VitalyWhy there is so much communist propaganda on lemmy?
DerisionConsultingThe first instance of Lemmy is lemmy.ml
The ML stands for Marxist-Leninists
breadsmasherI mean, its actually the country tld of Mali
Could be both.
Malian marxist leninists
talYeah, but that’s not why it’s being used by those instances.
It was used because it was cheap (possibly free?).
It was free until last year, but the “enlightened” people repeating whatever they feel like, to shit on someone else’s work isn’t something new.
And .af is Afghanistan, .tv is Tuvalu, and .ai is Anguilla.
But .af is used for “As fuck”, .tv is used for media, and .ai is used for sketchy startups jumping on a bandwagon after they didn’t get rich off of blockchain/crypto.
so every other domain except lemmy is also marxists leninist like most tv and ai domains are mainly related to tv and AI, dumbass?
Because there’s nothing wrong with being communist, and yet most of western civilization publicly demonizes communism and anyone who espouses communist views. Given the freedom to share an idea without fearing ad hominem attacks, ideas are judged on their merits alone.
See also: Satanism, Atheism, Socialism.
The issue that every "communist" when pushed will take position on atrocities committed by various communists regimes... they gonna do that thing that "fascists" do: "well he really did not do it but if he did, they clearly deserved it"
Tell that to east Asians or Europeans to their face... everyone is deff hard online tho.
HegarI find that liberals are much more dismissive of US atrocities. Most communists I speak to know a wealth of details about the failings of mao and stalin.
Ask a US conservative about our 20th and 21st century atrocities - torture, massacres, coups, support for genocidal regimes and ecocidal companies, etc. - and they'll proudly defend our brutality. Ask a liberal and they'll hedge, deny and justify like an awesome internet tankie who's never opened a history book.
Boomers are deff in denial but younger gen seems less likely to straight up deny it. It would be coached as "lesser of two evils" lol
Social media has a lot of bad faith actors who polarize every discussion so top comments will generally be extreme with an inflammatory shit show under.
That hasn’t been my experience at all. Sure, there are nationalists who will defend their own favorite Communist^™ Regime, but an ideological believer in communism is just that.
every “communist” when pushed will take position on atrocities committed by various communists regimes… they gonna do that thing that “fascists” do: “well he really did not do it but if he did, they clearly deserved it”
I have never encountered that argument. Is that something Tankies say?
What I have seen is the often mocked argument, that these regimes were not communist in the first place.
Actual communism has never existed and probably never will.
There are however plenty of communists that will openly denounce stalinism. That is the entire premise of Animal Farm, btw.
There’s nothing wrong with communism, correct. But what we know for fact is that the human species is incompatible with communism, moreso as the population is increased. There is, by nature, traits within that are antagonistic with communism. Communism has failed every time. Our best efforts so far are embracing some communist ideals whilst pandering around with others.
Will we get there? Probably.
Within this era? Hell no. We’ve only just started evolving an adaption to a shrinking planet and working with neighbours. However, as you know we’re still very divided, tribalistic, and prone to take whatever advantages we can get.
This is the realisation most people have during year 3 or 4 of the college communist phase. You accept the reality of Lord of the Flies and Animal Farm, that human nature is why we can’t have nice things…yet. I reckon around 2100–2150, after we’ve been through some more shit together and wanked another world war out of our system.
naevaTheRatBut what we know for fact is that the human species is incompatible with communism
Sorry what? How on earth would such a thing even be established as fact? This is a very bold claim.
Communism has failed every time.
I’m always really interested in what people mean when they say this. Is it that no organisation that has tried has managed to realise the utopia Marx predicted? Is it that they tend to lose wars with the USA? Is it that great suffering has occurred?
What is a system that has not failed? Like it’s pretty apparent whatever we’re doing now isn’t working. We’re in a mass extinction, the climate is destabilising, homelessness and sickness exist alongside people that personally own jet aircraft.
Genuinely I would love to know what specifically you mean because I see this a lot and it confuses the hell out of me.
