it professed, but much like a cancer that has metastasized to every part of the body any effective treatment would be lethal; America cannot both exist and actually improve. From the moment this country was built on stolen land we have placed ourselves on fhe wrong side of hidtory, and what has become evident now has always been evident to black, brown, queer, and disabled people. It is not a few apples that are rotten; the barrel itself has rotted.

^{1. https://futureofmedia.hsites.harvard.edu/us-media-index}

^{2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_government_attacks_on_journalists_in_the_United_States}

^{3. https://www.forbes.com/sites/janicegassam/2026/01/31/journalists-are-being-arrested-fired-and-silenced-what-this-means-for-the-future-of-the-profession/}

The post literally says "our flaws are nothing compared", can you read?

Idk, I personally have never met Ism but I heard they were a pretty cool cat

Just block all .ml instances and move to something not lemmy based. Piefed is good. Plus blocking an entire domain fork thing, whatever you call these, is as easy as one click.

This is the way.

If you don't like ml, just block them and leave lemmy.

Why exactly is leaving Lemmy necessary? I blocked the .ml instances, but I'm content with Lemmy for the rest

Because Lemmy itself is developed by the same folks who run .ml instance. Luckily there is piefed and mbin, which are compatible.

Piefed is a 1 to 1 replacement with access to the same content.

The lead lemmy developer has some u n usual political ideologies which are incompatible with my own.

The lead lemmy developer has some u n usual political ideologies which are incompatible with my own

Ooh, interesting. Do you also leave buildings whenever someone plays Michael Jackson?

What a silly thing to say.

Firstly, it's classic, textbook whataboutery.

Secondly, I'm struggling to remember the last time I would have been anywhere that would have played Michael Jackson.

Finally, you don't seem to understand the basic concepts of approval, support, and patronage. The existence of alternatives is critical

I may not like my government, but I can't just flip to another one so I'll vote accordingly but pretty much go about my life
I don't particularly like a lot of mozilla's decisions in the last several years, but chrome & friends is worse. All I can do is use a soft fork. Still using a soft fork but at least not supporting firefox directly.
I don't align well with desalines, and given the ready availability of alternatives, I can switch away without issue.

Oh, well. Nice to meet you, I guess. I hope you have a good day

Just because we block your instance, doesn't mean we cannot interact with each other in communities on other instances!

Oh this is actually eye-opening. Thanks for explaining it. Had no idea.

It still feels sad and frustrating, but it feels a little less sad and a little less frustrating

And umm yeah nice to meet you

The Soviet Union had to build a fucking Iron wall to prevent people from escaping

holy fuck lmao

Well yeah, but then it rusted after 40 years and people could get back through.

? I mean it's a true statement...

you really think the Soviet Union made a literal wall out of iron all along its border to keep people inside? you think they built a really big metal wall all along their ~60,000km land borders? 3 times as long as the Great Wall of China?

are you perhaps confusing this with the berlin wall? or do you think the phrase "the Iron Curtain" was meant very very literally?

they played too much RA2.

Obviously the guy isn’t a native speaker

For what it's worth, when I read the OP my brain went to the Berlin wall, not the iron curtain. They said "iron wall," not "Berlin wall" or "iron curtain" so I think there will be a mix of folks interpreting it each way.

Yeah, the vocab term was wrong but I didn’t see the whole statement as being that wrong.

I don't have an answer to your primary question, however...

I'm not at all in support of the Iranian regime, but be careful with that 30,000 number. It appears to be propaganda and falsified evidence created to help instill support for the ongoing war. There is also evidence Mossad incited the protests and created a false flag within Iran.

Do your own searching. Or don't. But I'd take that 30k number with a grain of salt.

Do your own searching. Or don't. But I'd take that 30k number with a grain of salt.

they wont, and, they wont.

easier to have a clear enemy directed to you by the state and people that look similar to you than to recognise the depravity and violence in your own situation.

Exactly why I said "or don't." There's a narrative some people accept doesn't allow for much else.

Sorry, you got it wrong sweety, the actual figure is 30.000 gorillion deaths.

99.99% of users here do not love the regime in Iran, people oppose the war on Iran which goal is to create a failed state that would result millions of death.

Poople who love russia/china believe in the fairy tale of the real world being about good versus evil. Sometimes is about good vs good , sometime bad vs bad and sometime good vs bad

But you're not on ".ML", which is what OP is asking about.

The iron curtain was not a literal wall. The Berlin Wall was brick and whatever came to hand mostly.

They’re entitled to their opinion. It is wrong, but they are entitled to it. I’ve blocked that instance.

So long. Idk if we met so I’m not sure if I can say it was nice to meet you. But in case we did meet or in case you can read this, nice to meet you ✌️

Doesn't answer the question, and makes up something they thought the other person said. 🙄

To see where we’re all standing, I agree that my comment doesn’t answer the question.

Here’s my answer: I do not identify myself with the characterization of .ML as mindlessly supporting States that are not democratic. Instead, I (a member of .ml) fundamentally believe in the creation of human capabilities for humans to be free to choose how to live their life.

Some of the ways we build capabilities in humans are well understood: clean water, access to preventive medicine, access to education, access to networks like cosmopolitan cities or the internet.

I don’t assume the world is linear and teleological. Therefore, I don’t assume human development has to happen a certain, pre-specified, linear way. Instead, I assume the world is complex. Therefore, we need to constantly probe the world and ask “How do we get more capability-bolstering and less capability-undermining?”

If you want to label me, I think complexity science-aware and human development proponent fits.

As to making up what another person said, I’m not really following. Could you specify what you mean? The other person said they blocked my instance, and I played with that implication. I guess I missed something, but I can’t really see it.

I'm going to give you an honest and in no way meant to be demeaning answer, because you helped start that by giving me the same even though I rightly didn't deserve it because my first comment to you was in fact demeaning.

That being said, where did op say they blocked your instance?

It's alright.

I think I see where the confusion started.

I was referring to @CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de's comment (where they say "I’ve blocked that instance.") and you were referring to OP (who hasn't said they blocked .ml).

Does that sound right?

Yes, but the comment of yours that I'm responding to is a top level one meaning you were replying to op directly.

Short answer: the Kremlin.

Long answer: Kremlin paid propaganda leaking everywhere.

The Kremlin isn't why communists exist, communists exist and are growing in number due to the ever-clear fact that capitalism is failing globally.

You know there are more options that regulation free capitalism and communism?

Kinda? That's like saying there are many types of feudalism. Feudalism, capitalism, and socialism all describe currently or historically existing modes of production and distribution, but each society itself has its own characteristics based on level of development, the environment, etc. Communism is a post-socialist, global society, so we won't bother with discussing it at present. Within socialism itself, there are clear differenced between how it works in China, vs. how it works in Cuba.

