More like every time there’s been democratically elected socialists or communists, western powers intervene with staged coups, assassinations, or embargos.
Even if that’s true, so what? You are just pointing out one possible reason why communism doesn’t work in reality. Still doesn’t work.
If I say my immortal potion recipe would work in an alternate reality where humans didn’t breathe oxygen, it does not make it any more useful. Equally, in our reality, coups, assassinations and embargoes exist. If a political system can’t withstand them, it is not useful.
If you say something is bad, you must have some frame of reference to know how bad it is. So if you say communism is bad, we will want to know, “relative to what?” And since capitalism and western hegemony are the dominant systems, naturally they will draw comparisons. And those comparisons will be unfavorable since capitalism is clearly broken and incentivizes great evil.
So OK, we’re still not really discussing the merits and flaws of communism as they stand on their own, but most of you aren’t ready to accept that almost everything you have learned about communism is a lie and you definitely aren’t ready to engage with the actual historical record.
So instead, the arguments revolve around what-aboutisms. Because most of you deny the evidence of your eyes and just listen to daddy. Long before we can delve into how the soviets actually existed in the world, you have dismissed us as “tankies” and stuck your fingers in your ears.
This is like saying the idea of solar panels is bad because capitalists work against them to destroy their reputation. Judging a system based on the assumption that theres someone else trying to destroy it is very simple minded.
A political and economic system is not some random piece of infrastructure, like a solar panel. It’s more comparable to a padlock. It’s entire point is to manage human nature. If all people were benevolent and willing to work for collective good on their own, we wouldn’t need political systems at all. Neither would we need padlocks. A padlock that can’t hinder an intruder is a bad padlock. A political or economic system that can’t handle human nature (greed, lust for power) is a bad system.
A political and economic system is not some random piece of infrastructure, like a solar panel.
And its also not a magic potion.
A padlock that can’t hinder an intruder is a bad padlock.
A political and economic system is not some random piece of infrastructure object, like a solar panel padlock.
Youre saying a political system can only work if there is not a single aspect that can be taken advantage of? Thats equivalent to every single person being controlled 100% in their actions. If thats your idea of ideal, sure. I guess some people currently being in leading positions would agree with you.
The US is currently in the middle of a fascist takeover, while being a Democracy (in the past at least). Are you saying Democracy is not a political system worth pursuing because it doesnt work?
Youre saying a political system can only work if there is not a single aspect that can be taken advantage of? Thats equivalent to every single person being controlled 100% in their actions.
I did not say anything even close to that. I am saying a political system can only work if it can’t be easily overturned. It has nothing to do with how much it controls peoples lives or if it can be taken advantage of.
What is this bullshit argument? If a lightbulb stops working after 10 years, is it as useless as a lightbulb that breaks after 10 minutes?
can’t be easily overturned
Did I write they have to be impossible to overturn? Why don’t you read what I write more carefully instead of reacting to some made up version of my comment.
In many of these cases, the political system which couldn’t withstand coups were democracies. Does this mean that democracy isn’t useful? Are you saying that democracies should forbid socialists from being elected since if they get elected then america will intervene and the democracy will cease to be useful? Sounds like you don’t care for democracy and self-determination of nations. Bonus points will be awarded for being able to make your point without a potion metaphor.
My entire point is that political systems like democracies are not isolated from economic systems. Democracies fail when combined with communism, because all power is concentrated in the political apparatus, leaving no leverage for the rest of the population. Then, seizing power and removing democracy is too easy.
The problem isn’t political systems, it’s superpowers intervening, e.g. america funding fascist coups of democratically elected socialists. It would be hard for any small nation, regardless of political system, to defend against a coup funded by a superpower. Please prove me wrong and tell me how e.g. the coup in Chile 1973 could have been prevented by decentralizing power.
The problem isn’t political systems, it’s superpowers intervening
There can be more than one problem.
Please prove me wrong and tell me how e.g. the coup in Chile 1973 could have been prevented by decentralizing power.
A coup still inherently relies on there being internal forces willing to execute said coup. I don’t dare say being capitalist could have stopped this particular one, quite likely it couldn’t. But it it is at least more resilient in general.
If it was impossible to resist superpower sponsored coups, I am sure the Baltics wouldn’t be able to remain democratic right next to Russia.
