Comment on Personalized Political Spectrum

• TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Bruh just out here punching the air in an empty comment section of a shit posting sub

  Image

  Go back to your echo chamber tankie. Nobody likes you. Nobody wants you. But I’m sure your fans enjoy your circle jerk.

  Which actually existing current or historical leftist movements do you support?

  Are you a fucking cop? Get the fuck out of here you loser. I’m sorry everyone hates you. But thats a you issue.

  source

  • Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Image

    source
  • Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I’m not sorry everyone hates them

    source
• kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Anarchist Catalonia, modern Rojava, more than a few pre-Columbian North American societies, the Paris Commune of 1793… Maybe read some theory instead of making arguments from ignorance.

  And you can care about results without having historical results. Anti-monarchism in general had basically zero results post-Industrial Revolution until the liberals won in North America in the late 18th century, but that didn’t mean that they didn’t care about results, just that they hadn’t achieved much yet. The American Revolution was pretty quickly followed by the French Revolution, the Haitian Revolution, several more French revolutions, Brazilian independence, and eventually the October Revolution, the most recent Chinese civil war, the Cuban Revolution, and so on.

  Between 1775 and 1925, the general concept of people voting on matters of statewide policy went from a relic of the Classical Era that had ended more than 1800 years earlier to the norm in North America and Europe. 1800 years of obscurity, then 150 years to ubiquity in the world’s wealthiest states and another 50 to expand to most of the rest.

  Sure, anarchism has had a longer period out of the spotlight, not having been the norm since roughly the invention of agriculture ~8000 years ago, but you never know when it might return. Having a concrete, achievable plan to get results is good, but you also want to make sure that the results you’re striving for are just, otherwise you end up with liberalism again. And we all know how that ends up.

  source

  • Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Lol way to prove their point dumbass

    source
  • Riverside@reddthat.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Anarchist Catalonia, modern Rojava, more than a few pre-Columbian North American societies, the Paris Commune of 1793

    Pre-columbian societies aside (you can’t turn history around), all the rest ended up in fascism/monarchism/failed state in a matter of how many years/months?

    And you can care about results without having historical results

    Yes, you can do that if your goal is moral purity or intellectual amusement and not the material improvement of the lives of actual people. All other system changes you’ve proposed are just changes of ruling class and production system due to the slow motor of history and development, except for the socialist revolutions in Russia, China and Cuba. We literally have the recipe that works, why do you reject it?

    Having a concrete, achievable plan to get results is good, but you also want to make sure that the results you’re striving for are just

    Agreed. That’s why I praise the immense increases in welfare and quality of life in actually existing socialist countries, both historical and ongoing.

    source