when left leaning libs defend their ideals from right leaning libs by saying "it wasnt real communism" like in this case. they mean that the thing being talked about did not adhere to communist ideals.

when u say that "it wasnt real communism" u mean that there is a distinction between communism and socialism or lower stage communism as marx called it.

the gdr was a socialist country led by communist with the goal of establishing communism when they original lib said it wasnt real communism what he mean was that "the gdr was not a socialist country and it wasnt led by communist", then when i said it was real communism i meant to re state the fact that the gdr was a socialist country led by communist. so it is self evident that ur argument is irrelevant no one was actually talking about where the gdr was a stateless, money less, classless society, we were talking about whether the leadership of the gdr truly adhered to communist principles.

as to why ur argument looks to be in bad faith u would have to live under a fucking rock not understand this context or far more likely u are arguing in bad faith.

[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 2 points 6 months ago

I think you have an unrealistic estimation of how much most people understand the topic of communism, if you think not labelling different types of communism as the same ideology is living under a rock. More than half the country doesn't even realize that socialism and communism aren't complete synonyms, and a good fraction think paradoxically that center right liberalism is somehow communist.

Basically, I think you're doing this: https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/average_familiarity_2x.png