What's common to capitalism is that it's unsustainable over the very long term, and its contradictions become more apparent and fragile the more centralized it becomes, and it necessarily is always working towards this centralization. Socialism solves the problems with capitalism, and is a marked step forward onto the next mode of production and distribution. This is true in general, but each case in particular will have its own unique characteristics to be considered

Back in the day on Reddit it was all about Putin riding a horse and wrestling.

because they believe to make society better you must punish and control the people through fear.

And they fantasize about being the people who get to do this. Because they 'know' better than everyone else how they should live and you need to be 'educated' like they are if you are to be a member of this better society.

Authoritarians are always the same no matter what holy book they wave around. Ultimately, all they care about is their own power. Now, our dear friends from .ml certainly don't have any power, but they like to fantasize about it.

people like internet echo chambers because it makes them feel big.

Authoritarians are always the same no matter what holy book they wave around

... but you'll notice, they always have a holy book to worship.

Even the ones that call themselves 'Atheist'. Those are the worst. Because instead of purporting to speak on behalf of the fluffy undefinable divine, they simply replace it with themselves. Hence the miraculous double rainbows, new star in the sky, and season changing instantly from winter to spring on the day Kim Jong Il was born.

Even the ones that call themselves ‘Atheist’. Those are the worst

No, you are the worst. The gall of choosing between religious authoritarians vs non-religious authoritarians and picking based on you're innate hatred of atheism is stunning.

Every authoritarian system makes the head of it into god-king. It was so with the pope, Stalin, every emperor that ever walked the Earth. And you literally do not know anything about history if you claim that atheist are the worst.

By "holy book" I also mean titles like "Das Kapital", "Mein Kampf" or "The Art of the Deal".

Are you really putting one of the most cited economic texts of all time next to the ravings of two genocidal fascists?

yes exactly what I was thinking as well

Idk man. I don’t believe in any of that I’m just chillin.

yeah I see more posts about what lemmy.ml folks are like than experience such myself. Im a bit instance blind though as I also just hang and just block folks if they are too annoying. I don't need to get upset and sing from the rafters how bad they or their instance is. Ok I do bitch about the guy where I had to block like over a dozen alts but he was like pretty annoying.

It might be because this place is so small. A single idiot screaming loudly will take up the whole room.

First, it's important to understand that your question is a leading question. It assumes many premises are true facts and the people you are asking about do not agree with those premises. Until you have an approach that allows for you and your conversational partner to explore the disagreement on the facts of the matter, you will not only always be confused about this question but you will also never make any progress.

Let's just take your position that the people you are talking about admire authoritarian governments and couple that with your statement that "the West has many flaws. But our flaws are nothing compared to these guys."

The USA, for the last few decades, has imprisoned more of its people than the USSR ever did at the height of the GULAG system, including during WW2 when they housed POWs. But that's just imprisonment. The USA's parole system, which includes constant surveillance, submission to authority, garnishment of wages, and bureaucratic cruelty that often sends people back to prison, is twice as large as the USA's prison population.

Think about that in terms of authority. In the last 2 years the USA lost its place as the number one prison system by per capita incarceration rate. It lost that spot to El Salvador, with Cuba taking second and the US a close third. Prior to this, the USA held the top spot for over 30 years. And that's only counting the incarceration. The parole system is twice as large as any other country's prison system. No one has a parole system anywhere close to the USA.

So when you combine the most authoritarian institution possible - the criminal justice system - the USA has been far and away the largest authoritarian system in the world for half a century. China doesn't even come close. The USSR came close on the incarceration rate, but nowhere near the parole system numbers.

But that's not the only thing to look at with respect to prison systems.

The USA also has one of the highest recidivism rates in the world. That means that US prison and parole system are not rehabilitating people nor are they changing the social conditions that lead to crime. People just get trapped in the prison system. And since the US is near the absolute top, and China and many other nations are near the bottom, what that means is that in the USA more people are in prison for longer and then surveilled for longer and then end up back in prison than any of the nations you think of as authoritarian.

But that's ALSO not the only way to think about the prison system.

In the USA prison system, over 80% of prisoners are charged to be there, between $100 and $400 per day. That charge is accrued as debt to the state. No other country has a system like this. When prisoners get out, they leave with a massive debt burden. Many parolees are required to find work and report to their parole officer so that the courts can garnish their wages for years, keeping these people in abject poverty - purely through the use of authority. Again, you won't find anything like this in China or Cuba. In the USSR every single prisoner accrued minimum wage for all the hours they worked and when they left prison they were paid out for all the work they did. In the USA, prisoners are slave laborers that produce over $12B in profits for states and corporations through their labor alone. Bill and Hilary Clinton, when Bill was governor of Arkansas, had black house slaves that managed the Governor's Mansion because that's how Arkansas uses its prison slaves.

We could go on about the prison system if you want. But the point is that when you say the West isn't authoritarian like these other countries, you're already operating on assumptions that the people you are speaking about don't agree with. We don't agree that the West's problems are nothing like the problems of the countries you listed. We think the West's problems are actually significantly worse than the problems of the countries you listed. The prison/parole system of the USA is one example of why.

But before anything else, the real point here is that if you want to understand the position, you're going to have to open up the way you discuss these things and welcome and invite discourse on your assumptions. Until there is a shared understanding, it will be difficult to answer your question.

I feel like you replaced OP's specific concerns about authoritarian governments with your own. I think it's fair to say OP is viewing the west through rose-colored glasses, but I do think pivoting from executing homosexuals to the prison industrial complex (which is 100% fair to criticize) is not a fair equivocation.

You push back on this statement: "the West has many flaws. But our flaws are nothing compared to these guys," but you are assuming OP doesn't consider the flaws of our prison system. They may well have and still concluded, "these things are worse." And to a large extent I agree with them.

If that were the case, however, we would be talking about which authoritian regimes we support and why, and not why do those other people support authoritarian regimes as such. OP's question is framed as a dichotomy between those authoritarian regimes over there and our problematic democracies over here. That's a false dichotomy, as you're pointing out.

There are other problems in the body of the post as well, such as repeating the ridiculous number of 30k protestors killed in Iran. It wasn't in 2 weeks, mind you, that was reported all over Western media as the death toll in 2 days. That number is absurd. Israel hasn't posted numbers like that and they have people living in a full on ghetto and they are using the full force of their military against them including air strikes on densely populated refugee encampment. There is absolutely no way ANY country is killing 30k protestors with small arms fire in 2 days. And to include it in the comment as though it's not only real but the people who support Iran support it even though it killed 30k people is a leading question that the supporters of Iran would not accept on par with a lawyer asking a defendant if they had a ham sandwich on the night they murdered the victim.

Let's take the point about hanging homosexuals. In the last 40 years, the Iranian state has killed about 4k - 5k people in the LGBTQ+ community. Most of those happened in the years after the revolution. In the most recent years, the number has been less than one per year on average. There are also vigilante killings of LGBTQ+ people, numbering in the hundreds.

