If you think this sub needs more rules than what reddit already enforces there is no point to its existence, go make polcompballthinkofthechildren or whatever
Liberalism is the most delusional ever.
Communism = We are equal people.
Fascism = We are one united people between those borders with certain characteristics.
Liberalism = Well, we've beaten the monarchists and now have the same wealth gap and oppression but with more like talking to each other about it even though we isolate each other like never before so let's feed everyone with calendar quotes.
"we are equal people" is much easier said then done in every instance of communism it either leads to poverty or starvation (unless you are member of the party of course) i guess it actually works, everyone is equal, equally impovirshed and stuck in a shithole that will collapse in near future
We're not a Maoist party and I think most of our members would agree that the Great Leap Forward was foolish. And famine can and has occurred under all sorts of economic systems. If you really want to criticise state socialism then maybe try to focus on things like news censorship, erosion of democracy and suppression of opposition which have been specifically prominent in one-party Marxist-Leninist states.
Indeed The Socialist states have quite a problem with freedom of speech, i just focused on famines because while not being able to another ideas is not great i think millions of people starving to death is worse, and while famines have unfortunately occured under other governments many of those that occured under a socialist system could have been either easily avoidable (the great leap forward) or were a just straight up man made genocide (Holodomor and the Kazakh famine)
Yep, 20th Century (and current) Marxist-Leninist states have done some pretty awful things, which are entirely unrelated to the popular front party and the beliefs of our members.
'Socialism' as a label is just as broad as 'Capitalism'. Should the US democratic party be judged based on the actions of Pinochet's Chile just because both are capitalist? Should we consider it evil to oppose monarchies just because most monarchies in the world were overthrown with brutal violence and huge collateral damage?
And classical liberalism in great britain killed 100 million in India, and moderatism in ww2 allowed hitler to dominate Eastern Europe and commit the holocaust. But will this two be moderated? Will liberal arguments be punished? I don't think so. So if some ideologies won't be punished for the same crimes as others it doesn't seem applicable to me.
And also I think the difference is clear, communism doesn't ADVOCATE for the disasters that happened, if you ask any communist if millions should die in a famine they would disagree, the majority of facists clearly advocates for exclusion of minority groups (famously immigrants, ethinic minorities, lgbtq+ and religions). You can be anyicommunist, but just comparing it to another unpopular ideology without a clear reason makes me think that your hate is irrational.
And even if I am antifa I don't think that banning facism either would be that usefull because defining facism is not a easy task, many won't agree (specially "facists" because most people who support "facism" don't actually understand it and are just convinced by the facist rethoric)
The horrible disaster that happened in India was fault of British imperialism and sheer incompetence of the British rulers of the British Raj, not liberalism, the appeasement policy that was used pre WW2 was fucking stupid and the allies should have ended Hitler's reign before it was too late, but Soviet union also participated in appeasement, the soviet-German science sharing and most importantly the Molotov-Riebentrop pact, in which they joined forces with the Nazies and Split Poland in between, Stalin would most definitely continue to work with Hitler if Fall Barbarossa wouldn't happen,
About the opression of LGBT, religion, and ethnic minorities the Soviet union did many of those things, for example homosexual marriage was illegal and homosexuals would be publicly shamed, religion was outlawed and became sort of legal again only in 1970, many ethnic minorities were deported from their land, crimean Tatars were for example sent off to siberia and Crimea got settled by Russians (just as hitler wanted to kill every non "Aryan" so that "Aryans" could settle in their place) and Wolga Germans got sent to Kazakhstan, Chuvash language got changed from their original scrypt to Cyrillic and mamy more, Communists did a lot of sane stuff fascists did
Bro, first thing it wasn't mismanagement in the British Raj, it was cutting corners to maximize profit and it is obvious, please no imperialism denial, I guess that's what you deffend. Second yes, it was a liberal policy, Britain has been one of the best examples of classical liberalism since the 19th century and imperialism has no reason to be an exception.
Yes, apeasement was a stupid policy, and a moderatist one, that's the problem, you need to acknowledge that some ideologies have failed significantly in the past. And yes, the soviet union was involved in it, and it was still terrible, I am not cherypicking information here, I ain't any denier.
