redtea

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

NATO’s purpose is to guarantee the freedom and security of its members through political and military means.

https://www.nato.int/nato-welcome/index.html

It would seem that NATO itself disagrees with you.

Edit: NATO are the imperialists. By any definition. Please read any of the following authors's works on imperialism/empire: Hobson, Hilferding, Lenin, David Harvey, John Smith, Michael Hudson, Zac Cope, Anievas and Nisancioglu, Samir Amin, Giovanni Arrighi, Paul Kennedy, or Niall Ferguson.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago (5 children)

What was NATO doing in Yugoslavia, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq? How many Russians are there in Iran, Korea, or Syria?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago

What about Meta? Will they be federated with? If so, or if there is discussion before an announcement of defederation with Threads, then this argument doesn't stand. I'm not saying you're being inconsistent, but that it's inconsistent with the rationale for the general decision to defederate from Hexbear.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's a left-unity instance not a communist one, I think.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

The six million people killed in NATO's war o[f] terror are easily forgotten about and some people don't want pesky reminders thank you very much.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Please don't make me think about all those people my ~~regime~~ reasonable ~~war-~~ democracy-loving government murders.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago

This is a gross mischaracterisation. Please read Socialism: Utopian and Scientific by Engels. This is the basis of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Xi, etc's thought: all these figures are Marxist-Leninists, who reject the idea of utopia. Everything is contradiction. The Marxism you refer to, which is mainly Marxism-Leninism, is not teleological.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago

Echoing/adding to Tabitha's point, it gets tedious very quickly to argue with liberals about China because they're rarely well informed.

Marxism stands for the 'ruthless criticism of all that exists' and the 'concrete analysis of concrete conditions'. China does not get a free pass. But it's not very productive to argue with someone who isn't concerned with material reality in China because they've been led to believe falsehoods spread by liberals.

One of the reasons you don't see the critical side to the 'tankie' analysis of China is because you might never have got to the point where you're talking about China (as opposed to what westerners think about China).

If the 'tankie' has to debunk a blatant lie for the millionth time, a constructive conversation cannot follow unless the liberal is willing to move past that point. The liberal must first accept that they might be wrong and then continue the discussion beyond where it usually ends—which is usually where the liberal accuses the 'tankie' of arguing in bad faith for daring to investigate an issue beyond the headline.

(Again, to caveat this, by liberal, I mean pro-capitalists, not the 'progressive' liberals of the US.)

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago

Exactly this. Even the CPC doesn't claim to have achieved socialism yet. They don't plan to achieve it till ~2050 (although seeing how they smash all other targets, they might get there a bit sooner).

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago

Where are these communist/socialists that you're speaking of? In the west?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 years ago

What do you mean by socialist economics?

You'll be hard pressed to find anyone on Hexbear (or Lemmygrad for that matter) who 'supports Russia' or thinks it's 'ok to lock up gay people'. In fact, it's the exact opposite. If you read Hexbear's Code of Conduct, any kind of bigotry will result in a ban: https://www.hexbear.net/code_of_conduct

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

What do you mean by socialist? You support someone like e.g. Bernie Sanders, or?

view more: ‹ prev next ›