I think after G20 Europe will have another pogrom of communists. Just saying.

I have this buddy of mine, who used to be a communist. Really cool guy. I had to deprogram him to an extent. He still holds a lot of these flawed, fairytale ideas, but at the very least he conceded, that he could no longer be a communist. Now he claims to be an anarchist. I still got work to do is what I'm saying.

Some of the guys at my uni still struggle to believe, that all of my Polish relatives were part of the Solidarnosc movement back in the day. And they could not believe when I told them, that most Polish people have the same reaction to the Hammer and Sicle as to the Swasika.

I had to tell them, that the mismanagement of the economy and class-resentment led to the murder of the Kulaks in the Ukraine and a consecutive mass famine. That the communists had to put up posters reading "Remember, it is wrong to eat your children", to even just wipe their smug, self-righteous grins of their faces.

I wasn't specific enough? :D Like, saying that in order to be revolutionary you need to drop the flawed presuppositions that connect all forms of socialist/communist dictatorships? Like, the group struggle presupposition which erases the individual character of a person making them nothing more than an avatar of the superficially designated "group" that they are supposedly a part of? Like maybe that's what I meant by that?

Short version for you:

=> *Group identity politics is one of the core tenets of Marxism. You cannot be revolutionary as long as you don't drop this fundamental, dehumanizing, bigoted belief. In order to be revolutionary, you cannot be a Marxist.*

Marxism divides the world into the oppressors and the oppressed. There are no oppressed, or non-oppressive members of the group that has been declared "priviledged". If a successful person shares superficial characteristics (white, heterosexual, male) with the majority of successful people, then the Marxist interpretation is, that they MUST be oppressive.

And even if you acknowledge that there are innocent priviledged people, then we both know, that when push comes to shove, when injustice is done to such an innocent person, that will be viewed as acceptable, since at least the priviledged class got a reminder of what should justly happen to all of them due to their collective guilt.
(Which is why feminists are fine with false rape accusations. Because "It calls attention to the problem of women.") Look out for Marxism in your political discourse. You will notice it a lot these days. Feminism is gendered Marxism. Women are the oppressed, men are the oppressors, which is why they think this sort of collateral damage is acceptable.

That's why the Kulaks in the USSR got murdered en masse. Simply for being successful and having that attributed to their group identity. And what was their group identity? The priviledged and, therefore, the oppressors.

That's why white farmers in Zimbabwe were murdered en masse. That's why in both cases millions died of starvation.

That's why I'm so ***ing pissed at you. Because you are the classic example of an arrogant, know-nothing moron who thinks they have the needs of the world and their absolution all figured out. And what do you do? You go for a slightly altered political ideology, that rebrands itself and claims to be revolutionary, while still sticking to the bullshit that made it fail in the first place.

So much for: "Well, you just weren't specific enough." Dude, either you're thick beyond belief of willfully ignorant. Stop ***ing lying. I was more than specific enough.

On why I don't respond to everything: Look at how ***ing long these paragraphs are already getting.

That's the ***ing meat of my point. If you think you can be a Marxist and a revolutionary, you're an idiot. If you think you can be a Marxist, you cannot be a Libertarian. You cannot be a Libertarian and the worst type of collectivist that has ever existed in history at the same time. If you're not an individualist, then liberty will always be beyond your grasp.

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D Are you this ***ing retarded? :D "Oh I'm gonna win this argument by splitting hairs and acting as if my refutation isn't what my opponent alluded to. That that wasn't what they meant by "new" :D:D:D

> Well you're just ignorant （￣へ￣）. What are you? A ***ing elementary school kid? And didn't I already say something about smug communists who think they're better than everyone else? Which, incidentally, might be why they think they would be wise and smart enough to run the perfect dictatorship. Because unlike those idiots, THEY are SOOO enlightened.

You're so much more educated than the plebs, right?