Hopeful aside btw. Lord of the flies basically happened once except the kids all banded together and helped each other because humans are actually extremely pro social. theguardian.com/…/the-real-lord-of-the-flies-what…
Sorry what? How on earth would such a thing even be established as fact? This is a very bold claim.
I don’t want to sound patronising, but you have access to the entirety of our species’ history. It’s more about going through it to try find a time where it has worked. Beyond the exception of small communities, in every case I know of it has failed before maturing to a complete enough state—this actually includes some of those small communities too. Unless you’re confusing socialism with communism because of all it’s socialist traits.
So there’s a very big difference between X hasn’t happened yet and X is factually impossible. Imagine standing there in 1750s and saying “we know for a fact that the human species is fundamentally incompatible with flight”. Very shortly you would look like the complete arse that making that statement made you.
I don’t dispute nobody has achieved the utopia Marx hypothesised, that is trivial to demonstrate, I’m asking how on earth you would establish fundamental incompatibility.
Actually the current prevailing theory is that primitive communism was the state humans lived in before the founding of the first proto states, so if anything your stance should be that evidence suggests humans are fundamentally compatible with communism, unless you mean to argue we have undergone some shift in our fundamental nature in which case I would again ask where your evidence is.
Tribalism is compatible with communism. Kind of where the idea comes from. Unfortunately that’s not how society is these days. Whether communism, capitalism, or any other ism, control needs to be in place to ensure everyone is in line with it, since it’s impossible for 100% of a population to be, especially as that population goes into the millions.
With an authority or controlling wealth, everything results in an elite of some form to try keep a system in place, and that’s the start of failure.
If a village of 100 has just 1 asshole, things can be ruined. Scale up to global populations and you’ve got your answer. No ism can keep the psychopathic, narcissistic, or competitive nature of these people from ruining whatever ism it is you’d like to have.
Sorry, could you be a little more explicit in terms of how you’re answering my questions? I don’t really want to get drawn in to some aimless rambling bullshit.
I haven’t mentioned tribalism, I don’t even know what you’re referring to or why you’re bringing it up.
I don’t know what you mean by how society is these days. Are you saying society has changed fundamental human nature? what is the relevance please?
With an authority or controlling wealth, everything results in an elite of some form to try keep a system in place, and that’s the start of failure.
you’re talking to an anarchist so I have no disagreement there. I do wonder if you’ve ever read Marx though. Could you please honestly answer with what publications of his you’ve actually read? if none, what publications about Marxism have you read? if that list is exhaustive the three most recent?
If a village of 100 has just 1 asshole, things can be ruined. Scale up to global populations and you’ve got your answer. No ism can keep the psychopathic, narcissistic, or competitive nature of these people from ruining whatever ism it is you’d like to have.
???
Sorry, could you be a little more explicit in terms of how you’re answering my questions? I don’t really want to get drawn in to some aimless rambling bullshit.
Yeah, sure. The feeling’s mutual.
The topic of conversation is the scale of success of communism. If an original comment gets dissected poorly and barrels down a tangents of off-topic rabble, I re-read it and ignore stuff off-topic or unrelated, since that’s for a different conversation at a different time.
The points provided are my perspective of this topic and why I have that perspective. It is things I’ve experienced and know, not belief to plug narrative.
I haven’t mentioned tribalism, I don’t even know what you’re referring to or why you’re bringing it up.
Some things you have raised are loosely associated with our tribalism or post-tribalism era. However, tribalism is still relevant in modern society with political parties, sports teams, socioeconimcal ideologies, etc. It reaches back to our nature of belonging in a camp or community.
I don’t know what you mean by how society is these days. Are you saying society has changed fundamental human nature? what is the relevance please?
Quite the opposite. Society is a new thing. The more we attempt to progress it forward, we see more incompatibilities between our ideals and our nature. We will eventually evolve our nature into those ideals, but it cannot be entirely the other way around. As an anarchist, you’d understand your stance is predominantly the result of ideologies conflicting with human nature.
Could you please honestly answer with what publications of his you’ve actually read?
