An uphill battle destined to go downhill

Why don't you just let the Invisible Hand of the Market roll the boulder uphill?

Yes, being crushed by the weight of your own poor arguments, comprehension, and philosophy is probably quite an accurate way to describe arguing against a communist.

You can argue with communists, you can't argue with fanboys or those who accepted Marx as the one and true Messiah and tell you to read ze book instead of providing any points. But that's applicable to pretty much every topic (oop bad, for example).

I'm happy to hear this coming from someone on ml. At least some of you still possess the ability to reason.
- Sorry to disappoint, but I'm not exactly into Marxism-Leninism, I'm more of an anarchist myself (the idea of dictatorship, be it of a working class or anyone else, doesn't sit right with me). And ml was chosen at the time just due to it being hosted by the Lemmy devs
- Yeah I got a pretty nauseating explanation of "The June 4th Incident"

The authoritarian left and the liberal left have so little in common that it's frustrating the term "left" encompasses both.

And the authoritarians try to reconcile this issue by saying we liberals are actually on the right. How wonderful!
- To be clear, you were saying Capitalism is left wing. They are using Liberal, as in Libertarian, not as in the actual meaning of Liberal as in Capitalist.
- There is a difference.
  
  A lot of people who claim to be liberal, just aren't left wing. The good example is the FDP party in Germany.
  
  To quote Wikipedia: The FDP's political position has variously been described as centrist, centre-right, and right-wing. The FDP has been described as liberal, conservative-liberal, classical-liberal, and liberal-conservative. Other sources have described the party as libertarian or right-libertarian.
  
  There are left wing liberals, but don't act like they usually call themselves liberal.
- It's a simple fact.
The "authoritarian" left is just the framework of every revolution that actually won. There is a very special kind of Western detached romantic chauvinist "left" that believes only in failed and failing pure leftism and tragedy and is shocked and outraged at what it means to win, to establish defenses, to keep a nation or nations running.

There is no liberal left. Liberals are the mainstream political and are by definition conservative under global capitalism.
- Many of those aforementioned nations aren't exactly still running, though.
The pure (libertarian) socialists' ideological anticipations remain untainted by existing practice. They do not explain how the manifold functions of a revolutionary society would be organized, how external attack and internal sabotage would be thwarted, how bureaucracy would be avoided, scarce resources allocated, policy differences settled, priorities set, and production and distribution conducted. Instead, they offer vague statements about how the workers themselves will directly own and control the means of production and will arrive at their own solutions through creative struggle. No surprise then that the pure socialists support every revolution except for the ones that succeed.

Watch out, you’re going to be banned for espousing incorrect doctrine.

I don't mind being banned from an ml community tbh
Oh shit better look out, we got an edgelord here!
- Ironic that you’re using the comic about using bad faith debates in order to shut down this thread complaining about bad faith debates on ML.
  
  Ever heard of horseshoe theory?

One must find the anti-communist happy in their prison/punishment for being despotic, because they continue to repeat the same hypothetical thing everytime?

Are you doing that on Lemmy? In what communities?

Unfortunately on this community
- On c/memes?