Image Transcription:

An 8-panel Phoebe Teaching Joey meme.

The first panel is Phoebe from Friends saying “Russia”.

The second panel is Joey from the same show replying with “Russia”.

The third panel is Phoebe saying “has invaded”.

The fourth panel is Joey repeating back “has invaded”.

The fifth panel is Phoebe saying “Ukraine”.

The sixth panel is Joey repeating back “Ukraine”.

The seventh panel is Phoebe saying the completed phrase “Russia has invaded Ukraine”.

The final panel shows Joey proudly proclaiming “NATO just started a proxy war”.

  • Badass_panda@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Once you’re talking about a “dictatorship of the proletariat” you’re not anti authoritarian… let’s not “no true scotsman” communism, being anti authoritarian is something that can be true of communists and capitalists but isn’t intrinsically true of either.

    • chaogomu@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is no such thing as a “dictatorship of the proletariat”. That’s just a democracy.

      No, a dictatorship is when there’s one person in charge, and their word is law. You know, like a king, just one not born into power. A dictator seizes power. Like a king’s ancestors did.

      A dictator can be “enlightened” or some bullshit, but they’re still one person calling all the shots, and dictatorships are still the single most corruptible form of government every created.

      • Badass_panda@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        It isn’t a democracy if you pick a class of people (e.g., property owners) to disenfranchise, and make the argument that an open democracy favors the wealthy and therefore you won’t have one.

        You gotta use the actual examples of the folks applying the term to evaluate what it means.

        • chaogomu@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          By your weird logic, taxes on the wealthy aren’t democratic, even when the majority votes for them.

          True communism is merely that, extreme taxes on the wealthy until there are no individual factory owners, just communal owners. As for land, nothing in communist ideology says that you cannot own your own home, just the opposite. What you cannot do, is own all the homes in a neighborhood and charge ruinous rents.

          Communism is about ridding society of the parasite class, those rich bastards who abuse their wealth to exploit others, often causing real harm.

          Society creates laws to prevent one person from harming another. We just need to acknowledge the very real harms that the rich inflict on people every day.

          Hell, wage theft is the number one type of theft in the US, with dollar amounts greater than all other types of theft combined.

          • Badass_panda@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            By your weird logic, taxes on the wealthy aren’t democratic, even when the majority votes for them

            Of course they are; abolishing the vote because the majority doesn’t vote the way you want, however, isn’t democracy.

            True communism is merely that, extreme taxes on the wealthy until there are no individual factory owners, just communal owners

            So all the communist governments of the 20th century weren’t “true” communists; it’s a bit no true scotsman, don’t you think?

            • chaogomu@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Going back to my original comment, no they weren’t. They were dictatorships, and dictatorships can’t be communist, no matter what the propaganda they put out. A dictatorship is closer to feudalism than communism. The King owning everything, even your house is no different from “the State” owning everything, even your house, because at the heart of it, the dictator is the state.

              True communism might have a government, but it will be made up of the people, and it will serve the people. People would own their own homes, and collectively own their workplaces. It would be like putting the union in charge of the work site.

              That’s the dream, but the dream is often betrayed. A dream betrayed is a nightmare.


              Also, the rich assholes are actively trying to abolish the vote because the majority support taxing their asses. Because in a capitalist society, the rich hate the poor, and work to prevent the poor from having a voice.

              • Badass_panda@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                My point (and I can’t stress this enough) is that a political philosophy that relies on dismantling democratic processes and disenfranchising a large portion of the electorate to function is not democratic, even in theory.

                Marx’s conception of the dictatorship of the proletariat may not have been authoritarian, but Lenin’s was; I understand what you are saying (essentially that communism must be democratic, and that therefore anything that calls itself communism that is not democratic must in fact not be democratic).

                At the same time, communist theorists have made up marvelously positive-sounding terms that boil down to “dictatorship is good if it’s the right dictator”, and that’s what tankies (the people OP was referring to) use to justify supporting authoritarianism.

                If you’d like to define “true communism” as excluding all actual communist regimes, do you – I’m not trying to argue over whether communism is good or bad in theory.

                • chaogomu@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  A few points;

                  A; The rich are not a “large portion of the electorate” They are a tiny minority with extremely outsized influence.

                  B; Lenin betrayed the revolution. He established a dictatorship, which is feudalism with a coat of paint. And yeah, tankies idolize that shit. They see the rich (or the merely educated) as an enemy to be hurt, and once the rich are gone, they turn on other enemies of the State. Tankies are much closer to Fascism than Communism.

                  Their king doles out wealth to the loyal, and uses the power of the State to hurt their enemies, enemies who Dear Leader tells them to hate.

                  A sort of Feudalist Fascism, it’s a step back from even capitalism, which Marx saw as a necessary step between feudalism and communism.

                  • Badass_panda@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    It’s clear you feel very passionately about this, I’m certainly willing to concede that it’s theoretically possible for an entirely democratic country to choose a genuinely communist model in an entirely democratic way.