In that same time period in the USA, over 40,000 LGBTQ+ people were murdered by vigilantes.

So in Iran, the state does persecute homosexuals more so than the state does in the US. But on the whole, it's actually been far more dangerous to be homosexual in the US than to be in Iran and homosexual rights have only been recently recognized in the USA, with vigilante killings only recently being recognized as a hate crime.

So again, we have the situation of "their barbarous backwards society, our glorious human rights with occasional failures of conscience". The math isn't mathing. Both examples kill homosexuals, brutally, in large numbers. But then we take into account that Iran has been under a US siege for 40 years and doing everything it can to keep control of the situation, while the US has all of the prosperity and freedom of operations it could ever need, and we see that of course pathologies emerge under siege conditions. "You people" are likely OK with saying that the Japanese Internment under FDR was just a momentary blip due to the inordinate pressures of WW2 but are incapable of acknowledging what 40 years of siege might do to a country in these terms?

And again, these are only a few of the phenomena we can discuss to illuminate the position of those that support Iran, DPRK, China, Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, and even Russia (wrt the war specifically). There's also the number of people the West kills annually through siege warfare (800k, mostly children and elderly). There's also the number of countries completely destroyed by each camp. There's also the number of bombs dropped by China against anyone in the last 30 years (zero).

The question assumes we think the USA has problems but isn't as bad as those other countries that are obviously horrible dictatorships. This assumption is incorrect. Those who support the countries in question see the US as the greatest force of death and destruction in the world for the last 80 years, at least, and the entire white Eurocentric project of the USA, UK, France, Spain, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, and Portugal as the single most destructive historical social process in the history of the planet and thus is the primary problem that must be resolved for humanity to proceed with developing a lasting peace.

That's a false dichotomy, as you're pointing out.

That's fair. A lot of Americans aren't used to this level of authoritarianism and it feels like a blip from the status quo.

There is absolutely no way ANY country is killing 30k protestors with small arms fire in 2 days.

Media literacy and frankly trustworthiness is a massive problem of late. I don't think there is anyone who can be relied upon to give fair numbers, though it would be nice to provide various numbers and sources. Propaganda has always been a problem but until ~2000 I feel like American media was largely reliable, at least in comparison to state-controlled media. Probably too much trust in Israeli numbers, but by and large reasonably accurate.

Point is there are no reliable numbers today, there are no agreed on facts. It's all just blatant propaganda.

In that same time period in the USA, over 40,000 LGBTQ+ people were murdered by vigilantes.

Insofar as we accept these numbers (and I have no reason aside from sheer skepticism not to), I would just say that there is a difference between state-sanctioned murders and vigilantes committing crimes and being prosecuted. Particularly when we are talking about which governments we support and oppose.

Iran has been under a US siege for 40 years and doing everything it can to keep control of the situation, while the US has all of the prosperity and freedom of operations it could ever need, and we see that of course pathologies emerge under siege conditions

It's fair to point this out. American imperialism has been horrible for the Middle East. This is where I again draw a distinction between the government and the people. I understand why the people have the government they have, and why the government does the things it does, but that's not the same as approving of the government. I understand why Hamas did what they did in Israel, and it was undeniably effective at moving global perception. I still don't approve of it, even knowing they were already suffering slow genocide. It's a very troubling duality.

If nothing else, the Iranian people seem to hate their government, and that's reason enough for me to not view the regime favorably. A government should represent and be answerable to its people.

Those who support the countries in question see the US as the greatest force of death and destruction in the world for the last 80 years

I think there is nuance here but largely I can't disagree. I think reduced global hegemony is a good thing, but replacing American led hegemony with Chinese or Russian led hegemony doesn't seem any better. The world would work better with everyone on more equal footing. China will probably inevitably eventually take over America's place in the world and I think most people will probably not be any better off in that case, including Chinese people.

Anyway I didn't mean to wade in with my opinions. I just wanted to shape the conversation into more communication and less generic soap boxing. Just redeploying propaganda doesn't answer OP's question. I think this what you have here is closer. It still doesn't make sense to me to support the ascendancy of any authoritarian or imperialist governments.

A lot of Americans aren’t used to this level of authoritarianism and it feels like a blip from the status quo.

A lot of white Americans aren't used to it. Black Americans, Asian Americans, and the occupied indigenous peoples of this land have been trying to tell us for decades that the authoritarianism they suffer under was eventually going to hit white Americans, too. Now it's starting to happen, just a little bit, and white people are finally starting to belatedly fight back, a few are finding their way to solidarity, but most just think they need to vote in the other party to fix it.

Propaganda has always been a problem but until ~2000 I feel like American media was largely reliable

Propaganda in Western media has been a problem for literally centuries. The Opium Wars were launched under the cover of yellow journalism published in British papers owned by British opium traders (a.k.a. drug cartels integrated into civic society). Yellow journalism has been the norm in the US, between the 2 red scares, the anti-labor propaganda, all of the cases for violence against countries like Vietnam, Cuba, Nicaragua, etc. It's always been this way. It's just that there's been an effective resistance to it thanks to the digital revolution and there's been a reaction against that resistance to tighten up controls. Almost like a system under threat always tightens up controls....

Point is there are no reliable numbers today, there are no agreed on facts. It’s all just blatant propaganda.

You can't just become a nihilist here. There is sufficient understanding of the mechanics of killing people that 30k in 2 days is far far far beyond the pale. It's not credible in any way.

I would just say that there is a difference between state-sanctioned murders and vigilantes committing crimes and being prosecuted.

You would say that, but historically there HASN'T been a difference between these things on the European frontier. Vigilantism is a critical component of state power projection in the colonial context. Vigilantism against black people, indigenous folks, women (witches), homosexuals, labor organizer, and communists has been part and parcel of the American project, of the Canadian project, the Australian project, etc. You may want to create that distinction, but that's exactly how we get "their barbaric government, our regrettable sinners".

If nothing else, the Iranian people seem to hate their government, and that’s reason enough for me to not view the regime favorably. A government should represent and be answerable to its people.

The Iranian government WAS representative and answerable to its people. It turns out that liberal democracy is INCREDIBLY susceptible to disruption by Europeans!! The US and British came in and destroyed that representative and answerable government. While they did it, that liberal democracy had to tighten control over and over again to stop the infiltration and it was not enough. The white people won and reestablished control over Iran with a brutal puppet government. It took years for the Iranian people to produce another revolutionary group that was strong enough to push the Europeans out of power, and it was THIS SPECIFIC formation that did it. This formation of indigenous Iranian resistance has survived far longer than the liberal democratic formation of Iran, and it has weathered far far worse pressures from the Europeans. It has essentially been under an absolutely brutal siege for 40+ years. And it hasn't broken. Not only hasn't it broken, the Iranians are actually scoring substantial military victories against the world's most powerful military.

