Communists do support communist ideals, though. Socialist states have brought dramatic improvements, such as doubling life expectancy in Russia and China, 99.9% literacy rates, democratization of the economy, massive improvements to healthcare and education, low homeless rates, poverty alleviation, and more. I don’t “worship” states, I support socialism as a system for improving the lives of the people.
Trotsky was wrong. The biggest reason Trotsky was wrong was because he believed the peasantry to be counter-revolutionary, which was the basis of Permanent Revolution. However, even simple investigation into socialist states like China prove them to be more genuinely democratic than what preceded it. For example, look at the perceptions of democracy in China:
The real problem with Trotskyism, other than the inapplicability of Permanent Revolution, is that its conclusions are inflexibly against real socialism in modern implementation. Few Trotskyist orgs support AES, while none have established socialism themselves. It’s a deeply western, fatalistic tendency.
We are discussing so-called “Communists” on this platform. You and I both know this place is crawling with history denialists (particularly the events of June 1989). Any “ideology” that is more concerned about preserving the image of the state over accepting responsibility is not an ideology worth my or anybody else’s time. It’s insulting and little and pathetic.
I’m interested in the merits of communism, but all this platform does is re-hash the same state approved talking points over and over. It’s tiring and isn’t winning anybody with an ounce of morality over.
I don’t agree with the idea that “this place is crawling with history denialists.” What it is “crawling” with are people that combat the westernized, atrocity propaganda version of June 4th, 1989, instead contextualizing it with what’s actually confirmed. For example, western myth-making talks about tanks running over everyone on the square, resulting in 10,000 killed, but what actually happened is that dispersal of the square was peaceful, but on the way to the square hundreds of rioters and PLA members died in fighting around Beijing. This isn’t “denialism,” but instead deflecting western atrocity propaganda.
We do accept responsibility, and aren’t interested in lying, but when we know that the character of events is quantitatively and qualitatively different from the version western anti-communists beat us over the head with, we are forced to confront them honestly. What’s insulting and little and pathetic isn’t the communists combatting misinformation, but the anti-communists less interested in truth and more interested in wielding whatever convenient narrative they can like a club.
One thing that’s important is that when we talk about communism, honestly judging its merits and flaws, people come to communism. I made an intro ML reading list, as an example, that others seem to like. Also, around the world, communist orgs are growing in membership.
The point of this all is that you’ve done no real effort to explain how we falsify history, you’ve vaguely asserted it while belittling our efforts. Your citation is that “you and I know this,” which isn’t a source, nor is it accurate, yet you’re using this narrative like a club to try to shut me down, regardless of the truth of the matter. It’s thought-terminating.
You and I both know I will be banned if I posted (the freely available) photos. It’s easy to claim something never happened when you own and control the platform.
You’re being intentionally disingenuous and you know it.
Photos are freely available, yes, and they back up what I claimed, not what you’re vaguely hinting at. Westerners have used them to try to twist the narrative, distorting the context of the photos to concoct atrocity propaganda.
It’s easy to claim something vague happened, but not provide any evidence, and complain about misinformation being removed as a way to claim truth is removed. If you don’t do any legwork to prove that, though, your argument is utterly unconvincing.
Essentially, you want to uphold your own view, without proving any of it and without daring to look at counter-evidence. I recommend reading Qiao Collective’s Tian’anmen Protests Reading List for a good place to start.
Can you explain what exactly it is that I’m denying, with evidence? You’re proving me correct here, you’re denying history and using wetern atrocity propaganda as a club against anyone that wants to improve the world we live in.
The political discussion here would be much more enticing if these “communists” actually supported communist ideals. This is just state worship.
Leftism is dead and buried. Look up the concept of a “deformed worker’s state” and tell me it doesn’t describe China to a tee.
Trotsky was right and was assassinated for it.
Communists do support communist ideals, though. Socialist states have brought dramatic improvements, such as doubling life expectancy in Russia and China, 99.9% literacy rates, democratization of the economy, massive improvements to healthcare and education, low homeless rates, poverty alleviation, and more. I don’t “worship” states, I support socialism as a system for improving the lives of the people.