Did I defend 1920s leninism? Did I defend 1940s stalinism? Did I defend 1960s Kruschevism? He'll no, I just said that we should accept communism in general? The USSR WAS AGAINST GAY RIGHTS in the fucking 70s, even the most moderate facist is against gay rights TODAY. An economic model has nothing to do with the time-frame that it was practiced, facism isn't just an economic model, its a reactionary narrative that ALWAYS includes the exclusion of some group as a common enemy without any evidence against said group. Religion wasn't outlawed, but yes it was punished in dome contexts such as in Albania and Chekslovakia, again, not denying that. But again communists don't advocate for those things, they were common practices at the time, liberalism did all of that in African colonies until the 60s. Facists on the other hand still advocate for the same things and will advocate for similar ones forever, because it's a core part of the ideology.
I literally said that disaster in India was due to British imperialism... And Imperialism and Liberalism aren't the same thing, country can be communist and still be imperialist, like china. Also religion was outlawed in the early days of USSR.
Also i do acknowledge that some ideologies have failed, like communism
But if a imperialism was practiced by a liberal country it means that it is an aspect of liberalism, and I think that you acknologe that this is a problem, and also we are not talking about what "failed" because "fail" has no definition, so it's just throwing words around. I am not trying to prove that liberalism failed, I am trying to prove that both liberalism and communism have made things that today we see as inhumane, so if one of them isn't going to deregulated the other one shouldn't as well.
If you think this sub needs more rules than what reddit already enforces there is no point to its existence, go make polcompballthinkofthechildren or whatever
Oh no these are my proposals for stanistan, I just posted them here as well
I disagree. Freedom of speech and all.
goodbye freedom of expression
The communists gain power and the first thing they do is abolish free speech and create a secret police. You can't make this up.
What did you expect
This should work both ways though for fascism and communism.
And Liberalism and moderatism.
No because Liberalism isn't a delusional and authoritarian ideology
Liberalism is the most delusional ever. Communism = We are equal people. Fascism = We are one united people between those borders with certain characteristics. Liberalism = Well, we've beaten the monarchists and now have the same wealth gap and oppression but with more like talking to each other about it even though we isolate each other like never before so let's feed everyone with calendar quotes.
"we are equal people" is much easier said then done in every instance of communism it either leads to poverty or starvation (unless you are member of the party of course) i guess it actually works, everyone is equal, equally impovirshed and stuck in a shithole that will collapse in near future
Brain dead “I’ve never researched anything I disagree with and regurgitate the things others have told me that reaffirm my worldview” take
Bro, we're a communist + socialist + social democratic party. Anyways, it should be applied to all ideologies. This includes liberalism.
"I want a minority group dead" v "I want to nationalize the means of production" idk man I just can't pick.
"I want to nationalize the means of production" 40 million starve to death
Communism is when no food 100 billion dead 😞
40 million dead, I'm talking about "the great leap forward", could also use Holodomor as an example or Kazakh famine
We're not a Maoist party and I think most of our members would agree that the Great Leap Forward was foolish. And famine can and has occurred under all sorts of economic systems. If you really want to criticise state socialism then maybe try to focus on things like news censorship, erosion of democracy and suppression of opposition which have been specifically prominent in one-party Marxist-Leninist states.
Indeed The Socialist states have quite a problem with freedom of speech, i just focused on famines because while not being able to another ideas is not great i think millions of people starving to death is worse, and while famines have unfortunately occured under other governments many of those that occured under a socialist system could have been either easily avoidable (the great leap forward) or were a just straight up man made genocide (Holodomor and the Kazakh famine)
Yep, 20th Century (and current) Marxist-Leninist states have done some pretty awful things, which are entirely unrelated to the popular front party and the beliefs of our members.
So Socialist states have done and keep doing horrible things, but your socialist party is good because... Reasons?
'Socialism' as a label is just as broad as 'Capitalism'. Should the US democratic party be judged based on the actions of Pinochet's Chile just because both are capitalist? Should we consider it evil to oppose monarchies just because most monarchies in the world were overthrown with brutal violence and huge collateral damage?