No one is asking you to say "There is nothing wrong with the Iranian government and I wish that it was actually the ruler of the world". What we're saying is that we support the Iranian government in its decades long resistance on behalf of the Iranian people against the Eurocentric imperialist powers that wish to destroy it. We don't celebrate their excesses, we don't celebrate their failures, but we understand that all systems have excesses, all systems have failures, and in the question of solidarity, we stand with Iran against the empire.

but replacing American led hegemony with Chinese or Russian led hegemony doesn’t seem any better

This is a fantasy boogieman. Russia has absolutely no ability to establish global hegemony. There's no chance of it and there's literally no reason to make any decisions based on that possibility.

China absolutely DOES have the ability to establish global hegemony, and it will not. How do we know they will not? Because they are Marxists. Marxism is the study of human society from a scientific and historical lens. It does not afford a place for magical thinking. Marxism sees the globe-spanning European empire, it sees the history of that empire and how it has culminated in the USA, it sees how the context of the 20th century between the USA and USSR proceeded, and it sees the decline of the US empire following the same patterns as the decline of other empires. And what Marxism purports is that being a global hegemon is internally contradictory and will inevitably lead to collapse. As China is foundationally Marxist, to the point where everyone studies Marxism in school, business programs all integrate Marxism, many many organizations incorporate Marxism, and the various parties and factions in China all debate on a foundation of Marxism, there is zero reason to believe that China will deliberately choose to take a course of action that is not only doomed to failure, but literally doomed to failure in the exact way that we are watching it fail right now for the 600-year European imperial project.

The idea that everyone wants to be just as evil as us anglos is projection, not reality.

I can't speak for everyone, but a lot of people have learned to just ignore many reports from international news organizations about anything, since those same organizations routinely repeat the US government's released data, which has been filtered by international conglomerates with their own interests.

This is because those claims are often found to be untrue or wildly exaggerated after the dust settles.

That skepticism is the result of decades of "fake news" leading to a general doubt of any claim as a baseline.

...and that's just for starters.

So, first, you must agree on what the truth is with sources that you can trust. Good luck.

I've read that Iran killed 30,000 people, but can't read Arabic or know the context of images I have seen, and this could be true, however, given the track record of US media, I would consider the number to be wildly exaggerated just as a matter of course.

Also, I know that even IF it is true, that Iran has killed 30,000 protestors, the "good guys" can't stop Iran and "win one for democracy and human civilization" without murdering many magnitudes more.

Anyway, I want to read about the IRON WALL the USSR built to stop people from escaping, please share

(not a tankie, and I think Muslims and all other religions should pay the same taxes as everybody else, which they consider to be a wild affront to their dignity)

Anyway, I want to read about the IRON WALL the USSR built to stop people from escaping, please share

Not OP, but my guess is the “IRON WALL” they’re referencing is a conglomeration of the Berlin Wall and the Iron Curtain. The vast majority of the iron curtain was enforced with military patrols, not a literal wall.

It's not lemmy.ml as a source, but rather a symptom.

I see two things going on:

A general fall in trust in democratic institutions, as those institutions fail to represent people adequately;
A clear realization of global injustice perpetuated by democratc countries against the will of people.

There aren't many that that think that Iran's goverment is good for Iranian people, but they do see that they are defending their civilization. This umderstanding requires that the observer is able to maintain two observations at the same time, instead of requoring complete black & white intepretations.

mirror images of conservatives, just look at them. they are more closer to liberterian-republicans, too afraid to be called republicans but support thier policies 100%.

Totally, we communists support republican policies like checks notes universal healthcare, free education, guaranteed housing, guaranteed employment, state pensions...

And then there's .ml tankies that also support wars of conquest (if by Russia or probably if China, too), harsh censorship, wholesale slaughter of perceived enemies, etc.

The question wasn't about communists. It was about the dipshit tankies on .ml.

"Tankie" is a pejorative for communist, I think you're confused here. Communists don't support "wars of conquest," but they do support using force as necessary against fascists and capitalists, and censoring capitalist and fascist speech. Class analysis is core to communism, by reducing it to "groups we don't like" you're obscuring the class nature of communist theory in a way that makes it seem based on whims or genetics like fascism.

It's a specific kind of communist, not all communists are tankies

The ones of any relevance seem to count. It's a term levied against every major Marxist party and every socialist state.

Please do tell me which conquest war China has engaged in the past 50 years.

harsh censorship

It's 2026, we've seen how western legacy media are owned by Zionists and social media are owned by oligarch Epstein class, we literally go into the Lemmyverse running away from this. Only thanks to Chinese-born social media such as Tiktok have we been able to witness the genocide in Gaza and open our collective eyes to the Palestinian cause. How, with this hindsight, can we criticise a country wanting to protect its citizens from this?

Additionally, seeing your interest against censorship, are you aware that most Russian media is outright banned in Europe? Have you seen how Chinese social media gets banned in the US unless it changes ownership to an American firm? And most importantly: does this desire for media availability from all over lead tou to read news coming from, say, Iranian, Chinese or Russian media? Do you actively consume such media, or do you consume your media de-facto equally to as if there were censorship of such media?

wholesale slaughter of perceived enemies

I believe you're mistaken, the countries currently engaged in the genocide of Palestinians and threatening Iran with "the total elimination of a civilization" are the US and Isntreal, not communist.

Can you now bring up some points that are not projection of Western imperialism onto China?

Sometimes i get their love for china or cuba or whatever, but i dont understand the love for russia.... there's nothing remotely communist or pro-worker in russia anymore... its just a bunch of oligarchs like amerikkka (who .ml claims to hate)

the authoritarianism in china has at least raised the standard of living and modernization for most people... but all the lack of freedoms still suck. But it's a deal that most of them happily accept... dont criticize xinnie the pooh, but also have a good standard of living and modern cities.

Well, ml does stand for Marxist-Leninist I suppose

I assume you know this, but just to spare anybody else confusion; though it may be intended to stand for that in lemmy.ml, the TLD is for Mali.

Watching anime is a crime.

UK, EU, & US are getting closer to this every year.

uhm... no.

They aren't in love with authoritarian regimes as much as communism. So don't expect the devs to say nice things about the UAE, for instance.

They're campists. The thinking extends as far as USA (and the west more broadly) bad, therefore anyone opposed to the west good.

Its how you get supposed Marxists simping for a theocratic dictatorship in Iran and a gangster oligarchy in Russia.

Because that's Marcist-lenisim?

Stalin named it, and he's the one that set the definition of what that means.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism%E2%80%93Leninism

They don't call it "Stalinism" because that's way harder to defend.