The manifesto, obv. However also a series of works and citations while studying. I don’t see any purpose in listing anything. Though I’d like to point out I was reading a lot on other modern social/political/economical ideologies so as to prevent any bias. This resulted in my conclusion that none of them work and a fool tribes themself to one. For communism especially, this is an ironic position to take, but seems to be the most popular for thee average “communist” these days. It is quite literally impossible to have communism without acceptance of conflicting ideologies or nature.
alephI don’t want to sound patronising, but you have access to the entirety of our species’ history
I mean, do you? You think early man was a rugged individualist who pulled himself up by his boot straps?
Homo sapiens survived millions of years as a result collectivism and sharing resources, which are the central tennets of communism.
xigoiHomosapiens survived hundreds of thousands of years as a result of collectivism and sharing resources
Voluntarily sharing resources.
That’s naive. I think because you’re taking a rather shallow capitalism vs communism stance, not understanding all the capitalist traits your homo sapiens with communist traits had.
None-the-less, you’ve deviated far from the main point and referring to known prehistoric eras before the concept of the topic was conceived is not where I thought this could even go.
You’re also referring to negative byproducts of capitalism as “ideas” of it. There are few social or economical isms that have byproducts holding true to the ideas and intent. That’s my point. Human nature often ruins great ideas and why communism has yet to show any success. We have many great ideas on paper, but they don’t factor human nature.
Well, if we look at humans as a species then obviously the greater part of that is prehistorical. Clearly our “nature” is not incompatible with collectivism when looking at small communities and groups.
However, I think you have a point when it comes to more complex societies with increasingly larger populations, which, as a rule, have tended to form hierarchical class systems that are antithetical to collectivist ideals.
So we could say that humans have historically been fine with communism up to a certain point. It’s when they start to form nation states and larger communities that societies have generally gravitated towards hierarchy and plutocracy, for whatever reason.
Exactly that. And as I said, it’s not just for communism, this goes for most ideologies that influence society.
I think greed and power are the biggest kickers. These two seem to come as a way to ensure survivability in a large population. But it’s of no benefit in a small community where everyone’s acknowledged.
Unironically “why didn’t Marx think of human nature lol”
Actually read a book and stop trying to sound like a smartass asserting stuff on the basis of “it feels true”.
Must be the lizard people then, huh? I mean, if human nature has had nothing to do with the outcome of Marxism’s lack of uptake in global societies and cultures- Oh wait, I’m doing it again. Just because that “feels true” is might not be so. I’m learning…
So, since that’s all a lie and I’m clearly unaware that Maxism is actually wildly successful across the globe, please, recommend a book so I can keep riding the Rebelation Train.
I would like to know why people keep bringing up Karl on a comment about communism. Maybe he has works you know about which explains how they are synonymous.
Marxism lack of global uptake on a map:
States that had communist governments in red, states that the Soviet Union believed at one point to be moving toward socialism in orange and other socialist states in yellow. Not all of the bright red states remained Soviet allies.
These aren’t Maxist states. Those that do have Marxist traits are (mostly) Stalin’s Maxism-Leninism which obviously has some very different views to Marxism, especially on social matters and rejection of the left.
You’re even commecting the Soviets in, so I can only assume you’re referring to the Stalinification era and post era, which this map seems to be just that.
But the map and commentary is still interesting.
Marxism isn’t a rigid doctrine, it adapts to the material conditions of the world around it, as it was designed to do.
That doesn’t mean anything to the point I’m raising. But it is correct and why it has hybridised with other ideologies. It is another part of human nature to pick and choose what suits best. Also why capitalism is as bad as it is.
I didn’t know “human nature” was shorthand for “current capitalist states”.
It’s not. That would be very inefficient shorthand.
HubertManneI don't think its possible to be on social media of any kind without encountering propaganda of some kind. what frustrating about news nowadays is more the stuff that is not an outright lie. just leaves out things and lines things up for a particular narrative. So you can't be like. This right here is an outright lie (I mean oftentimes you can but not always) and instead have to be like. this ignores this or does not take this into account. etc.
Because fascists are mostly content with gobbling Fox News cock.
Why are we getting homophobic?