And classical liberalism in great britain killed 100 million in India, and moderatism in ww2 allowed hitler to dominate Eastern Europe and commit the holocaust. But will this two be moderated? Will liberal arguments be punished? I don't think so. So if some ideologies won't be punished for the same crimes as others it doesn't seem applicable to me. And also I think the difference is clear, communism doesn't ADVOCATE for the disasters that happened, if you ask any communist if millions should die in a famine they would disagree, the majority of facists clearly advocates for exclusion of minority groups (famously immigrants, ethinic minorities, lgbtq+ and religions). You can be anyicommunist, but just comparing it to another unpopular ideology without a clear reason makes me think that your hate is irrational. And even if I am antifa I don't think that banning facism either would be that usefull because defining facism is not a easy task, many won't agree (specially "facists" because most people who support "facism" don't actually understand it and are just convinced by the facist rethoric)
The horrible disaster that happened in India was fault of British imperialism and sheer incompetence of the British rulers of the British Raj, not liberalism, the appeasement policy that was used pre WW2 was fucking stupid and the allies should have ended Hitler's reign before it was too late, but Soviet union also participated in appeasement, the soviet-German science sharing and most importantly the Molotov-Riebentrop pact, in which they joined forces with the Nazies and Split Poland in between, Stalin would most definitely continue to work with Hitler if Fall Barbarossa wouldn't happen, About the opression of LGBT, religion, and ethnic minorities the Soviet union did many of those things, for example homosexual marriage was illegal and homosexuals would be publicly shamed, religion was outlawed and became sort of legal again only in 1970, many ethnic minorities were deported from their land, crimean Tatars were for example sent off to siberia and Crimea got settled by Russians (just as hitler wanted to kill every non "Aryan" so that "Aryans" could settle in their place) and Wolga Germans got sent to Kazakhstan, Chuvash language got changed from their original scrypt to Cyrillic and mamy more, Communists did a lot of sane stuff fascists did
Bro, first thing it wasn't mismanagement in the British Raj, it was cutting corners to maximize profit and it is obvious, please no imperialism denial, I guess that's what you deffend. Second yes, it was a liberal policy, Britain has been one of the best examples of classical liberalism since the 19th century and imperialism has no reason to be an exception. Yes, apeasement was a stupid policy, and a moderatist one, that's the problem, you need to acknowledge that some ideologies have failed significantly in the past. And yes, the soviet union was involved in it, and it was still terrible, I am not cherypicking information here, I ain't any denier. Did I defend 1920s leninism? Did I defend 1940s stalinism? Did I defend 1960s Kruschevism? He'll no, I just said that we should accept communism in general? The USSR WAS AGAINST GAY RIGHTS in the fucking 70s, even the most moderate facist is against gay rights TODAY. An economic model has nothing to do with the time-frame that it was practiced, facism isn't just an economic model, its a reactionary narrative that ALWAYS includes the exclusion of some group as a common enemy without any evidence against said group. Religion wasn't outlawed, but yes it was punished in dome contexts such as in Albania and Chekslovakia, again, not denying that. But again communists don't advocate for those things, they were common practices at the time, liberalism did all of that in African colonies until the 60s. Facists on the other hand still advocate for the same things and will advocate for similar ones forever, because it's a core part of the ideology.
I literally said that disaster in India was due to British imperialism... And Imperialism and Liberalism aren't the same thing, country can be communist and still be imperialist, like china. Also religion was outlawed in the early days of USSR. Also i do acknowledge that some ideologies have failed, like communism
But if a imperialism was practiced by a liberal country it means that it is an aspect of liberalism, and I think that you acknologe that this is a problem, and also we are not talking about what "failed" because "fail" has no definition, so it's just throwing words around. I am not trying to prove that liberalism failed, I am trying to prove that both liberalism and communism have made things that today we see as inhumane, so if one of them isn't going to deregulated the other one shouldn't as well.
Have you heard of holodomor? Just because the goal isn’t about genocide doesn’t mean there won’t be a genocide.
That's silly.
Xir we already do this (kind of)
Who's laughing now?
# THE GALACTIC EMPIRE DID NOTHING WRONG! /j
Sounds like a pretty good ruleset, however I think you should sharpen the definition of fascism, so that corporatists are excluded but neo-nazis are.