The ones you see online don't even understand it, it literally requires supporting the left most party, but I've never seen a .ml account actually pushing for change thru the two party system, despite that literally being the first step:

Marxism–Leninism holds that a two-stage communist revolution is needed to replace capitalism. A vanguard party, organized through democratic centralism, would seize power on behalf of the proletariat and establish a one-party communist state. The state would control the means of production, suppress opposition, counter-revolution, and the bourgeoisie, and promote Soviet collectivism, to pave the way for an eventual communist society that would be classless and stateless.[12]

Most people online that say they're "ML" don't understand anything about it. They "learned" all they know from unsourced shitposts.

Which is crazy, because this is the closest actual ML has ever come, after trump the Dems are most likely to gain so many seats, it'll effectively be a one party government starting 2029.

If we get a progressive Dem that will name a progressive DNC chair after becoming president, we're fucking there. A one party government that's genuinely for the proletariat.

Any that claims to actually be ML and isn't pushing for the DNC as hard as possible right now is lying about their self professed label, or never understood what it meant

Disclaimer I'm not from the states.

Believing the Democratic Party will in anyway abolish or even threaten capitalism is laughable. Even the most "left" (I don't like the left/right axis) politicians in America are at most social-democrats and are more likely to actually enact social liberal policies. The democrats will never pose an actual threat to capitalism.

The republicans are much more enamored with the status quo, but the democrats won't resolve the structural contradictions the USA (and the west) faces.

Believing the Democratic Party will in anyway abolish or even threaten capitalism is laughable

I'm not talking about "the party" I'm talking about the DNC...

And the DNC is basically a dictatorship run under the chair, for four years they're accountable to no one and for a long string of chairs that's worked out horribly.

When a Dem becomes president, they name a DNC chair. Meaning the last one was obvious a neoliberal appointed by Biden and thats why they didn't let us have a primary.

Right now the DNC chair is legitimately nonbiased. They won't say shit till after the primary, and support everyone equally that goes to a general.

That means, ML should be pushing really really hard for a progressive Dem in the presidential primary, one who they believe will appoint someone explicitly progressive as chair.

Like, if you think the literal first step in ML invalidated the whole thing...

I'm just explaining what their plan is, go to .ml and tell them that you believe their entire plan is fundamentally flawed and if they agree, ask them why they still say they're ML.

God, the "actually, Lenin would have voted blue no matter who" takes are the most compelling evidence of "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing" I've ever seen.

Lenin supported participation in bourgeois electoralism in a communist party, while also being extremely, constantly critical of social democratic reformists. The Democrats having one good election is not going to cause "the proletariat to seize power and establish a one-party communist state" unless you've been watching too much OAN.

You must not sink to the level of the masses, to the level of the backward strata of the class. That is incontestable. You must tell them the bitter truth. You are in duty bound to call their bourgeois-democratic and parliamentary prejudices what they are—prejudices.

Whilst you lack the strength to do away with bourgeois parliaments and every other type of reactionary institution, you must work within them because it is there that you will still find workers who are duped by the priests and stultified by the conditions of rural life; otherwise you risk turning into nothing but windbags.

The conclusion which follows from this is absolutely incontrovertible: it has been proved that, far from causing harm to the revolutionary proletariat, participation in a bourgeois-democratic parliament, even a few weeks before the victory of a Soviet republic and even after such a victory, actually helps that proletariat to prove to the backward masses why such parliaments deserve to be done away with; it facilitates their successful dissolution, and helps to make bourgeois parliamentarianism “politically obsolete”.

Lenin's reason for participating in bourgeois electoralism was specifically to reach people who believed it was an adequate solution in order to persuade them to engage in mass action and outright revolution. This "Lenin was a reformist, actually" line is complete and total nonsense.

God, the “actually, Lenin would

I think your confusion is you think Lenin had any say what so ever in what Stalin called "Marxism-Lenism"

Which is a pretty foundational misunderstanding coming from a literal .ml account

Dear God, where did you even pick up these brainworms?

Yes, I'm well aware that Stalin coined the term "Marxism-Leninism." That doesn't in any way mean that Lenin "had nothing to do with" the ideology, since his writings formed the basis of it.

But let me get this straight: is your argument then that Stalin would've "voted blue no matter who?"

It's literally the first step of ML...

If you're so against that, have you thought of evaluating all the parts?

Were you even aware that one of the core tenets of ML is voting for the lesser evil no matter what?

If you’re so against that, have you thought of evaluating all the parts?

Against what? Your completely absurd, blatantly ahistorical distortion of theory? Again, where did you even pick up these brainworms?

Were you even aware that one of the core tenets of ML is voting for the lesser evil no matter what?

No, because it isn't. You're just trolling, aren't you? Did you read a single thing I quoted?

You quoted Lenin...

Again, he had no say in "Marxism-Leninism", because Stalin made it up using their names.

You can't defend ML by using quotes of Lenon or Marx, because those parts may or may not be in ML.

You keep saying you understand that, but you clearly don't or you wouldn't be doing what you're doing.

Lmao. So just to make this absolutely clear, in your worldview:

Lenin was an evil crazy revolutionary who only advocated participation in bourgeois elections for the purpose of guiding people towards revolutionary activity
Stalin, a moderate reformist, invented an entirely new ideology called Marxism-Leninism that had absolutely nothing to with either Marx or Lenin despite fighting side-by-side with Lenin during the revolution and extensively citing both of them.

"Stalin, the moderate reformist" is a new one for me so I feel like I gotta take a step back and clarify that that's actually what you're claiming here.

Edit:

Reforminsm and revolutionism. What is the difference between revolutionary tactics and reformist tactics?

Some think that Leninism is opposed to reforms, opposed to compromises and to agreements in general. This is absolutely wrong. Bolsheviks know as well as anybody else that in a certain sense "every little helps," that under certain conditions reforms in general, and compromises and agreements in particular, are necessary and useful.

"To carry on a war for the overthrow of the international bourgeoisie," says Lenin, "a war which is a hundred times more difficult, protracted, and complicated than the most stubborn of ordinary wars between states, and to refuse beforehand to manoeuvre, to utilise the conflict of interests (even though temporary) among one's enemies, to reject agreements and compromises with possible (even though temporary, unstable, vacillating and conditional) allies--is not this ridiculous in the extreme? Is it not as though, when making a difficult ascent of an unexplored and hitherto inaccessible mountain, we were to refuse beforehand ever to move in zigzags, ever to retrace our steps, ever to abandon the course once selected and to try others?" (see Vol. XXV, p. 210).

Obviously, therefore, it is not a matter of reforms or of compromises and agreements, but of the use people make of reforms and agreements.

To a reformist, reforms are everything, while revolutionary work is something incidental, something just to talk about, mere eyewash. That is why, with reformist tactics under the conditions of bourgeois rule, reforms are inevitability transformed into an instrument for strengthening that rule, an instrument for disintegrating the revolution.

To a revolutionary, on the contrary, the main thing is revolutionary work and not reforms; to him reforms are a by-product of the revolution. That is why, with revolutionary tactics under the conditions of bourgeois rule, reforms are naturally transformed into an instrument for strengthening the revolution, into a strongpoint for the further development of the revolutionary movement.

