That is the thing isn’t it from the types that it hasn’t been implemented properly. Communism has been tried in many countries throughout the world from Europe through Asia and they even managed to rack up a death tool that surpassed by a great amount the third reich. You don’t hear any argument that right wing fascism works but just wasn’t implemented properly.
As I said they were two great evils of the 20th century but only one has been punished.
what most libs don’t understand is the importance of the “gate-keeper” in communism. Liberals… even progressive liberals don’t typically embrace communism. But they knowingly or unknowingly embrace communists as allies, thinking that their own more moderate views will be more popular and will prevail once they, together as allies, rid the world of the evil in the existing system. But they act as gatekeepers, allowing the communists to gain positions and power and resources and a following. Eventually if, as allies, they are successful, they will change the system and throw out the “evil”, “greedy”, or “old” or whatever they call the existing system. Ahhh… here is where the surprise comes in for the libs… the communists are ruthless and could not care one small bit what the liberals think. The liberals would just be the famous “useful idiots” that opened the gate. And every time a liberal challenges the every increasing and eventually controlling communists, they are deemed and doomed to be an enemy and are disposed of as just another “evil”, “old”, or “greedy” or incompetent liability to the goals of the communists.
If it happens, and if I live to see it, I will get much dark satisfaction from seeing justice served on the gate-keepers.
To the best of my knowledge none of those are Marxist. Communism under Marx was all about doing it on a state (country) level, overthrowing the upper classes, and transforming society.
The right really needs to update their criticism of the left for the 21st century. I haven’t found any polling data… but based on my time online and watching Breadtube and other leftist argue on YouTube and Twitch, Tankies are generally mocked and the socialist movement leans more towards democratic socialism and market socialism. And many of the communists are of the anarchist variety and see countries like NK, Cuba, USSR, and China as examples of why its bad to have any sort of centralized power.
It’s because the derision is misplaced. There aren’t really good versions of fascism. It’s pull out the ole’ dictionary (marrian webster):
It’s pretty hard to find anything morally good in there.
Now communism:
Now you many not agree, but I think you’d fine a lot more people okay with " a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed" and “a theory advocating elimination of private property” than “a political philosophy… that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition”.
It’s not until you get down to the second definition of Communism that you start to hit the morally questionable stuff… and this is the problem… the wrong word is being targeted. All the immorality that we associate with Communism isn’t the communism… its Marxism-Leninism… and really Leninism, Maoism, all those leaders who took Marx’s ideas and turned them autocratic.
Regardless if they are socialist, communist, or even capitalist… any illiberal authoritarian government is bad… and that’s where the “evil” lies.
Of course Marxism is studied on American campuses. His writings are highly influential.
It does “work”.
Some of us were here for the Charlottesville thread, fellas. Might want to pack it up.
So are the writings of the fascists, are they studied as well?
Yeah the thing that makes it so unique historically is it doesn’t even require any sort of competence or skill to work. In fact pretty much every fascist movement was hilariously incompetent.
Of course they are. Though they’re not as palatable to the masses like Marxism, nor as relevant, and therefore quite diminished in comparison.
That is an opinion, with which I disagree. One of the two most pressing problems in the country today stems from concepts stemming from fascist principles. I don’t know yet whether the faith in the state comes from fascism or the other way around, but I’m sure they are connected.
Unlike Marxism, fascism works.
As far as I’m concerned, Marxists had one job, stop the Nazis, and they did it. As dog ■■■■ as the Soviet Union was for the people that lived there, I’m not sure any other hypothetical government in their place could have stopped them.
Whose writings? Mein Kampf is like seventy percent gibberish. Mussolini didn’t write anything. Or Gabriel D’Annunziato for that matter. Or Franco. Or whoever. There’s, like, Martin Heidigger and that’s it.
Marxists didn’t stop the Nazis.
Whatever you want to call them.
Das Kapital and the Communist Manifesto are complete gibberish.
Marxism fails. Fascism works.
Call who?
I would say about 70% credit to Russian soldiers and about 30% credit to American soldiers in defeating the Wehrmacht.
Nothing to do with economics.
The Russians simply did the brutal heavy work and paid the brutal price.
The United States was thus able to face a softened Wehrmacht and thus suffered relatively light casualties over the remaining course of the war.
And I would disagree. One thing you are ignoring is the air campaign - for example.
