BurgerPunk [he/him, comrade/them] @ BurgerPunk @hexbear.net

Posts

0

Comments

676

Joined

3 yr. ago

And as liberal democracy seem to be the 'goal' 

Bourgeois democracy is the goal of capitalist states because it is democracy for the ruling class only. Liberal democracies have strong states and engage in censorship. They excecute, imprison, or discredit political dissidents. The difference isn't what they do but who they target and who benefits.

All AES states are democracies, they aren't liberal democracies and they don't benefit only the bourgeois. That's why say China is considered, "evil authoritarian" while the US and its "liberal democracy" are considered good by libersls like you despite the US actively engaging in genocide, proxy wars, running concentration camps on its border, sanctioning any nation that seeks independence from its hegemony, and persecuting political dissidents.

Its an article by neocon liar, Iraq War architect, and Axis of Evil author David Frum and you believe what he says? Also its in the Atlantic so its almost guaranteed to be liberal garbage.

authoritarians good, liberals bad?

"Authoritarian" is meaningless used this way. Its just hurled at AES and other nations attempting independence from US exploitation. And liberals are always bad. They support the global imperialist power structure - the greatest engine of destruction in out world. Liberals are literally destroying the planet and performing genocide as we speak

Theyre letting the lame duck with dementia continue making decisions? This administration has committed fraud by hiding Biden's condition. Now descions of worldwide importance are being made by people no one elected. This is a rouge and illegitimate government.

Libs still pretend they care about democracy. They're full on "still love the truck though" but with the state

Cecil Rhodes was a racist piece of shit

I can't think of a single Rhode Scholar who isn't a complete neolib ghoul carrying on Rhodes legacy of barbarism and exploitation. Not exactly a group of people i envy or would want to be a part of

It seriously took you 17 days to come up with this banger

I understand why you see things that way because you're a liberal and not a Marxist. Reform makes sense if you come at these problems from the perspective of liberalism. The problem is that the it really isn't an issue of systems feeding into each other - it is the system- liberal democracy and who controls and why it exists in the first place that's the issue.

You bring up good questions about why liberal democracy looks different in Europe than the US. There are a lot of reasons for that, but what matters is that liberal democracy performs exactly the same function in Europe as it does in the US. It doesn't matter if theres one party or twelve, ranked choice or first past the post. I'm not argueing that one or the other isn't better, i just don't think it matters whether the system of bourgeois rule is slightly better or not.

Okay, i can see the logic there. I also agree that its not about individual leaders having personal faults so much as the current political paradigm. I also agree that there would be a voter base for a progressive party. There's cerainly popular support for every proposed progressive policy in the US. Just M4A we know was widely popular across the country. Theres also been demonstrated that there's a grassroots donor base for a progressive party as we saw in Bernie's campaigns.

The real question that i think you should try to answer is given that there's broad support for these policies, and there's both a voter and donor base - Why does it not exist?

Liberals look at this question and blame the people. They blames voters. They blame the voting system and the two party stranglehold. Then they advocate for ranked choice and third parties.

Marxists consider the material basis of the system first and surmise that it doesn't exist because it wouldn't serve the interest ruling class. That liberal democracy is not democracy for the majority of people- the working class - but a democracy for the ruling class and both parties exist to serve their interests. This is why we can't get M4A - the most broadly supported policy proposal in the country. It doesn't matter that most people want it because it does not serve the interests of the ruling class.

the other party should be Progressives

I'm curious who you consider to be a progressive in US politics.

And i do mean curious genuinely. I'm a communist so I don't have a very high opinion of what counts as "progressive" in the US. I do think there wouod be a voter base for what could be called a Progressive Party in the US but i don't see any leadership. Most espousing "progressive" positions would turn their backs on them the minute they could actually come true, or whenever they have to put their money where thier mouth is. Kamala Harris and the entire progressives caucus cime to mind.

I'd like to hear your opinion on possible leadership though. And i won't attack it as we both know I'll disagree before hand lol - I'm just genuinely curious how a non-communist views it

"Young people say the world is ending. Here's why it's actually just a Vibepocslypse caused by those millenials on their Tiktok" - opion writer failchild in make work job making millions while the world burns

That's why we don't have down votes on hexbear. If you disagree you've got to post.

Everyone arguing with you is anti-zionist. We want Isreal as it exists to end. If you care about the injustice and genocide of that fascist settler-colonial state, then I don't get why you want to die on the hill of an antisemitic position

You're really pretending you can't see the trope you've tripled down on? Its ZOG. Its the one way to criticize Isreal that actually is antisemitic

It's the anti-Zionist Liberal interpretation, excusing the Empire for the deeds its Vassal commits.

Nailed it. They need to excuse the US and they get to do it in a racist way. Liberal win-win

Smol bean US being controlled by their own vassal that couldn't exist without their support. This is really deep analysis. You are a very deep thinker.

Exactly. Im a stickler on this point because I've had to go through conversations with left leaning jewish friends who still have some lingering brainworms. It matters to understand what is actual antisemitism. The zionist will not act in good faith - so it's even more important for us to understand the difference

You think your antisemtic trope is analysis?

Isn't that an Israeli talking point tho, that any criticism of them is anti-semitic, equating any criticism of the zionist project as anti-semitic?

No. What I'm saying is that specifically believing the US is controlled by Isreal - that the US is subordinate to Isreal - that is an antisemitic belief (on top of being ridiculous). That's not an isreali talking point. Believing that is not helping combat zionism - it helps it.

I'm anti-zionist. That's why its very important to me to point out this antisemitic belief because its detrimental to the cause of anti-zionism.

I love Stalin's writings style. That's a great breakdown. Dialectic and Historical Materislism is the best explanation of those concepts.

That's a lot of words to double down on an antisemitic trope

The US could theoretically not allow themselves to be controlled. But that's not the reality.

I agree. He made great contributions to theory. Foundations of Leninism is great - and he's a really good writer on top of it. Unsurprising as he was a voracious reader of Marxist theory.