The revolutionary will accept a reform in order to use it as an aid in combining legal work with illegal work to intensify, under its cover, the illegal work for the revolutionary preparation of the masses for the overthrow of the bourgeoisie.

That is the essence of making revolutionary use of reforms and agreements under the conditions of imperialism.

Oh hey, Stalin cites Lenin in his book titled Foundations of Leninism and argues for the exact same position I just showed Lenin expressed! What are the odds!

If someone types a sentence or two...

They very rarely if every meant a giant essay no one will every read

Oh hey, Stalin cites Lenin in his book titled Foundations of Leninism

Why do you think that has anything to do with Marxism-Lenism?

a giant essay no one will every read

Well, this certainly explains why you have such a bastardized understanding of Marxism-Leninism. You certainly didn't get it from actually reading theory. Some Youtuber told you this nonsense, right?

Why do you think that has anything to do with Marxism-Lenism?

Why do I think Stalin's book Foundations of Leninism has anything to do with the Marxism-Leninism term coined by Stalin? Do you hear yourself?

Stalin did not distort Marx or Lenin, he synthesized what Marx and Lenin theorized and practiced into a unified ideology and term. The reason it isn't called "Stalinism" is because compared to Marx and Lenin, Stalin's new contributions to Marxism-Leninism are like a puddle to their oceans, a tree to their forests.

The DNC is incapable of being a communist vanguard, the purpose of a vanguard party is to build up a reliable cadre of disciplined communists that can bring the working class struggle under one banner for the purposes of revolution. The idea that a liberal party dominated by capital could be confused for a vanguard is genuinely baffling, and the fact that you think Marxist-Leninists organizing in parties actually attempting to become a vanguard like PSL is baffling. I've never seen someone so confidently incorrect about Marxism-Leninism.

Lenin's central thesis to the vanguard model is written plainly in What is to be Done?

please read my whole comment before downvoting

Lots of terrible stuff was done by the west/USA, or because of it. These countries you listed are in some ways much worse for their own people than the US is for americans, but mostly don't terrorize other countries. I think you grossly underestimate the amount of people murdered by US and its allies' bombs compared to those murdered by their own authoritarian governments.

When you learn about all the horrendous monstrosities some of the goverments do, it's easy to just dismiss any critique of the West, because at least they are not this evil.

Well, I think the tankies have it just like that, just reversed. When they learned about all the tens of thousands (probably more? idk) innocent people and little kids murdered by the USA in all those countries all in the recent history, and none of our "civilized" countries doing anything about it, they just support any regime that opposes the US, because at least it's not this evil.

If you have the world mostly divided into two camps, it's very depressing to acknowledge how evil both are. If you see one's atrocities first, it's easy to dismiss the other's due to it.

Now, some tankies are more fanatical than others, but many of them are similar to liberals supporting the US. They don't deny some of the flaws of china for example, but they still support it over the US, for obvious reasons. The US supporters also don't deny some of the war crimes and atrocities, especially after a few years since they happened, but they never see the big picture. They see individual mistakes excusable by the perceived evilness of the enemy.

Tl; dr:

When you said:

The West has many flaws. But our flaws are nothing compared to these guys.

you basically answered your question. Just reverse the sides.

you need to think like a cave man, conspiracy theorist, and an idiot all at the same time. america bad, therefore not-Amera good. Wikipedia is anti-communist propaganda

It's on you that you're incapable of understanding criticism to Wikipedia, it's actually quite simple:

Wikipedia, especially so English Wikipedia, is edited primarily by tech-literate men living in the Anglosphere, and it's sourced primarily by Anglosphere sources. For this reason, Wikipedia will portray the same bias that those individuals and sources portray.

That's it, that's literally it, it's not so hard to understand. Now, if you understand this, and you are aware that Anglo media and individuals portray an Anticommunist view, then Wikipedia will simply replicate this view. It's not just anticommunist, Wikipedia has its share of misogyny, of racism...

I want to create a world where each person give according to their ability and take according to their need.

It's pretty cringe that they paint themselves this innocent.

i mean, its been the thesis of leftism for a little while now.

you got a better thesis for a different organisation of the economy?

There cannot be a better thesis because that is literally the best thesis.

It’s also a thesis that would only work properly for a colony of ants. Otherwise, all we get is an authoritarian shithole, which isn't much of an improvement over our current capitalist shithole.

They are carzy over there don't even try. I once started debating an idea and the answer was "you support american captalism propaganda" These people and just like maga weirdos You can be agains everyone. I don't have to choose between comunism or captalist.

common sense is not for everyone

Neither is spell check eh?

Unresolved daddy issues.

Not even joking. Left or right, if you spend more than five minutes talking to somebody on the authoritarian side of the political spectrum, their relationship with their dad WILL get mentioned. They're obsessed with dads.

TIL I’m authoritarian and obsessed with my dad.

Thanks to this comment, I’ll go to therapy, start doing mindfulness meditation, start going to church on Sundays, and become vegetarian.

Thanks for your contribution

Hmm I can't say I have the same experience, but perhaps I did not dig down deep enough during those conversations into their relationships with their parents.

It always seemed to me the difference between an authoritarian and a non-authoritarian socialist/communist was based on their view of other people: the authoritarians I spoke with usually regarded people as flawed and in need of guidance, whereas non-authoritarians seemed to believe people are inherently good but corrupted.

What do you mean by "non-authoritarian?" Are you speaking of a divide between Marxists and anarchists, or something more vague?

most people's primary problem with other people is that they are not themselves.

There is no "authoritarian side" of the spectrum, the question is which class should have authority, the working classes or capitalists. Secondly, I have never seen anyone on Lemmy.ml or Marxists otherwise speak of their parents when explaining why they support Marxism.

sounds like all of my bad first dates with the ladies. daddy issue girls can't wait to tell you about their dad.

Lemmy.ml is largely made up of communists, who support the working classes holding state authority, rather than capitalist states where authoritarian control is in the hands of the tiny capitalist class over the working classes. State authority isn't independent of class struggle, but is a product of it, and as such all states are "authoritarian," but it's far better for the working classes to hold that. And for what it's worth, Iran is supported against the west and Israel, not as a socialist state.

As for your post body, a number of claims you made are lies.

Iran shot 30,000 people in less than than 2 weeks.

Incorrect, the UN estimates ~3100 total deaths. Western press made up the 30,000 figure at the behest of the CIA/Mossad to help foment regime change before their invasion.

The Soviet Union had to build a fucking Iron wall to prevent people from escaping.

No? Do you really think a landmass that large would do something like that? There was a wall in Berlin, but that was just as much to keep West Germans out, as the Cold War had tons of spies on both sides.

China censors the internet.

