this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2023
158 points (100.0% liked)

196

16246 readers
2400 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (9 children)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (43 children)

Hard-core authoritarian communist. The kinda peeps who support Stalin and shit

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Isn't "authoritarian communist" kind of an oxymoron? 😂 like the whole point of communism is that there isn't a ruling class. I guess Russia and China were never really communist, just statist authoritarian right? I mean, the Nazis called themselves Socialist. They were nowhere near that

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Isn't "authoritarian communist" kind of an oxymoron?

Most real life implementations of communism used an authoritarian one party system. You can say these aren't true examples of communism, but that just ends up sounding like cope unfortunately.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

None of those states ever gave economic or political power to the working classes.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Isn’t “authoritarian communist” kind of an oxymoron?

Yes. Yes, it is. I sometimes call them “pseudocommunists” for this reason.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

well socialism has the proletariat as the ruling class, this is true in Marxism & anarchism even if anarchists word it differently

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The proletariat are by definition the majority. The Soviet Union was by no means ruled by the majority. Stalin murdered millions to enforce his autocracy—the exact opposite of majority rule.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

just to chime in with an anarchist perspective-- majority rule, as lionized by proponents of liberal democracies, is itself a form of heirarchy in which the will of an ostensible 'majority' (though usually that of the capital- owning class actually) is inflicted upon society as a whole, alienating the minority position, enforced by the state apparatus' monopoly of violence.

if one values bodily autonomy, reconciled with the needs of the collective, a system of governance like mutual collective determination must be established which guarantees that all voices are heard and acknowledged.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (42 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's the prog-lib equivalent of woke. It's used dismiss leftists with out engaging with our arguments. The term has lite ideological or argumentative use.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Libs use it that way, actual leftists use it to describe fascists that think they're on the left and like red flags.

load more comments (6 replies)