I don’t observe any homophobia in that comment. Their statement is that fascists submit to anything Fox News says, and makes no remarks about oral sex beyond the graphic metaphor. Also fascist is a genderless term so there is no way to know if the fascist is gobbling on same or opposite gender cock.
Gobbling cock is great. Fox News cock, though? Have some standards.
U/TheUncannyObserver there is a lesson in there...
Oh, there’s plenty of fem fascists out there too.
Why’d you assume it was gay?
Probably because communism > capitalism and on capitalist channels like corporate social media or MSM, this type of ideology is muted by default for obvious reasons
Clowns think they can beat Mao and Stalin on genociding dissidents and undesirables.
Yes that is a good example of a communist regime
empireOfLove2Be careful where you tread here. You must be careful to separate “communists” (people who believe in economic reorganization away from the power of capital) and “tankies” (those who support corrupt regimes that project the illusion of communism).
There are indeed quite a few communists and various other alt-camp political spectrum believers on here. They do have quite liberal beliefs but don’t typically cause much of a fuss, because rational people can coexist with differing beliefs… and i dont mind them one bit. But the tankes, like lemmygrad, hexbear, etc, do stir up an anti-west "commie propaganda"fuss every chance they get, without being related to actual communism, especially if one mentions a hot button like Israel or Ukraine. And if you get into an argument with a tankie, they will just sling mud on you and call you a Nazi.
The cool part is, you can filter a lot of the chaff by just blocking the ugly instances from your user settings page (since Lemmy supports that now), blocking frequent flyers, and trimming/moving your subscribed community list to other, often smaller instances. A minimal amount of effort VASTLY increases the quality of content you’ll see on lemmy.
HypxThere are very few real communists left. On here, it’s going to be pretty much all tankies.
Yeah, unfortunate but true…
Global news communities in instances like beehaw or lemmy.world seem to have predominantly communist and leftist posters. The nazbols congregate on their own famous three instances.
diplodocusShow me a single comment on Hexbear or lemmy.ml or lemmygrad that promotes nazbols or patsocs or MAGA communists or LaRouchites like Hinkle or Haz or Maupin or Dugin.
Or Juche, Maoism, Leninism, Stalinism…
Given your false reports to the authorities, it seems you like authoritarianism after all.
Were the reports false or were the authoritarians false?
What does a decision to rely on ad hominem display… A deeper stalking would brittle it down tho
The phrase is whittle it down.
Sure. That’s a phrase which also works. And when English isn’t everyone’s first, or even second, language, either way is fine as long as the intended message is interpreted somewhat
silly goose meekahI’d definitely describe myself as a communist, but I do realize we never had a proper communist state on this planet, just authoritarian states that acted like communists to win over the workers. Capitalism needs to be regulated as fuck to create a fair society, so for now, I strive for socialism, because I understand going straight to communism probably won’t work.
OBJECTION!There is a clear contradiction in this comment.
Capitalism needs to be regulated as fuck to create a fair society, so for now, I strive for socialism, because I understand going straight to communism probably won’t work.
Isn’t this the exact reasoning behind China’s market reforms, beginning under Deng Xiaoping?
If we take this poster at their word, then their disagreement with modern China is not ideological in nature!
Does that mean their disagreement is about the practical implementation? Of course not! That would contradict a key piece of evidence: This World Bank report!
According to the report, 800 million Chinese people have been lifted out of poverty - accounting for three quarters of worldwide poverty reduction! No reasonable person could called that a failed implementation!
If this poster really supports a transitional phase of regulated markets, then why would they be condemning China for successfully implementing the very approach they advocate for?
Lifting 800 Million People Out of Poverty – New Report Looks at Lessons from China’s Experience
Over the past 40 years, China has lifted nearly 800 million people out of poverty, accounting for more than 75 percent of global poverty reduction in the same period, according to a new report released on Thursday.
It might have worked in that regard but at what cost? An authoritarian state that commits genocide inside it’s own borders, so yes it clearly failed in the regard that it does not treat everyone equally, a core principle of real communism.
Your genocide assertion I won’t touch because it’s untouchable on lemmy.world.