Tbh I think people are trying to hard to dunk on you rather than actually explaining how we see things and why.

Opposing war is generally the correct take, in most cases, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that you should turn it into a hard rule, because there are exceptions. The American Civil War is an example I think most people would agree with. As violent and bloody as it was, it was still outweighed by the centuries of systemic violence baked into the system.

As Marxists we concern ourselves less with “who started it” (an inherently subjective question) and more with who’s fighting it and why, and what outcomes can be expected. War is the continuation of politics by other means, so to understand a conflict it’s important to look at the political questions at stake, on a case-by-case basis.

Without getting into the specifics of these conflicts, that’s what’s meant by “anti-war-ism,” not just opposing war, but doing so without really bothering to understand the specifics of a given conflict.

That’s still not as fast of a development, and the conditions aren’t really comparable. China used to be among the poorest countries in the world.

And while their government has not always been ideal, it was undoubtably the best option on the table historically. The corrupt Nationalists didn’t do shit for the people (and pocketed foreign aid). Before that, with no central authority, was the warlord period. Before that was the backwards Qing dynasty. In all the thousands of years of Chinese history, nobody really did anything for the rural people until the communists.

Marx… is convincing with his way of argumentation (at least if you’re a bit stupid)

I’m sorry, what? Have you ever actually tried to read Capital? Most of Marx’s works are dense and academic, drawing intellectual traditions that are often unfamiliar to modern readers (classical economics, Hegel, etc). Marx’s way of argumentation isn’t really geared toward the lowest common denominator.

It’s kinda funny how you can’t even keep your criticism straight through a single comment. In one sentence, reading Marx is a “chore” that nobody would want to slog through, in the very next one, Marx is so persuasive, his honeyed words easily sway the minds of any who stumble across them, like the Sirens calling ships to their rocks.

As for “no good goal exists anymore” or “it’s hard to see what good goal tankies ever had” maybe we just like it when this sort of thing happens:

The revolution that feeds the children gets my support.

When you figure out a better way to do that, get back to me.

This is the absolute worst part of site culture, particularly on .world.

If you talk shit about another user or instance, then checking up on whether it’s actually true or not is not “following around and harassing” it’s just basic fact checking.

This is why I always say, “If someone says something happened on the fediverse without providing a link, they’re lying.” At the very least, it should be disregarded as hearsay. But somehow the culture is that people get to talk shit and if you check them on it you’re the bad guy. How anyone can stand that BS is beyond me.

My dad’s self-publishing a book and formed a one person corporation as part of that. By your logic, if you take away corporate rights, then soon enough you’ll be coming after small authors like that. It’s inevitable. Just a law of the universe.

Or, you know, it isn’t, that’s bullshit, and the same is true for a wealth tax.

The US was never “an anti-corporate nation.” The founders were very keen on protecting the wealth of the elites, it’s why they wanted to prevent “mob rule.” The 1800s was when anti- corporate movements began to form.

Your perspective is nihilistic and defeatist. Just because one country historically “failed” to design a government that puts people over profits (something that was never the intent to start with) it means we should just throw in the towel and stop trying?

Who’s they? Bernie Sanders?

People do call him out on reddit, lemmy, and other social media. As for bigger names, it’s not just a matter of what’s true, but what the practical consequences would be.

Because Trump is so petty and vindictive, people tend to not want to say things that will tick him off. Foreign leaders might be of the mindset of “weathering the storm” in the hopes he’s replaced by someone better, while domestic media outlets risk being cut out of press briefings if they say anything critical of him.

As for the Democrats, they have all kinds of screwed up priorities. They’re constantly trying to appeal to the “center” and be accommodating to a fault. The right has criticized them for “promoting violence” when they do call someone a fascist or similar. They’re all about bipartisanship and you can’t really do that while calling the other side terrorists, regardless of the actual truth.

Yeah, that’s right. You got us.

We’re gonna put a wealth tax on your toothbrush.

Fight Club, but the protagonist and Tyler Durden are two different people, rather than being different headmates of one plural system.

Yes, actually, I did. I remain convinced that your source is correct and that it was 6-7, not 20-30.

Your homework.

Mk ultra sounds pretty smart. And it is. If stimulants could reduce your risk of death would you not use them?

I have no idea how these sentences are connected.

There is no van of cops following you at all times.

No one said there was?

Bro, it doesn’t matter how many times you say something. What matters is what the fucking source says. It’s like you think if you just say something loudly and confidently enough, that somehow makes it true. It’s ridiculous.

This is what multiple sources (including the ones I posted) actually say.

That’s just an outright lie. I saw the source, you saw the source, I don’t know who you possibly think is going to fall for that. Nobody else is reading this far into a pointless argument in a 4 day old thread (apparently one person did, hi, upvoter) Like, literally:

Who am I going to believe? You, or my own eyes?

God damn, no wonder kids are so fucking stupid nowadays. Nobody can get you people to read.

Buddy, I understand you’re just trying to copy what I said, but you have absolutely no leg to stand on here. The screenshot is literally right there like a smoking gun. If you’re not trolling and aware that you’re spewing bullshit, you have to be the most ignorant person on the planet.

But you know what? Fine. I looked into it and here’s my source saying it’s 6-7 years.

You’ve proven it to my satisfaction too! I’m using your own source, which literally says, word for word, that the wait time was 6-7 years! Nowhere have you presented any evidence it was remotely close to 20-30!

I’m not surprised that you’ve “proven it to your own satisfaction,” given that your standards of evidence are random Quora users and Russian state media you don’t even realize is Russian state media! And even they say you’re wrong! Literally the only standard you’re applying is, “What makes the USSR look bad” or “What lets me win this argument.”

I really don’t know what you’re getting out of this. You are not going to convince me that when it says, “the average wait time was 6-7 years” it actually meant 20-30. You’re not going to convince me that 6-7 is basically the same as 20-30. You’re not going to get me to do your homework for you. Your source says 6-7, not 20-30 so that’s what I’m going with. This is incredibly straightforward.

I legitimately can’t tell if you’re just trolling me or if you’re legitimately unable to understand this. Just find a schoolbus in the morning, and get on it. You need more help than I could ever provide.

Buddy, the burden of proof is on the person making the claim. I’m not going to do your homework for you.

And you can talk all you want about how I “don’t care about the truth,” no amount of posturing will change the objective fact that 7 is less than 20. I’m the only one here basing my beliefs in anything factual.

Technically, that was with Germany, but a similar idea.

Don’t get it right too soon or people will call you a conspiracy theorist.

Remember, we don’t do that stuff anymore, it’s totally crazy to suggest that’s even a possibility. Wait 20 years, it’ll come out that we did, in fact, still do that stuff - but only back then. But by then we’ll have stopped and it’ll be totally crazy to suggest that’s even a possibility. Until you wait another 20 years.

No one has ever accused me of not posting walls of texts before 🤣

I think you’re right about it being about a specific thread though.