ITT: leftists fighting leftists, including the OP
Which is super-ironic considering what the posted meme is
silly costume dance
Submitted 7 hours ago by bearboiblake@pawb.social to [deleted]
https://quokk.au/static/media/users/qH/2Q/qH2QV66rz1ARivM.jpg
Comments
RiceMunk@sopuli.xyz 4 hours ago
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 1 hour ago
ITT: leftists fighting leftists, including the OP
I’m pretty sure OP is just a MAGAT troll that’s successfully stirring shit up with the help of other trolls. like a troll circle jerk.
Wataba@sh.itjust.works 1 hour ago
Blaming the liberals is an auto red flag for me. Whether it’s coming from MAGA or anarchist dips.
bearboiblake@pawb.social 3 hours ago
Honestly, I am kind of surprised at how invested and single-minded a lot of people are in protecting capitalist propaganda. I doubt any of these commenters are ruling class, but they’re relentlessly berating and smearing me for advocating for the interests of the working class and providing basic political education. It’s really something.
RiceMunk@sopuli.xyz 3 hours ago
Well, you are misusing established naming conventions and giving off the vibe that you think your definition is the only correct one ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
zxqwas@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
Do you think that the relative impopularity of anarchism in politics is due to poor performance of the anarchists marketing department?
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 1 hour ago
if true, they should get more organized. maybe have some meetups and discus what their plans are forward.
starik@lemmy.zip 6 hours ago
Boo. This sucks
bearboiblake@pawb.social 6 hours ago
Liberalism is a right-wing ideology which adopts the language of progressiveness, but actually prioritizes the freedom of movement of wealth, e.g. free markets, over the freedom of individuals. Some individual liberties are espoused under liberalism, insofar as those liberties do not interfere with the freedom of capitalists to exploit the working class. I believe fully in the freedom of individuals, as long as those freedoms do not allow for the exploitation or oppression of others.
How does capitalism inevitably lead to fascism?
>Basically, the issue with capitalism is that the more wealth you have, the easier it is for you to make more money. And since money can be used to buy goods, services and influence, there is always a way to use money to gain more political and social power. With that political and social power, you can push society and the legal system in the direction you want to go. So you can use your wealth to gain power, and then you can use your power to change laws and society so that you can make even more wealth and power. It’s a positive feedback loop. > >Obviously, though, if the billionaires and ruling class are accumulating more and more of our society’s wealth, that inevitably means that there’s less for everyone else to go around - therefore, working class people feel poorer and poorer. Meanwhile, the economy is going absolutely great for rich people, so inflation continues to go up - everything gets more expensive, but wages don’t increase. The wealthy just keep more and more of the wealth for themselves. To accumulate more and more wealth, they change the laws so that they can avoid paying taxes, so public services collapse. Politicians are lobbied to ensure that public funds are diverted away from where it is most needed - housing, healthcare, transportation, infrastructure - and instead into industries where their class interests most benefit from it, such as weapons manufacturing and extractive industries such as fossil fuels and mining. > >The working class are bound to notice that their lives are getting shittier and shittier, and if that situation is left unchecked, the working class would realize that the ruling class are fucking them over, rise up, and overthrow their rulers. Obviously, the ruling class need to do something about this, but there’s no solution that the ruling class can offer. They’re causing all of the problems, to fix them they’d have to give up some of their wealth and power - and that’s not something they’re going to do. So they need to find someone else to blame the problems we have in society on. Unfortunately, though, no matter who they blame the problems on, and no matter what they do to “fix” it, the issue will continue to persist, because the material conditions underlying the issues are, very intentionally, never addressed. > >So, the conundrum returns: The ruling class said that minority A caused all of the problems, minority A is persecuted and oppressed, but society doesn’t actually get any better. Either the problem wasn’t minority A, or minority A just hasn’t been oppressed enough yet. So the ruling class can either escalate the oppression, or they can shift the focus to another minority group. The division continues to escalate in terms of how vitriolic and extreme it is, and it also continues to divide the working class into smaller and smaller groups. > >To get the working class to buy into this hateful message, they need to take advantage of our worst instincts, and one of those instincts is the in-group bias. The majority are manipulated into being suspicious, then intolerant, then hateful, then violent, then genocidal, towards whatever the targeted minority of the day is. Anything that can be used to divide the working class - sexuality, nationality, immigration status, ethnicity, religion, sex, gender identity, age, all of these will be used as wedges to keep the working class split apart and not working together, because they know that if the working class actually unite against them, they are completely and truly fucked. > >That’s exactly how fascism manifests. It’s because it’s possible for people to accumulate power through wealth. This is why capitalism must be abolished. If we do not abolish capitalism, fascism will always return. It’s just a matter of time.
