Thanks, comrade

I am glad that this was said. Insults should not be welcome in any community, both in Lemmy and Lemmygrad, because if any discussion is made in good-faith, insults are never needed. And by good-faith I mean giving well thought answers, being able to defend your points and consider one’s arguments and reconsider your own. Above all, there should be freedom of criticism, not freedom of cursing. But if you cannot defend your point, you should expect to be attacked.

In respect to those with a liberal tendency, I don’t blame the political inconsistency on yourselves, hence why I think this is outside the scope of the administration any public statement on this, but I will personally state that liberals should reconsider their attitude on communism. Liberals should at least have an open-minded attitude towards communism because think about how many books have you read on that subject, on how communists understand the capitalist society, how they perceive the historical role of the people, and what they are trying to achieve. How much do you know about communism and its history, really?

As a communist myself, if I were to explain communism to a 3 year old, I would say communists want people to “be nicer to each other.” To a 16 year old, I would explain that communism is trying to diminish the differences between the rich and poor. Because by then, they will already have experienced seeing hopeless, hungry and homeless people on the streets of the city he lives in begging for money because he can only satisfy his need through the exchange of money. To a 32 year old, I would say communism is about ending exploitation, because by then, they will already have the experience of the labor market enough to not only recognize exploitation, but feel in on their own skin.

Being skeptical about everything should not only be welcome, but actually encouraged as well. But what most liberals (and people influenced by liberalism, knowingly or not) in fact do is deny communism altogether, not being skeptical about it. They do not engage with communist ideas, and proceed to attack communism, even if they are completely unaware what is it about. This is fanatical liberal dogmatism, not actual intellectual engagement.

But again, I don’t blame liberals for their own incoherence. Their thinking is a product of a historical period, like every generation, and like communists as well who are also a product of the same historical period. The base framework for communism is Marxism, and very briefly, Marxism is a critique of capitalism based on a scientific methodological approach to the analysis of society and its mode of production. It wouldn’t be much of a stretch to say everyone in the world lives in a capitalist economy. So of course Marxism, the philosophical, political and economical framework which investigates capitalism through a scientific method, would be the target of the most vicious attacks by those who benefit directly from capitalism, i.e., the bourgeoisie, through every possible means (propaganda). It’s also the reason why Marxism continues to be a relevant and influential theory worldwide, but by definition it is an unfinished and constantly evolving theory.

So in short, everyone is free to criticize Marxism and communism based on what they understand by it, and everyone should be open to be criticized, but insults should never be allowed, and we should always be humble on what we don’t know, instead of attacking others based on ignorance.

I’m kinda surprised how much lemmygrad antagonizes themselves with their brothers on the left.

If you read the post which this one responds to, you can see the user has a lot of “baggage” behind their post. At this point, no leftist can consider them a “brother”, and it’s meaningless to call itself a leftist while parroting the talking points of the US State Department. What does it even mean to be a leftist?

C’mon, people, if there are your potential supporters, they are here. You don’t gain followers with harassment. This toxicity is totally counter productive here even for your own cause.

What toxicity? My post actually considered what the user wrote in good faith, and I responded in good faith. I didn’t insult them, I carefully explained why their assumptions were wrong in the specific example of China. But I could go on into the original verborrhage of the user, which equated the USSR with Nazi Germany, denied NATO expansion, claimed Taiwan as an independent country (which the majority of countries of the world do not recognize), claimed it had “concentration camps” and so on.

In their post, they called people who are sympathetic to China and the USSR “fascistic and ignorant”, and you are complaining about toxicity when I respond to them not even insulting them once?

Because the user posted their question here. If you read their post, you can clearly see they didn’t have an intent in asking a question either, they just blurted out common talking points about the USSR and PRC we see from Western countries, so I made this one in response, in the same place.

This isn’t about any utopia, it’s about objective truth. There are many criticisms to be made of the USSR and China, but if your criticism is based on falsehoods and propaganda, you are far from understanding anything.

If the intent of the bot is to fight disinformation, I think this is pretty spot on

I posted a response to user @goosefetisch@lemmy.ml here because they deleted their post after a deserved backlash from the Lemmy community. I didn’t want to discard the effort in compiling this information, so I thought I’d post it here.

Natural? Absolutely not.

In a capitalist system, where labor is a commodity bought by employers, it will tend to have unemployment. Unemployment is extremely useful for capitalists primarily because it drives the prices of labor down, because unemployed people will be more desperate for a job and accept lower wages, and also it leaves a larger pool of labor to be employed anytime needed.

The market itself cannot fix unemployment, and in fact, tends to worsen it. Unemployment is only fixed through state intervention and programs to employ people. The lowest unemployment rates are found in countries which do not obey the capitalist market logic, namely socialist countries. Cuba had an unemployment rate of 1.2% before the pandemic, Laos has an unemployment rate of 1% and was lower before the pandemic, the USSR had rates of unemployment below 1%.

There’s nothing natural about unemployment. It’s a state policy to leave a high percentage of the people unemployed, and it only benefits corporate interests.

The Roman Empire also thought it would be eternal 😉

or the bourgeois scum that control it

“Lenin’s Democratic Centralism”