You're viewing a single thread.
Oh, libs. When will you learn that the right is immune to these sorts of accusations? Nobody is swayed by this "Trump is a communist" rhetoric, the only people who agree with it are people who already hate Trump and would clap along with any comparison or accusation as long as it's negative. Trump has "Only Nixon could go to China" powers.
It's the same sort of thing as the Dems trying to attack Trump as weak on immigration and pass themselves off as border hawks. Liberals can't help but to concede this whole moral framework to the right and argue purely along technical lines of efficiency.
Of course the liberals clap along because it owns the "tankies," and in their minds, if they just punch left enough they'll convince everyone that they're "one of the good ones" on the left, as if they're not going to be labelled Stalinists anyway, like they did with Obama.
It's bad enough that it's not true, but even worse is that nobody buys it (who wasn't already "vote blue no matter who").
he said “stalinist”; not communist… one of the primary things that differentiates stalin from marx and lenin (afaik; i’ll freely admit i’m not reading books on the subject, but that’s also the perspective of the mainstream and thus afaik the communication he’s going for) is the authoritarianism, purges, etc: he’s trying to say that trump is a cult of personality of equal substance to the mainstream understanding of stalin
i’ll freely admit i’m not reading books on the subject
Let me first clarify a few points then.
Marx and Lenin were also "authoritarian." You should read Engles' On Authority, it's not long and explains his position on the matter, which was consistent with Marx.
"Stalinism" isn't really a thing, nobody calls themselves that, it's just a pejorative for Marxism-Leninism, which was Stalin's stated ideology (in fact, he's the person who coined the term). Marxism-Leninism ("Stalinism") is the most prevalent ideology among self-described communists globally, particularly in the global south.
If Sanders just wanted an authoritarian figure to compare Trump to, there are no shortage of right-wing ones who have much more in common with him. The choice of Stalin seems to be intentional, to distance himself and his own brand of socialism from Stalin and other M-Ls.
I believe this is a flawed strategy, in the same way it would be to accuse a witch-hunter of being a witch. The problem is that you're accepting the premise that witches are real and need to be hunted, and at that point it becomes a question of who can better make the case that they're not a witch - which is going to be the witch-hunter, because that's their job, they know how to play the game, they made the rules. In the same way, right wingers are always going to be more convincing anti-communists than someone who calls himself a socialist, they made the rules of the red scare and they know how to play it. The real way to defeat the witch hunt is to have enough people who aren't afraid of being called witches, and the way to defeat red scare stuff is not to accept the framing and punch left, but to say, "So what if I am a Red?"
Cowards driving by and downvoting without addressing any arguments: where is the lie?
if you say “libs” it instantly puts people in the headspace of “own the libs”, “everything i don’t like is woke”… it’s a dog whistle, and thus sets people up to think the rest of what’s being said is tainted
the ideologies in the group are not a cohesive block
Part of the reason to use the word is to expose liberals to the idea that they are not in fact the Left and their policies support capitalism at every turn
I take drive by downvotes as a compliment, the meaning I get from them is, "I don't like this because it challenged my beliefs in a way I can't answer." Great! That's what I was going for.
That's a nice way to think about it, thank you
Is it unfathomable that someone could see something they think is wrong but doesn't think starting a long-winded Internet argument wherein neither party will in any scenario whatsoever convince the other of anything is worth their time?
I think it's representative of intellectual cowardice which is why I made my comment. It is entirely consistent with my experience when commenting on a
.worldpost and calling out Liberalism's "true face".Pack it up, fellas. Not wanting to start Internet arguments is now "intellectual cowardice".
It seems you would rather have this meta argument about posting etiquette then actually address any substantive policy or historical arguments so I'm not sure you are making the point you think you are
Nah, I've said all I wanted to say have a good day
wow, you're soooo woke