Randall spittin' facts
Randall spittin' facts
Lol. 90% of hexbear posts are about liberals.
Libs live rent free in your heads, don’t lie to us 😏
“I know we’re the dominant group in everyday society, and most regular people agree with us, which means most people you must interact with are probably liberal, but we live rent free in your head you see, and it totally doesn’t have anything to do with us shoving our bullshit down your throats every day in your daily life. It’s because you’re pathetic!”
Sure, Jan. Sure.
Aye I wish belived that capitalism created a fair society. Seems more comfy.
In my experience, the point of leftism is to bring more power to the average citizen. What about that do you disagree with?
The problem isn't communism per se, but communism forcibly imposed.
More precisely, the problem is that communism is the superior system to the degree that it's egalitarian - that it eliminates the ruling class and instead treats all citizens equally - and the forcible imposition of communism immediately destroys that, since it presumes that those carrying out the forcible imposition rightfully possess the authority to do so, and thereby simply establishes them as a new ruling class.
Communism should be the goal, but in order to actually fulfill its potential, it MUST be voluntarily adopted by the people rather than forcibly imposed.
I don't know.
That's really a separate matter. The fact remains that communism forcibly imposed will fail - that by starting from the presumption that some possess the right to force submission to a particular system, it will simply establish a new ruling class.
The fact remains that communism forcibly imposed will fail
But control by the capitalist class imposed by force is fine?
I'm not sure what you're getting at.
But control by the capitalist class imposed by force is fine?
Of course not.
Binarism cripples reason. You can do better.
So communism is good ...but only if everyone (including the class benefiting from oppressing all the others) agrees to adopt it voluntarily?
What exactly are you suggesting should happen? People in Chile did voluntarily adopt communism and The CIA couped them.
Nothing is going to change the simple facts I already pointed out - the forcible imposition of communism necessarily presumes that those imposing it possess the right to do so, so establishes them as a new ruling class and those forced to submit to them as their subjects.
What people choose to do in the face of that fact is a separate, and necessarily speculative, matter. It's certainly not for me to decide.
Not them alone.
Exactly as is the case currently, once the right to force the submission of others has been successfully claimed by some, everyone else is subject to their authority, whether nominally deservedly so or not.
Right but submission is currently imposed by force.
If "rule by force" is inherently bad yet both sides do it, and you've already admitted communism is the better system, shouldn't "imposed by force" on both sides of the equation cancel out and we're left with "which outcome is better?"
I am seriously trying to figure out your position here, if it's disingenuous apologia for the current Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie or if you just have incredibly strong anarchist convictions.
Right but submission is currently imposed by force.
Yes, it is.
If "rule by force" is inherently bad yet both sides do it, and you've already admitted communism is the better system, shouldn't "imposed by force" on both sides of the equation cancel out and we're left with "which outcome is better?"
Communism is only better at its full potential, without institutionalized, hierarchical authority.
With institutionalized, hierarchical authority, it's just a somewhat different type of bad.
Broadly, the primary difference between authoritarian capitalism and authoritarian communism is the specific hoops those so inclined have to jump through in order to gain wealth and power. Under authoritarian capitalism, they generally have to gain wealth first, with which they can and do purchase power, while under authoritarian communism, they generally have to gain power first, with which they then can and do commandeer wealth.
The people end up more or less equally fucked either way.
I am seriously trying to figure out your position here...
With all due respect, the problem is that you're treating ideology - both mine and your own - as a primary thing to which reason is then subject.
It must be exactly the opposite - reason must be the primary thing, and ideology subject to it.
And to go all the way back, reason dictates that the forcible imposition of communism (or any other system) necessarily presumes that those carrying out the imposition possess the right to do so, and thereby makes of them a ruling class.
That conclusion is not subject to ideology - it stands alone, purely as a product of reason. Ideology must accommodate that fact - not the other way around
if it's disingenuous apologia for the current Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie...
That's just your biases speaking.
...or if you just have incredibly strong anarchist convictions.
I am in fact very much an anarchist, but it's not that I reason as I do because I'm an anarchist but that I'm an anarchist because I've reasoned as I have.