But can't capitalism can be reformed?
> While, of course, some laws to reform capitalism can be passed, and would definitely alleviate the worst harm caused, over the long term, capitalism cannot be reformed. > > Any attempts to reform, democratize or socialize capitalism may yield short term improvements to quality of life of the working class, but if capitalism is not abolished, it will always reassert itself, and capitalism inevitably leads towards fascism. > >The New Deal prevented the US from sliding into fascism in the 20th century, so that’s ultimately a good thing, but it did not go far enough, and that’s why we have the resurgence of fascism in the 21st century America.
But the Soviet Union was really oppressive!
> Yeah, the soviet union had a lot of problems, Stalin was a psycho. Let’s not do that, but we can do socialism using a bottom-up, direct democratic, consensus based decision making approach, rather than a top-down, centralized state. We can learn from the mistakes of the past. > >I’d encourage you to check out an anarchist FAQ to learn more - If you haven’t heard much about anarchism before, you probably have some misconceptions about it, so I encourage you to watch the Q&Anarchy video series by Thought Slime or have a look through an Anarchist FAQ, because it’s almost definitely nothing like what you think. > > I personally believe that it’s the most coherent philosophy which adequately explains and addresses all of the problems which plague our society, and which holds the most promise for a path out of the inevitable cycle of the continuous rise and fall of fascism that capitalism makes inevitable.
starik@lemmy.zip 6 hours ago
Boo. Your manifesto sucks. Nobody wants to read it. Stop copy/pasting it.
ddplf@szmer.info 6 hours ago
Are you sure you’re not confusing liberals with libertarians?
Stefan_S_from_H@piefed.zip 1 hour ago
It’s an American thing, I guess.
Meanwhile in Germany: a coworker thinks neo-liberal must be great because it’s a new form of liberal.
bearboiblake@pawb.social 5 hours ago
Yes, I’m certain! Liberalism advocates for free markets, free markets cause the accumulation of wealth, because the more money you have the more money you can make, and since money is power, liberalism leads to the concentration of power into fewer and fewer hands, which inevitably leads to fascism.
ddplf@szmer.info 5 hours ago
I had to do my own quick research because liberal vs libertarian distinction in a cultural context, at least on the American side of the internet, is pretty crooked - with the term liberal being used to described the ideas generally recognized to be socialist democrats.
So yes, you’re very much correct, apologies
FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 5 hours ago
Laissez Fair Capitalists advocate for Free Markets, Liberals do not.
jaybone@lemmy.zip 2 hours ago
The women in the background on the right are not having any of this shit.
TrickDacy@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
So sick of this shit
bearboiblake@pawb.social 5 hours ago
Liberalism? Same. It’s an absolute plague on society. We need to get rid of the ability of the ruling class to exert their “freedom” to exploit the working class.
TrickDacy@lemmy.world 4 hours ago
I’m so sick of trumped up infighting and blame being cast on people (victims, you’re blaming the victims) you imagine you can fully define even though you wouldn’t possibly even have a clue what they believe.
bearboiblake@pawb.social 6 hours ago
Viewers may find this context helpful:
I’m an anarchist - if you haven’t heard much about anarchism before, you probably have some misconceptions about it, so I encourage you to watch the Q&Anarchy video series by Thought Slime or have a look through an Anarchist FAQ, because it’s almost definitely nothing like what you think.
