the elephant mops the room
(midwest.social)
slothrop Conservatives believe in hierarchy. That's it. They'll do whatever their leader says. They're spineless disgraces.
Socialism puts the means of production in the hands of the workers.
Putting it in the hands of the state just consolidates power to the state and away from the one dude at the top of the company. Workers remain at the behest of a power outside of themselves.
The elephant would think that a government saying "hey, you have to give power to your employees" is the same as "we're the government and we own a portion of your company" when they're very different things. Mostly because they lack any brain cells and only speak in terms of capital and pedophilia.
It works because the GOP elephant would think state control of the means of production is socialism.
No, I’m pretty sure that’s Communism.
Actually it’s also in line with Fascism, which is the GOPs current position. Quite a bit of overlap, especially with how much Nationalism and racism goes into the major Communist power groups.
Sorry. How much racism goes into the major communist power groups? Where did you even get that from? Stalin was the poor son of a poor cobbler and was a Georgian, a racially minoritized group in Russia. The Cuban revolution fundamentally overturned the anti-black EuroCentric government. And I certainly don't see how racism is present in Vietnamese communism. As for China, Han supremacy is long historical process predating modern communism that the CPC has actually taken steps to address including their One-Child Policy which was only applied to Han, while non-Han were either exempted entirely or had limits of 2 or 3.
I think you’re forgetting quite a few pogroms
You mean in the USSR? The ones the Red Army was sent to stop? The ones perpetrated by the anti-communists, conservatives, Ukranian Nationalists, and various peasant militias? The communist party did not incorporate racist pogroms into its program and actively worked against them
Stalin didn’t like Jews and was on his way to build camps himself. The doctors plot was leading up to that.
So you're saying that the communist party itself was deeply racist because of stuff that might have happened but didn't? Do I have that right?
Attempted murder is a crime yes. Stalin was fine with the many pogroms immediately after the communists took over. They briefly used the Jews to help them with thier agenda then immediately turned on them. Starting during the war and continuing on.
He was gearing up to put them all in gulags but he died first. You say that’s worth ignoring but let me ask you this: if I built a jail in my house, buy an abduction van and began writing down all your movements, and tell people I’m planning to imprison you for no reason. Is that alarming? Is that showing where my morals lay? Is it a crime? would you want me arrested?
Stalin was fine with the many pogroms immediately after the communists took over
And yet, the communists actively worked to end the pogroms. Almost as though Stalin's personal opinions didn't actually matter and the party was in charge.
They briefly used the Jews to help them with thier agenda then immediately turned on them. Starting during the war and continuing on.
Yeah, so it's time for you to go get sources that document how the Bolsheviks and the Communist Party actively planned and executed porgroms against the Jews, because that didn't actually happen and your claim is going to require some evidence.
He was gearing up to put them all in gulags but he died first.
That's cool. So your claim is that the Communist Party itself was actively racist except for the fact that the Communist Party didn't follow through with supposed plans against Jews. So... you're saying that the party itself was not racist in this way, but rather that perhaps Stalin personally was, but never got to steer the party to act on his racism.
You realize that's what you're saying right? You're undermining your first point by trying to appeal to Stalin's personal character and stating that it didn't happen.
Is that showing where my morals lay?
Yeah, this is the problem. You're trying to say that the Communist Party was itself deeply racist, but instead you're trying to transfer stories about a specific person who was elected by the Communist Party to establish a moral judgment that then is supposed to transfer back to the party, despite you being completely unable to point to actual events that support your claim. It's not even guilt by association, it's guilt by association with a thought-crime.
You're grasping at straws.
What about China and The Uyghurs? This idea that communism is non discriminatory is laughable _
I didn't say communism is non-discriminatory. Your willingness to jump from "racism" to "discrimination" demonstrates you don't understand the topic at all.
What about China and The Uyghurs?
China absolutely has a problem with Han supremacy and assimilated European racism, no doubt. But the situation with Uyghurs is not evidence of it. The situation with the Uyghurs, quite literally, is only framed as an Islamophobic "racism" problem by the white supremacist Islamophobic West. When the Arab League surveyed the entire situation, not only did they not find any evidence of Islamophobia, they actively approved of the Chinese program. Why?
Because the problem in Xinjiang is the problem of manufactured extremism. Manufactured by whom? The US and UK primarily. They have a decades long history of training, arming, and even fomenting Islamic extremism in the entire region (go look at where exactly Xinjiang is on a map). Remember the Mujahideen? Remember how the US created al-Qaeda? Remember how the current president of Syria had a huge bounty on his head for being a literal head-chopper in ISIS but then it turns out he's been actively working with the US military intelligence apparatus for at least 7 years? Yeah, so the US has been continuing their 50-year program of creating terrorist extremists and they were doing it in Xinjiang with the Uyghur community. The US and UK have built a substantial program of reinterpreting Islam to justify terrorism and spreading that in isolated and economically under-developed Islamic communities to create terrorist cells, very much like what the US did with Evangelical Christians right here in the USA (and most terrorist attacks in the US are from white Christian who were radicalized, even if tangentially, by these programs).
So again, why did the Arab League approve of China's program in Xinjiang? Because it was actually effective. The number of terrorist attacks in Xinjiang plummeted following China's implementation of their program. Economic opportunity was expanded, education, literacy, and health outcomes all skyrocketed. Uyghur women in Xinjiang had massively expanded academic, economic, and family-planning opportunities. It's honestly a huge achievement, and one that the Arab League would be highly interested in understanding - the first ever deradicalization program aimed at Muslims radicalized by the decades-long Western radicalization program.
So, what about China and the Uyghurs? Not a racism thing. Not a discrimination thing. Not a Han supremacy thing. It's an anti-terrorism program aimed at threading the needle, maintaining the Xinjiang autonomous region while neutralizing the radicalization threat from the West. And it's working, not just well, extremely well, and the Uyghurs in Xinjiang every year are posting continued population growth, positive academic growth, positive economic growth, and they're all still practicing Islam.
Communism is stateless so definitely not that. In socialism there is a state which controls the means of production but that state is (supposed to be at least) made up of workers who recieve no more pay than the average proletarian and are subject to instant recall. Fascism is when (amongst other things) the bourgeois state gives dictatorial power to a faction of the bourgeois or am individual who controls the means of production and disciplines workers for the protection of bourgeois interests.
Conflating socialism and fascism is harmful to workers liberation and only serves the fascists who are far more in reach of power than workers are. It creates grounds for fascist to use socialist aesthetics to attract workers to their movement as was done in the past repeatedly.
No, it's fascism
It's not that either if the state is still around and in control of anything. Not one "communist" regime ever actually progressed into actual communism.
