Mikhail and Hodj's Political Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,673
18,384
He can write all he wanted. He can fantasize about how great his Maoist utopia was. It is not communist as discussed by Marx from 1844 and beyond.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it was. And still is. The Red Book is one of the world best selling Communist tracts.

This moves beyond special pleading right into outright dishonesty and lies. Instead of rabidly trying to defend your ideology by running away from the people who espoused it, ask yourself "Why am I defending an ideology that led to the deaths of millions"

You guys are literally as delusional and in denial about this as the Neo Nazis are about the Holocaust. You're in full blown denialism. You wouldn't accept it from a skin head, I won't accept it from you.

And literally no one else will either.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,673
18,384
khalid_sl said:
rrr_img_46878.png


Come at me brah.
rrr_img_46879.jpg
Click to expand...
I don't have time for any more logic classes :/
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,673
18,384
Araysar_sl said:
Its awfully hard to admit that the champion of your political philosophy rolled over a couple dozen million people
Click to expand...
Being stuck in the position of defending it is unenviable.

You'd get very similar responses to the ones Dumar and Mikhail are giving out if you went to stormfront and asked about Fascism killing millions and how we should think about that.
 
M

Mikhail Bakunin_sl

shitlord
2,199
1
Araysar_sl said:
Oh its because Capitalism isnt implemented in a perfect world and perfect conditions




Socialist policies in America prevent true free market competition and artificially increase costs.


See? I can play this bullshit game too.
Click to expand...
My argument has nothing to do with conditions. It has to do with what the necessary conditions are to taxonomize an economic system as socialist in the first place. The hand you should have played was the socialist policies ofChinacausing all the problems. Of course, that wouldn't make sense because China hasn't ever been socialist, but that's how you play this dishonest game you're trying at. Don't feel bad. You'll get more chances.
 
M

Mikhail Bakunin_sl

shitlord
2,199
1
hodj_sl said:
Guy can't even be honest about the debate. Mao was a communist because he was one of the most prolific Communist authors the world has ever seen
Click to expand...
Yeah dude, Mao was a communist because he was a communist author. And we know he was a communist author because he was a communist. Got it.
 
Araysar

Loser Araysar

Log Wizard
<Gold Donor>
85,140
172,384
Mikhail Bakunin_sl said:
You don't know that. This just bald assertion. The fact of the matter is, for the examples I've given, the societies did better economically than others in the region. It's just asinine to flatly assert that these systems are doomed to failure. You have no evidence for that beyond your willingness to appeal to examples that absolutely don't fit (because they're completely predicated on maintaining capitalist power structures).
Click to expand...
Oh so I dont know if these 2 examples could sustain themselves for a long time, but you can confidently assert that these 2 examples are proofs of viability of the entire Communist philosophy.

Its a bullshit double standard again.
 
Araysar

Loser Araysar

Log Wizard
<Gold Donor>
85,140
172,384
Mikhail Bakunin_sl said:
My argument has nothing to do with conditions. It has to do with what the necessary conditions are to taxonomize an economic system as socialist in the first place. The hand you should have played was the socialist policies ofChinacausing all the problems. Of course, that wouldn't make sense because China hasn't ever been socialist, but that's how you play this dishonest game you're trying at. Don't feel bad. You'll get more chances.
Click to expand...
Sure it does, you change the goal posts all the time to create the perfect conditions in which communism can thrive. No external threats, no people desiring capitalism or other modes of governance, etc.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,673
18,384
Mikhail Bakunin_sl said:
You don't know that. This just bald assertion.
Click to expand...
A bald assertion is one with no facts to back it up. You have the failures of every single major communist revolution, a fact you can't even refute you have to accept whole hog as reality, as proof of his assertion.

The only bald assertions here are the ones trying to rewrite history, claim Mao and Lenin, Stalin and Pol Pot, etc. weren't really Marxists because they weren't following Marxist philosophy even though you can straight out google any of these people and go read their recognized histories online and every single one of them were operating from a Marxist framework.

Communists literally want people to ignore their failures and pretend they don't exist, because they are that inconvenient to their assertions.

Now ask yourselves. Every communist revolution has failed and been usurped and turned to the point that modern communists even deny these people were communist. Ever heard the phrase "History repeats itself?" Why do you think that is? Why does the history of communism include repeated disasters, famines, mass executions, repression, slaughter?

Why does every Revolution end up fearing the end of the Revolution so much that they force it through nights of terror and disappearing political enemies in the night?

Couldn't be because all these revolutions are started and led by tone deaf and arrogant people like Dumar and Mikhail, could it? People who refuse to recognize their own faults? People who refuse to recognize their own failures, and the failures of their ideas?

Hmmmm?
 