Anarchists are vehemently opposed to states such as the USSR and China. We consider them to be as great a danger as fascism.
I personally believe that anarchism is the most coherent philosophy which adequately explains and addresses all of the problems which plague our society, and which holds the most promise for a path out of the inevitable cycle of the continuous rise and fall of fascism that capitalism makes inevitable.
Liberalism is a right-wing ideology which adopts the language of progressiveness, but actually prioritizes the freedom of movement of wealth, e.g. free markets, over the freedom of individuals. Some individual liberties are espoused under liberalism, insofar as those liberties do not interfere with the freedom of capitalists to exploit the working class. I believe fully in the freedom of individuals, as long as those freedoms do not allow for the exploitation or oppression of others.
How does capitalism inevitably lead to fascism?
>Basically, the issue with capitalism is that the more wealth you have, the easier it is for you to make more money. And since money can be used to buy goods, services and influence, there is always a way to use money to gain more political and social power. With that political and social power, you can push society and the legal system in the direction you want to go. So you can use your wealth to gain power, and then you can use your power to change laws and society so that you can make even more wealth and power. It’s a positive feedback loop. > >Obviously, though, if the billionaires and ruling class are accumulating more and more of our society’s wealth, that inevitably means that there’s less for everyone else to go around - therefore, working class people feel poorer and poorer. Meanwhile, the economy is going absolutely great for rich people, so inflation continues to go up - everything gets more expensive, but wages don’t increase. The wealthy just keep more and more of the wealth for themselves. To accumulate more and more wealth, they change the laws so that they can avoid paying taxes, so public services collapse. Politicians are lobbied to ensure that public funds are diverted away from where it is most needed - housing, healthcare, transportation, infrastructure - and instead into industries where their class interests most benefit from it, such as weapons manufacturing and extractive industries such as fossil fuels and mining. > >The working class are bound to notice that their lives are getting shittier and shittier, and if that situation is left unchecked, the working class would realize that the ruling class are fucking them over, rise up, and overthrow their rulers. Obviously, the ruling class need to do something about this, but there’s no solution that the ruling class can offer. They’re causing all of the problems, to fix them they’d have to give up some of their wealth and power - and that’s not something they’re going to do. So they need to find someone else to blame the problems we have in society on. Unfortunately, though, no matter who they blame the problems on, and no matter what they do to “fix” it, the issue will continue to persist, because the material conditions underlying the issues are, very intentionally, never addressed. > >So, the conundrum returns: The ruling class said that minority A caused all of the problems, minority A is persecuted and oppressed, but society doesn’t actually get any better. Either the problem wasn’t minority A, or minority A just hasn’t been oppressed enough yet. So the ruling class can either escalate the oppression, or they can shift the focus to another minority group. The division continues to escalate in terms of how vitriolic and extreme it is, and it also continues to divide the working class into smaller and smaller groups. > >To get the working class to buy into this hateful message, they need to take advantage of our worst instincts, and one of those instincts is the in-group bias. The majority are manipulated into being suspicious, then intolerant, then hateful, then violent, then genocidal, towards whatever the targeted minority of the day is. Anything that can be used to divide the working class - sexuality, nationality, immigration status, ethnicity, religion, sex, gender identity, age, all of these will be used as wedges to keep the working class split apart and not working together, because they know that if the working class actually unite against them, they are completely and truly fucked. > >That’s exactly how fascism manifests. It’s because it’s possible for people to accumulate power through wealth. This is why capitalism must be abolished. If we do not abolish capitalism, fascism will always return. It’s just a matter of time.
But can't capitalism can be reformed?
> While, of course, some laws to reform capitalism can be passed, and would definitely alleviate the worst harm caused, over the long term, capitalism cannot be reformed. > > Any attempts to reform, democratize or socialize capitalism may yield short term improvements to quality of life of the working class, but if capitalism is not abolished, it will always reassert itself, and capitalism inevitably leads towards fascism. > >The New Deal prevented the US from sliding into fascism in the 20th century, so that’s ultimately a good thing, but it did not go far enough, and that’s why we have the resurgence of fascism in the 21st century America.