Not really a problem, it's a good thing western spyware like Facebook isn't allowed, and VPNs are plentiful. Censorship isn't willy-nilly, it's largely the internet equivalent of industrial protectionism.

China wants to eliminate Islam.

No? China has freedom of religion.

Watching anime is a crime.

No it isn't, lol.

The West has many flaws. But our flaws are nothing compared to these guys.

It's the opposite. Socialist countries have flaws and real problems, but the genocidal western empire is the biggest obstacle holding human progress back. They plunder the global south, are obliterating Palestine, and are all surging to the rightas the empire falls.

According to your UN site there:

Iranian authorities have acknowledged 3,117 deaths and approximately 3,000 arrests, whereas human rights organisations estimate these figures to be in the tens of thousands.

So its IRAN claiming 3100. Not the UN

The "Human Rights Orgs" have provided little to no evidence of there being deaths in the tens of thousands.

The same reason MAGA does. They want a daddy to force himself on them.

TIL I want a daddy to force himself on me.

I had never thought about it. But I now feel obliged to. I guess I now have to search for local daddies and DM them? Idk… does that sound about right?

kinky!

“Its the antiimperialism of idiots”

I think you and I both dislike imperialism. What does sensible anti imperialism look like to you?

The same thing that anti fuedalism and anti monarchy looks like. Building a better system in the face of global opposition to the movement. The Soviet Union failed miserably at this, so defending that system is absurd. China is doing better, but needs to demonstrate that it can escape its authoritarian past, and also not fall into its own cycle of imperialism.

I personally do believe China can do this, and it will take some time, like it took some time for the US to and Europe to converge on liberal democracy. However I think China needs to face some uncomfortable truths on the journey. Xi is a step backwards from Hu and Deng. But Nixon was step backwards from Kennedy. Trump is a huge fucking step backwards from Obama. They'll get there, no matter what the US does, in the same way liberalism got there despite the last throws of monarchy standing against it.

China is doing better, but needs to demonstrate that it can escape its authoritarian past, and also not fall into its own cycle of imperialism.

I think if Mao or Lenin were to take a look at today's China, they would not call it "alternative system to capitalism" (or socialist or communist for that matter):

https://spectrejournal.com/one-should-not-camouflage-capitalist-and-imperialist-china-as-socialist/

The socialist market economy in China is based on the NEP and is built on foundations laid by Mao.

I just think they're neat

Lol. The idea that you are asking this in .world. My god. How has the irony not killed you?

These people are called "tankies". It's communists who like militarism and imperialism, as long as it's of their own flavor. The internet has many such "bunkers" where these people congregate. They unironically support the countries you mention, and they do not represent the entire left-wing community.

I'd argue that they aren't the result of capitalist policies being shitty. Such communities have existed on the internet since the early 00s. It's just their ideology.

Why are they on lemmy? My guess is that Reddit banned some of their communities for posting violent content (threats of violence etc.) so they moved to lemmy, which does not censor people to the degree Reddit does.

The .ml for lemmy.ml supposedly stands for "marxism leninism".

Just set an instance block and move on. I blocked lemmy.ml a year ago and I am mentally much better not having to see their bullshit every day.

They are weirdos, just add to blocklist and move on.

It’ll be sad to see you go.

They need masters

TIL I need masters.

Hadn’t thought about it but you know what? I’ll spare a thought. Just give me a sec.

You know what? I’m not convinced I need a master.

Just to make sure we’re getting at the truth, are you sure I need a master?

Weak snowflakes who think they are not.

Communists are authoritarians because that's what communism is, like by definition; it's hard-left but also authoritarian. That's literally what separates lib-left from auth-left, the same obviously being for lib-right and auth-right (I'm just going off of the standard four-quadrant political compass, which probably has its own deep, foundational issues).

I have friends who are self proclaimed "tankies", and talking to them a lot about it, my best understanding of the way they put it is basically:

You need an Iron Fist® to fix anything, and an Iron Fist® to keep it that way.

I also think that .ml probably has a percentage of people from those locations, and most people, period, tend to think their way is the best way. Which is also fairly hard to prove because history keeps being altered and destroyed and humans only live for like 60-90 years and we don't have a very advanced intergenerational memory. Or maybe we do but just don't know how to learn very well from it when all it seems to scream is "BREED, EAT, SLEEP, STINKY, TRIBE, SCARY, RUN, FIGHT, SAFE, LOVE". It's like some people's own evolutionary biology tells them to prevent others from learning history to establish dominance and power.

Hard to say whether or not we'll make it. The solution-path definitely has a lot of construction and destruction.

You need an Iron Fist® to fix anything, and an Iron Fist® to keep it that way.

Unfortunately the existence and hegemony of the US in the previous century has de-facto meant that yes, you need an iron Fist to fix things and to maintain such things. The question is who wields this fist. In capitalism, the bourgeois wield it, they exercise this violence everyday (e.g. half a million murders yearly through economic sanctions by the US and EU alone). In socialism, it's the working class who wield it against capitalists, and you'll never forgive them for doing so.

I support the system that feeds the children and kills Nazis.

Thats also why old people think the young people's culture is wrong. Thats not how they grew up, and they were born and made it old/successful enough to reproduce, so its a system that works so why would they change it with their new music and hairstyles? Theyre gonna get us all killed man.

Democratic socialism is a much better move towards communism than an authoritarian approach. Therefor Europe is already more communist than China and Russia.

Mad, tankies?

Europe isn't socialist in the slightest, though, so I'm more confused than mad. Socialism is a form of society where public ownership is principal, and the state is run by the working classes. No country in Europe has this, nor the modern Russian Federation, they are all capitalist states where state authority lies in the capitalist class, while the PRC and former USSR do fit this.

Literacy rates, societal guarantees in the 1936 constitution, reports on the healthcare system over time, and more are good sources for these claims.

Europe is already more communist than China

Yes, I'm sure that European politicians just can't wait to abolish the capitalist class. /s

Democratic socialism is just a tool to raise class consciousness, not the end goal itself. As soon as socialists have locked in 51% of the parliament, parliament will be dissolved by right wing forces and fascism will be organized to maintain existing class relations, as has happened in the Spanish Civil War, in the Finnish Civil War, in the '73 Chilean coup (with help from the CIA)

In short, "democracy" organized fascism when it felt it could no longer resist the pressure of the working class in conditions even of only formal freedom. Fascism, by shattering the working class, has restored to "democracy" the possibility of existing

Gramsci, Democracy and fascism

On paper, Karl Marx is correct, but greedy leaders abused it and communism failed. Similar problems are occurring under capitalism leading which will eventually lead to it's demise.

Socialism hasn't failed. The soviet union may no longer be here, but socialism still is a working mode of production. The problems of capitalism are entirely different from those found in socialist countries.

