• GrandmasterFrank
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Burden of proof? I never claimed anything except “different people have different interpretations,” do you need a source for that? You are extremely desperate for conflict, and I’m not interested.

    • QueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If you’re willing to engage beyond fallacies, then how do you justify supporting western governments engaged in constant imperialist war and extraction for their capitalist constituents against “authoritarian” countries like Cuba who have actual democracy and put all their resources into helping their people through a brutal embargo (by the us) by providing free and quality education and medicine? [if that is indeed your position, correct me if I’m wrong.]

      An important part of ML that we agree upon in theory is that states will inevitably arise as long as the conditions are there for such. Through scientific study we have come to the conclusion that the existence of classes, exploiters and exploited, is the basis of states. A state is a mechanism for the rule of one class over others. If you are an anarchist as you claim, your ultimate goal should be eliminate the state. That is our goal as communists, and our method is a state of the working class used to provide for the needs of the former needs of the exploited while suppressing the exploiters (landlords, capitalists, kulaks, monarchists, fascists), this is what liberals call “authoritarianism.”

      • GrandmasterFrank
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t justify all the actions of western governments, and I don’t identify as an anarchist, what I meant was that I agree with some principles of anarchism

        • QueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          This whole thing started when you said “Pretending that there isn’t a spectrum, of governments restricting liberty or expression, isn’t helping anyone.” The type of anarchists criticized by OP are those that say they hate all government yet only criticize enemies of the US. I would agree with what you originally said as in socialist societies are less oppressive to the average person than capitalism (insert Stalin quote:

          spoiler

          IT IS DIFFICULT FOR ME TO IMAGINE WHAT PERSONAL LIBERTY IS ENJOYED BY AN UNEMPLOYED HUNGRY PERSON. TRUE FREEDOM CAN ONLY BE WHERE THERE IS NO EXPLOITATION AND OPPRESSION OF ONE PERSON BY ANOTHER: WHERE THERE IS NOT UNEMPLOYMENT, AND WHERE A PERSON IS NOT LIVING IN FEAR OF LOSING HIS JOB, HIS HOME AND HIS BREAD. ONLY IN SUCH A SOCIETY PERSONAL AND ANY OTHER FREEDOM CAN EXIST FOR REAL AND NOT ON PAPER.

          )

          The whole reason why all of us are arguing with you is because you seem to be defending the anarchists we criticize, despite supposedly not agreeing with them.

          • GrandmasterFrank
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            well the OP image had a whataboutism energy, like “you criticize a state despite all states being bad” and like I said I don’t think that kind of attitude is helping anyone in the context of discussing more or less oppressive governments

            • QueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s not “whataboutism” it’s pointing out contradictions in their internal logic. “I hate all states, but I agree with the US’s foreign policy and hate their enemies specifically.” If someone is against unjust hierarchy they should be primarily anti-capitalist as capitalism is a very “authoritarian” system where one’s boss has autocratic control of their labor power and you don’t have work because the system can’t find need for you you may be condemned to starve. There is also global imperialism, slave (prison) labor and so on. This is the system we should spend our energy opposing as most of us live under it. Also, even if you don’t like Russia or China, if you live in the US your “anti-hierarchical energy” should be spend fighting the US. Especially as they are the global imperialist hegemon and have more bodies to their name than any other government (beside maybe Britain from whom they inherited their system). Even if you oppose Russia too (which is also capitalist), leave it to the Russians to fight Putin.

              • GrandmasterFrank
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                It’s not a contradiction and it’s not about the United States’ foreign policy, it’s about the differences in restricted expression between states. Would you not agree that a country that has LGBT-free zones are more oppressive than otherwise comparable countries?

                You can think all states are authoritarian and acknowledge that some states allow more liberty than others, so bringing up that all states are authoritarian is a whataboutism (“You think that state is particularly authoritarian? But what about the inherent authority of all states?”)

                • Jonathan12345@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  A state by ML definition is a tool of oppression from one class to another. I believe you’re referring to institutions. Since all oppression is some kind of authoritarianism, the label is meaningless.

                  • GrandmasterFrank
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I am not speaking strictly in a ML capacity, by “state” I mean country or government, and the term is not meaningless because (unless you believe every state is equally oppressive) it can still be used to measure relative liberty