But the Soviet Union was really oppressive!
> Yeah, the soviet union had a lot of problems, Stalin was a psycho. Let’s not do that, but we can do socialism using a bottom-up, direct democratic, consensus based decision making approach, rather than a top-down, centralized state. We can learn from the mistakes of the past. > >I’d encourage you to check out an anarchist FAQ to learn more - If you haven’t heard much about anarchism before, you probably have some misconceptions about it, so I encourage you to watch the Q&Anarchy video series by Thought Slime or have a look through an Anarchist FAQ, because it’s almost definitely nothing like what you think. > > I personally believe that it’s the most coherent philosophy which adequately explains and addresses all of the problems which plague our society, and which holds the most promise for a path out of the inevitable cycle of the continuous rise and fall of fascism that capitalism makes inevitable.
starik@lemmy.zip 5 hours ago
“Viewers” are consumers of visual media, like television. What you mean is “readers” - consumers of text. Is the rest of the manifesto this stupid?
bearboiblake@pawb.social 5 hours ago
Do you view an image on your screen?
Chippys_mittens@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
I’m confused. Can you give your PERSONAL definition of Liberal, Conservative, facist, centrist, anarchist, communist, libertarian, democrat and republican? Please give a definition based on your personal beliefs, I can’t click a link or watch a video.
Chippys_mittens@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 6 hours ago
I love that I can see there’s 9 comments on this, but I can’t see them at all.
I have never seen my blocklist work so well.
bearboiblake@pawb.social 6 hours ago
The downside to blocking them is that you can’t downvote the liberals just flagrantly lying in the comments, but I understand why you block them.
FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 7 hours ago
Readers may need context to understand this meme.
You see, OP believes that Leftism is when people become more like the CCP or USSR, an elite classist autocracy in which all are equal below an iron fist. That’s why he thinks Leftism is opposed to Liberalism; the advocacy of Human Rights and Freedoms so long as they do not infringe upon the rights of others.
Basically, OP is a Red Fascist.
DeckPacker@piefed.social 1 hour ago
Yes, apparently reading is hard
tidderuuf@lemmy.world 6 hours ago
Are the DNC members that said yes to AIPAC and dark corporate money these leftists you speak of?
FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 5 hours ago
If the DNC had their way, money from AIPAC would have been outlawed 29 years ago. They literally wrote and introduced policy to do that, and passed it later in 2002 only for it to get struck down by the conservative SCOTUS.
bearboiblake@pawb.social 6 hours ago
Actually, no, I’m an anarchist - if you haven’t heard much about anarchism before, you probably have some misconceptions about it, so I encourage you to watch the Q&Anarchy video series by Thought Slime or have a look through an Anarchist FAQ, because it’s almost definitely nothing like what you think.
Anarchists are vehemently opposed to states such as the USSR and China.
I personally believe that it’s the most coherent philosophy which adequately explains and addresses all of the problems which plague our society, and which holds the most promise for a path out of the inevitable cycle of the continuous rise and fall of fascism that capitalism makes inevitable.
Liberalism is an ideology which prioritizes the freedom of movement of wealth, e.g. free markets, over the freedom of individuals. I believe fully in the freedom of individuals.
How does capitalism inevitably lead to fascism?