D

Dumar_sl

shitlord
3,712
4
Erich Fromm_sl said:
There is no greater misunderstanding or misrepresentation of Marx than that which is to be found, implicitly or explicitly, in the thought of the Soviet Communists, the reformist socialists, and the capitalist opponents of socialism alike, all of whom assume that Marx wanted only the economic improvement of the working class, and that he wanted to abolish private property so that the worker would own what the capitalist now has. The truth is that for Marx the situation of a worker in a Russian "socialist" factory, a British state-owned factory, or an American factory such as General Motors, would appear essentially the same. This, Marx expresses very clearly in the following:

"An enforced increase in wages (disregarding the other difficulties, and especially that such an anomaly could only be maintained by force) would be nothing more than a better remuneration of slaves, and would not restore, either to the worker or to the work, their human significance and worth.

"Even the equality of incomes which Proudhon demands would only change the relation of the presentday worker to his work into a relation of all men to work. Society would then be conceived as an abstract capitalist." [58]

The central theme of Marx is the transformation of alienated, meaningless labor into productive, free labor, not the better payment of alienated labor by a private or "abstract" state capitalism.
Click to expand...
Again, as I've said countless times before: you've never read Marx, and you misapply and misunderstand meaning from excerpts.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,673
18,384
Mikhail Bakunin_sl said:
Yeah dude, Mao was a communist because he was a communist author. And we know he was a communist author because he was a communist. Got it.
Click to expand...
Mikhails argument again boils down to "Even though he wrote massive tracts on Communist thought that are still widely read today in Communist theory, even though he started a Communist revolution, and ran a Communist nation and party for the majority of his life, even though his OWN PEOPLE call him a communist and his own nation venerates its Communist history, he's not a communist because I said so"

Also, an attempt to strawman the argument into circular reasoning, as if saying "A guy called himself communist and wrote a book about Communism that is widely accepted as Communist literature" is circular reasoning akin to "The bible said it, I believe it, that settles it"

Basically, Mikhail just went literally full retard here.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,673
18,384
Mikhail Bakunin_sl said:
See dude? It totally was. Because he nakedly asserted that it was. The END.

You know it's a communist tract because it was written by a communist and you know he was a communist because he wrote a communist tract.

lulz
Click to expand...
So what makes someone Communist then, Mikhail?

Hmmm?

If being one of the most prolific communist authors of all time doesn't qualify them as a communist, then what does?

Hmmm?
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,673
18,384
Dumar_sl said:
Again, as I've said countless times before: you've never read Marx, and you misapply and misunderstand meaning from excerpts.
Click to expand...
If you don't read the Torah, you can't criticize Zionism

If you don't read Dianetics, you can't criticize Scientology

If you don't read the Bible, you can't criticize Christianity

If you don't rape children, you can't criticize child rapists

If you don't drink and drive, you can't criticize drunk drivers

If you don't mutilate animals, you can't criticize animal mutilators

so forth and so on

bad argument is bad.
 
M

Mikhail Bakunin_sl

shitlord
2,199
1
hodj_sl said:
You'd get very similar responses to the ones Dumar and Mikhail are giving out if you went to stormfront and asked about Fascism killing millions and how we should think about that.
Click to expand...
I've actually argued with fascists who said that and I was perfectly willing to concede that historically existent forms of so-called fascism might not be real fascism as it had been theorized and just argue against it without trying to do this retarded guilt-by-fake-association game, or pissing and moaning about revisionism, or constantly and repeatedly using the phrase "special pleading" in a totally wrong way. Of course, I'mvastlymore intelligent than you so I can see how trying to marshal real arguments might strain your introductory grasp of logic.
 
Araysar

Loser Araysar

Log Wizard
<Gold Donor>
85,140
172,384
I've been reading up on Catalonia. It sounds like they had their own Reign of Terror. Is this true, MB?
 
D

Dumar_sl

shitlord
3,712
4
hodj_sl said:
If you don't read the Torah, you can't criticize Zionism
Click to expand...
Yeah, more nonsense as usual. Read these two quotesagain and againuntil you understand them. And if cannot, I can explain them to you:

Karl Marx_sl said:
An enforced increase in wages (disregarding the other difficulties, and especially that such an anomaly could only be maintained by force) would be nothing more than a better remuneration of slaves, and would not restore, either to the worker or to the work, their human significance and worth.

"Even the equality of incomes which Proudhon demands would only change the relation of the presentday worker to his work into a relation of all men to work. Society would then be conceived as an abstract capitalist." [58]
Click to expand...
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,673
18,384
I've actually argued with fascists who said that and I was perfectly willing to concede that historically existent forms of so-called fascism might not be real fascism as it had been theorized
Click to expand...
Yeah well that's you. I would and do laugh in their faces when they try that shit.

Oh the holocaust didn't happen? really?



There is no guilt by association or anything else here Mikhail. All I'm doing is EXACTLY WHAT COMMUNISTS DO TO CAPITALISM every day.

You want to cry that all these examples aren't really examples because they fell short of the most idealized state of utopian perfection your fragile little mind can dream up. That's not reality, though.

Here on planet Earth, we call a duck a duck and a rose a rose and when Mao writes a book called the Little Red Book of Communism, and runs a Communist nation for decades as the head of the Communist party and regularly cites Communist theory and rhetoric as justification and reasoning for his policies, we call that Communism, even if it hurts the little commies tushies because their fantasy communism got its shiny little white shoes tarnished with a few hundred million dead bodies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.