Trotsky was wrong. The biggest reason Trotsky was wrong was because he believed the peasantry to be counter-revolutionary, which was the basis of Permanent Revolution. However, even simple investigation into socialist states like China prove them to be more genuinely democratic than what preceded it. For example, look at the perceptions of democracy in China:
This is combined with over 90% of the population supporting their government. Consistent studies like this point to something beyond whatever Trotsky believed. Roland Boer’s Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance goes over how socialist countries have established democratic control.
The real problem with Trotskyism, other than the inapplicability of Permanent Revolution, is that its conclusions are inflexibly against real socialism in modern implementation. Few Trotskyist orgs support AES, while none have established socialism themselves. It’s a deeply western, fatalistic tendency.
Explain to me how denying history because it is shameful is a “communist ideal” and then we can talk.
Can you explain? What do you mean by this vague statement?
We are discussing so-called “Communists” on this platform. You and I both know this place is crawling with history denialists (particularly the events of June 1989). Any “ideology” that is more concerned about preserving the image of the state over accepting responsibility is not an ideology worth my or anybody else’s time. It’s insulting and little and pathetic.
I’m interested in the merits of communism, but all this platform does is re-hash the same state approved talking points over and over. It’s tiring and isn’t winning anybody with an ounce of morality over.
I don’t agree with the idea that “this place is crawling with history denialists.” What it is “crawling” with are people that combat the westernized, atrocity propaganda version of June 4th, 1989, instead contextualizing it with what’s actually confirmed. For example, western myth-making talks about tanks running over everyone on the square, resulting in 10,000 killed, but what actually happened is that dispersal of the square was peaceful, but on the way to the square hundreds of rioters and PLA members died in fighting around Beijing. This isn’t “denialism,” but instead deflecting western atrocity propaganda.
We do accept responsibility, and aren’t interested in lying, but when we know that the character of events is quantitatively and qualitatively different from the version western anti-communists beat us over the head with, we are forced to confront them honestly. What’s insulting and little and pathetic isn’t the communists combatting misinformation, but the anti-communists less interested in truth and more interested in wielding whatever convenient narrative they can like a club.
One thing that’s important is that when we talk about communism, honestly judging its merits and flaws, people come to communism. I made an intro ML reading list, as an example, that others seem to like. Also, around the world, communist orgs are growing in membership.
The point of this all is that you’ve done no real effort to explain how we falsify history, you’ve vaguely asserted it while belittling our efforts. Your citation is that “you and I know this,” which isn’t a source, nor is it accurate, yet you’re using this narrative like a club to try to shut me down, regardless of the truth of the matter. It’s thought-terminating.
You and I both know I will be banned if I posted (the freely available) photos. It’s easy to claim something never happened when you own and control the platform.
You’re being intentionally disingenuous and you know it.
Photos are freely available, yes, and they back up what I claimed, not what you’re vaguely hinting at. Westerners have used them to try to twist the narrative, distorting the context of the photos to concoct atrocity propaganda.
It’s easy to claim something vague happened, but not provide any evidence, and complain about misinformation being removed as a way to claim truth is removed. If you don’t do any legwork to prove that, though, your argument is utterly unconvincing.
Essentially, you want to uphold your own view, without proving any of it and without daring to look at counter-evidence. I recommend reading Qiao Collective’s Tian’anmen Protests Reading List for a good place to start.
Pictures of the dead do not back up what you claim.
In other words, you have nothing, but you’re too stubborn and arrogant to admit it
See the above comment for more detail
Can you explain what exactly it is that I’m denying, with evidence? You’re proving me correct here, you’re denying history and using wetern atrocity propaganda as a club against anyone that wants to improve the world we live in.
Like I said. This platform prohibits posting anything other than the official stance of denialism.
There are plenty of photos of the dead scattered around bloodied and mutilated.
You expect me to ignore that and pretend it didn’t happen?