>Basically, the issue with capitalism is that the more wealth you have, the easier it is for you to make more money. And since money can be used to buy goods, services and influence, there is always a way to use money to gain more political and social power. With that political and social power, you can push society and the legal system in the direction you want to go. So you can use your wealth to gain power, and then you can use your power to change laws and society so that you can make even more wealth and power. It’s a positive feedback loop. > >Obviously, though, if the billionaires and ruling class are accumulating more and more of our society’s wealth, that inevitably means that there’s less for everyone else to go around - therefore, working class people feel poorer and poorer. Meanwhile, the economy is going absolutely great for rich people, so inflation continues to go up - everything gets more expensive, but wages don’t increase. The wealthy just keep more and more of the wealth for themselves. To accumulate more and more wealth, they change the laws so that they can avoid paying taxes, so public services collapse. Politicians are lobbied to ensure that public funds are diverted away from where it is most needed - housing, healthcare, transportation, infrastructure - and instead into industries where their class interests most benefit from it, such as weapons manufacturing and extractive industries such as fossil fuels and mining. > >The working class are bound to notice that their lives are getting shittier and shittier, and if that situation is left unchecked, the working class would realize that the ruling class are fucking them over, rise up, and overthrow their rulers. Obviously, the ruling class need to do something about this, but there’s no solution that the ruling class can offer. They’re causing all of the problems, to fix them they’d have to give up some of their wealth and power - and that’s not something they’re going to do. So they need to find someone else to blame the problems we have in society on. Unfortunately, though, no matter who they blame the problems on, and no matter what they do to “fix” it, the issue will continue to persist, because the material conditions underlying the issues are, very intentionally, never addressed. > >So, the conundrum returns: The ruling class said that minority A caused all of the problems, minority A is persecuted and oppressed, but society doesn’t actually get any better. Either the problem wasn’t minority A, or minority A just hasn’t been oppressed enough yet. So the ruling class can either escalate the oppression, or they can shift the focus to another minority group. The division continues to escalate in terms of how vitriolic and extreme it is, and it also continues to divide the working class into smaller and smaller groups. > >To get the working class to buy into this hateful message, they need to take advantage of our worst instincts, and one of those instincts is the in-group bias. The majority are manipulated into being suspicious, then intolerant, then hateful, then violent, then genocidal, towards whatever the targeted minority of the day is. Anything that can be used to divide the working class - sexuality, nationality, immigration status, ethnicity, religion, sex, gender identity, age, all of these will be used as wedges to keep the working class split apart and not working together, because they know that if the working class actually unite against them, they are completely and truly fucked. > >That’s exactly how fascism manifests. It’s because it’s possible for people to accumulate power through wealth. This is why capitalism must be abolished. If we do not abolish capitalism, fascism will always return. It’s just a matter of time.
But can't capitalism can be reformed?
> While, of course, some laws to reform capitalism can be passed, and would definitely alleviate the worst harm caused, over the long term, capitalism cannot be reformed. > > Any attempts to reform, democratize or socialize capitalism may yield short term improvements to quality of life of the working class, but if capitalism is not abolished, it will always reassert itself, and capitalism inevitably leads towards fascism. > >The New Deal prevented the US from sliding into fascism in the 20th century, so that’s ultimately a good thing, but it did not go far enough, and that’s why we have the resurgence of fascism in the 21st century America.
But the Soviet Union was really oppressive!
> Yeah, the soviet union had a lot of problems, Stalin was a psycho. Let’s not do that, but we can do socialism using a bottom-up, direct democratic, consensus based decision making approach, rather than a top-down, centralized state. We can learn from the mistakes of the past. > >I’d encourage you to check out an anarchist FAQ to learn more - If you haven’t heard much about anarchism before, you probably have some misconceptions about it, so I encourage you to watch the Q&Anarchy video series by Thought Slime or have a look through an Anarchist FAQ, because it’s almost definitely nothing like what you think. > > I personally believe that it’s the most coherent philosophy which adequately explains and addresses all of the problems which plague our society, and which holds the most promise for a path out of the inevitable cycle of the continuous rise and fall of fascism that capitalism makes inevitable.
TrickDacy@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
Why the hell do you have such a deep need for clinging to these labels and definitions of them?
There is only one reason that would ever make sense: to degrade those who don’t fully align with your tankie views.
FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 6 hours ago
Your definition of Liberalism is directly opposed to modern and classical definitions of the word. Your whole argument now hangs on the ability to change the meanings of words to be whatever you want them to be. Perhaps you’re not a Tankie, although you could be a Tankie trying to mask your disgusting scent, instead you might have simply been mislead by the countless Tankies who came here before you to preach the exact same messages.
ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world 6 hours ago
Your political takes are always wrong, Mr. Banjo.
FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 6 hours ago
Elaborate