I think categorically different but not entirely different problems. Power players a.k.a. bad actors could in theory infiltrate any hierarchy over long enough time (dependent on their level of duplicity, awareness, steps ahead, or dedication possessed by a given individual/group)

The profit motive as the driving force of capitalism selects for those best able to seek it, creating corruption. Administration isn't a problem inherently, and people aren't supernaturally good or evil. It's perfectly possible to create a system that includes recall elections and other measures to help combat corruption in socialism (and these features exist in socialist states already).

I mean he was stil right. Any plan or system is subject to good faith execution. If political leaders lie and steal, it doesn't matter how sound the poltical framework is.

Capitalism isn't failing because of corrupt leaders. Capitalism is failing because it's operating as it is designed. Corruption isn't antithetical to capitalism, it's a key component.

There are many paths towards communism. China and Russia went with an authoritarian regime "to move towards Communism". This actually makes sense on paper because it requires quite a lot of power to actually change the whole system into communism. The tankies still believe this, but in reality their leaders are perfectly happy with all the power they now have.

All states are "authoritarian," as all states are a product of class struggle and exist to put one class on top. In capitalist states, that class is the capitalist class, in the PRC and former USSR, that class is the proletariat. That's why they both have high approval rates (when Russia was still socialist), as they implemented proletarian democracy and authority against capitalists. There are no paths to communism that do not require authority against capitalists.

Literacy rates, societal guarantees in the 1936 constitution, reports on the healthcare system over time, and more are good sources for these claims.

"Top 10 lies the USA wants you to believe. You won't believe #1!"

Then provide a counter-argument. You’ve been accused of seeking to replace one authoritarian regime with another and your only response is “nuh-uh, propaganda”. If you can’t articulate what you want, why you want it, and and why you believe it’s not what the people opposing both you and the current regime offer, how are you ever going to achieve momentum to build the system you seek?

Then provide a counter-argument.

Come on dude... this is not a good faith argument and not worth my time. "Why protest bombing their schools when they hang gays?" JFC...this is an absolute troll post.

how are you ever going to achieve momentum to build the system you seek?

I'm sorry, what have you done lately? I've fought with Proud Boys, I've marched with strikers and donated to mutual aid support, I help get progressives and socialists elected to local positions, I fight against ICE and am active in rapid response teams, I fight for LGBTQ+ and immigrants and minorities, I fight for a free Palestine, I've marched with teachers unions, etc

What organizing have you accomplished?

You got called out because instead of providing a good faith argument in favor of your belief you just posted some snide remark. I pressed you to provide any sort of substance and you accuse me of being unworthy of your time?

This is an anonymous forum for the sharing of ideas and conversation. Anyone can post a laundry list claiming radical actions, but there’s no proof. Nobody knows who you really are, nobody knows if what you say is true, and there’s no way to prove it because unless you’re going to post a lot of irrefutable personal information online it’s just talk. Personally, I give you the benefit of the doubt and take you at your word that you do engage in those actions, but I could claim I’ve aided and abetted arson at a fur warehouse, doxxed an animal researcher and harassed them to the point they’ve had to move to a different state (then did it again), lived in an Occupy encampment for months through the winter, and beat a bonehead with a lock and chain outside a punk venue while getting a knife to the abdomen in response. Could be true, could be bullshit; it’s the internet.

Anyone can organize. The Proud Boys organize. I wasn’t asking for your organizational resume, I was asking for what the philosophical goals of your organization are. Why is what you seek to achieve not what OP accused you of authoritarianism? And now, additionally, why is it that so often when pressed to provide an explanation of those beliefs do people resort to “troll post”, “bad faith”, “not worth my time”, and non-sequitur replies? You are probably correct in the assumption that your reply won’t change my belief, but that doesn’t mean it won’t provide insight into how another person thinks that may influence future interactions or contemplation from myself or one of the many people on this forum that read it.

I ain't reading all that. Free Palestine.

Is this why they call you silentjohn, because when pressed for a defense of your beliefs you refuse to answer and instead drop hashtag grade slogans? No wonder we’re losing to the fascists, the commies can’t even defend the philosophy they stand for.

No wonder we’re losing to the fascists

I repeat: What organizing have you accomplished?

Blocked.

I repeat, anyone online can claim organizing because it’s anonymous. You’ve been challenged to explain the philosophy behind what you’re organizing for.

they did reply to the "challenge" though, by saying this is a baitpost and not written in good faith, nothing of consequence will happen in this thread, just more dividing of the working class.

idk i tried to write more, but op was right, this thread is not a good faith discussion, i hope you can find solidarity with working class peoples around you.

Always with the anthropocentrism. Hit me up when you feel like fighting for the rights of all the victims of capitalism and human greed. You might get some assistance now and then, but you’ll never get solidarity until the pretense of human exceptionalism is dropped.

yeah, i shouldnt have even tried :(

Environmentalism and animals rights is a helluva no sell for you guys, isn’t it? The rejection of that value as fundamental to what needs to change caught me off guard, and is why I push back so hard to keep your flavor of leftism from becoming the dominant voice. I went rounds over in ML about this the other day, the idea that accepting non-human suffering/environmental destruction as a sad but acceptable consequence of human advancement so long as there’s “pledges and goals” for reducing it in the future is tolerable.

If we’re going to fight this fight let’s actually start fresh, not just make excuses for retaining the ugly parts of the system we destroyed because “humans are more important, we’ll get to that later”. Later never comes, there’s always a reason that can be found. Humans are important, but they’re not the only things living on this planet, most of them get a few decades of life, and there’s a lot more humans as well as other living things left to come after those of us here not are dead.

This is why I push people for their deeply held convictions about why they want the system they want. Slogans, laundry lists of unverifiable accomplishments, rehearsed talking points, the words of dead philosophers; none of that means shit. What’s it mean to them, the individual.

Tiny penis syndrome.

But our flaws are nothing compared to these guys.

Our glorious leaders. Their barbaric dictators.

This is like reading that post from a user complaining about the horrible vendor lock-in and subscription 'features' on an HP inkjet printer.

This can't be genuine, right? :D

Oh yey, another having propagandized upvote farming quote from someone who's failed to notice their own state's authoritarianism.

"Look over there! A squirrel!"

Surely you would agree that some countries are more authoritarian than others?

What does that even mean, in practice? Without analyzing authority's class character, it's meaningless. I'd argue that countries like the US and European ciuntries where a tiny number of capitalists control authority are worse than socialist countries where the broad working classes control authority.

Exactly. Rosa was almost right about not moving and not noticing chains (and we can't fault her too much as her statement was made by observing 3D conditions during her time), but as situations d/evolve, chains will necessarily tighten as scarcity, real or imagined, to maintain some sort of order. It becomes a question of who you allow to yank your chains, the supergreedy who want the very few to have extravagances and opulance at the expense of the bulk of the rest of society, or those who would at least attempt economic planning and distribution so that fewer die of illness, disease, hunger and thirst, unnecessary war.

Yep, great points and well-said!

🫡❤️