When it comes to Einstein...buddy...buddyboy...I'm a natural scientist myself. So don't you talk smack to me about Einstein. That guy, at the end of the day, was just another human being. Like everyone else. Really, you should dwell on this, because I honestly start to think, that you haven't gotten out of this childish phase yet, in which you think you're made of more pristine materials than those around you. And it shows when people disagree with you on your fundamental ideological convictions. Face it, you're just arrogant. You don't know the first thing when it comes to organizing people. At least I doubt it, since you spent so much of your waking hours on this site. And yeah, I levy that criticism against myself just as much.

Here's why the Einstein interjection is bullshit.
- Einstein didn't acknowledge quantum physics. He hated the concept.
- He got up in the face of Urbain Le Verrier, when the guy predicted there had to be an eight planet of the solar system, arguing, terribly, like an insolent child, much like yourself, much like lots of radical socialists, funnily enough, that his prediction had to be wrong.
Why? "Well, your math is sound, but your Physics is terrible!" (A.f.A)
What. A. ***ing. Joke.
Guess what? Urbain was right. Shortly after Neptune was discovered.

And if you're so god damn educated, then you surely have been perking up your ears in high school, right? Because, there you learn, that the Argument from Authority is a classic logical fallacy. RIGHT?! Because, you see, it is always your last resort. ALWAYS! If you don't have anything more to say....?
"Well you're just ignorant."

The worst part? You don't even present more credentials than your opponent to make your favorite ***ing fallacy even slightly more convincing. Now why would that be? How can you be so certain of yourself, that you can't even imagine why this would look unconvincing to someone? Why don't you even muster the brain power to critically self-reflect?
And back to the start it goes, FULL ***ING CIRCLE!
Say it with me...
Because I'm an arrogant moron at heart.
That's why I always use this excuse and that's why I'm convinced of communism.
Because. Deep inside. I think. Would it have been me, not Stalin, then utopia would have been achieved long ago.

I rest my ***ing case.

"A few attempts" :D:D:D Maybe after those few attempts that cost 100 million people their lives it is time to ask yourself if your fundamental philosophical presuppositions are flawed :D I mean if communism was based on a solid foundation, why wouldn't it have succeeded in most attempts? Surely it wasn't a lack of commitment and opportunity. And if every revised reiteration of the same basic concept, based on the same basic presuppositions failed every time, maybe it's because there's a missing brick at the ground level of your ideological Jenga tower.

Maybe, for example, the idea that human interaction, morality and ethics are nothing more that the result of group stuggles. The group struggle between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie apparently wasn't the core system governing the resulting social structures of human society. So let's just abstract and go to other groupings in general. Let's just look at groupings based on sex, race, gender and so on. Yeah I'm clearly the historically ignorant simpleton here.

As I said: More of the same old shit from a new can. Nothing revolutionary about it. Unless you do not consider trying the same thing over and over again to be insanity ^^

It's always the same with Marxist: "I'm obviously more sophisticated than you, peas... I mean contra-revolutionary class traitor!"

Btw Order No 270 was the "deserters will be shot" order issued by Stalin during the axis invasion of Russia.

Приказ № 270, това́рищ!
Xуррааааааа!!!

Tiny problem there...I'm not a staunch defender of capitalism. So you want to replace the current economic system with something *NEW*, since the current one has failed. So instead of thinking of a new one, you go to the failed alternatives book shelf and grab the slab on socialism and tweek it a bit.

It's not about the ideologies being yor ideology, that are at odds with mine. It's that socialism has been proven to be shit and that it isn't new. You're not offering people an alternative, because it isn't. It's the same one century old shit from a new can.

You want to effectively change capitalism to something better? Stop looking to the failed alternatives to capitalism, that failed ages ago. Think of something that is actually new, dare I say REVOLUTIONARY!

Communism / socialism aren't. Because they aren't new and revolutionary. They are the legacy. Old news.

(also typical socialist hogwash: There is one causal principle for all the world's evils...Reductionist thinking for simpletons. Even the most reduced, confined system is usually still beholden to more than one alteration of a variable.)

Just thought of a stupid little witticism: If misery makes you a comedian, there should be no hobos in the world.

You could start by evolving and catching up with the rest of the species and realise that both fascism and communism are dead ideologies, that should've stayed dead after the end of WW2 and the fall of the Berlin wall respectively. Then you'd finally catch a break. Just a suggestion.