More like every time there’s been democratically elected socialists or communists, western powers intervene with staged coups, assassinations, or embargos.
Even if that’s true, so what? You are just pointing out one possible reason why communism doesn’t work in reality. Still doesn’t work.
If I say my immortal potion recipe would work in an alternate reality where humans didn’t breathe oxygen, it does not make it any more useful. Equally, in our reality, coups, assassinations and embargoes exist. If a political system can’t withstand them, it is not useful.
You’re discussing with brainwashed tankies who can only answer “what about xyz in the west” to any kind of, even constructive, criticism.
Lots of anarchists are like that too, a shame because there is surely something to take from those kind of ideas.
If you say something is bad, you must have some frame of reference to know how bad it is. So if you say communism is bad, we will want to know, “relative to what?” And since capitalism and western hegemony are the dominant systems, naturally they will draw comparisons. And those comparisons will be unfavorable since capitalism is clearly broken and incentivizes great evil.
So OK, we’re still not really discussing the merits and flaws of communism as they stand on their own, but most of you aren’t ready to accept that almost everything you have learned about communism is a lie and you definitely aren’t ready to engage with the actual historical record.
So instead, the arguments revolve around what-aboutisms. Because most of you deny the evidence of your eyes and just listen to daddy. Long before we can delve into how the soviets actually existed in the world, you have dismissed us as “tankies” and stuck your fingers in your ears.
This is like saying the idea of solar panels is bad because capitalists work against them to destroy their reputation. Judging a system based on the assumption that theres someone else trying to destroy it is very simple minded.
A political and economic system is not some random piece of infrastructure, like a solar panel. It’s more comparable to a padlock. It’s entire point is to manage human nature. If all people were benevolent and willing to work for collective good on their own, we wouldn’t need political systems at all. Neither would we need padlocks. A padlock that can’t hinder an intruder is a bad padlock. A political or economic system that can’t handle human nature (greed, lust for power) is a bad system.
And its also not a magic potion.
A political and economic system is not some random
piece of infrastructureobject, like asolar panelpadlock.Youre saying a political system can only work if there is not a single aspect that can be taken advantage of? Thats equivalent to every single person being controlled 100% in their actions. If thats your idea of ideal, sure. I guess some people currently being in leading positions would agree with you.
The US is currently in the middle of a fascist takeover, while being a Democracy (in the past at least). Are you saying Democracy is not a political system worth pursuing because it doesnt work?
I did not say anything even close to that. I am saying a political system can only work if it can’t be easily overturned. It has nothing to do with how much it controls peoples lives or if it can be taken advantage of.
So just to be clear, there doesnt currently exist a political system that works, as they all have been overturned multiple times?
What is this bullshit argument? If a lightbulb stops working after 10 years, is it as useless as a lightbulb that breaks after 10 minutes?
Did I write they have to be impossible to overturn? Why don’t you read what I write more carefully instead of reacting to some made up version of my comment.
Your argument.
Why are you implying that real communism would be easily overturned? Its never been implemented.
In many of these cases, the political system which couldn’t withstand coups were democracies. Does this mean that democracy isn’t useful? Are you saying that democracies should forbid socialists from being elected since if they get elected then america will intervene and the democracy will cease to be useful? Sounds like you don’t care for democracy and self-determination of nations. Bonus points will be awarded for being able to make your point without a potion metaphor.
My entire point is that political systems like democracies are not isolated from economic systems. Democracies fail when combined with communism, because all power is concentrated in the political apparatus, leaving no leverage for the rest of the population. Then, seizing power and removing democracy is too easy.
The problem isn’t political systems, it’s superpowers intervening, e.g. america funding fascist coups of democratically elected socialists. It would be hard for any small nation, regardless of political system, to defend against a coup funded by a superpower. Please prove me wrong and tell me how e.g. the coup in Chile 1973 could have been prevented by decentralizing power.
There can be more than one problem.
A coup still inherently relies on there being internal forces willing to execute said coup. I don’t dare say being capitalist could have stopped this particular one, quite likely it couldn’t. But it it is at least more resilient in general.
If it was impossible to resist superpower sponsored coups, I am sure the Baltics wouldn’t be able to remain democratic right next to Russia.