yogthos

joined 4 years ago
[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 2 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Revolutions require a critical mass of people to come together, and sometimes people who have different vision for the end goal find opportunities to work together as Bolsheviks and anarchists did. Lenin wrote extensively on the subject of when alliances should be formed. MLs don't have a problem working with anarchists, recognizing that there are common interests and that a time may come where such alliances may need to be rethought. The hate largely comes from the side of anarchists who refuse to work with MLs and spend their time trying to discredit the accomplishments of existing socialist states.

It's also worth noting that the reality in the west today is that both MLs and anarchists are an insignificant political minority. If the current system does end up collapsing in the near future, then fascism is the most likely outcome. While the left bickers, the right is rapidly growing in power in vast majority of western countries.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 months ago (4 children)

The Bolsheviks’ had the ill-gotten might to push their agenda, but might does not make right. The Bolsheviks lied to and used the anarchists to achieve what they did, but anarchists have learned from their past mistakes and will prove you wrong.

No amount of moralizing will change the fact that anarchists fail to organize effectively time and again. If anarchists actually learned anything then we'd see that put into practice. The lack of any actual achievements is the elephant in the room here.

Capitalist aggression did not make necessary the regressive views on social issues and science the USSR had (which resulted in famine), nor the widespread corruption and bureaucratic inefficiency of state officials. You cannot simply excuse all flaws of the USSR by blaming global capitalism.

Yes, it absolutely did as anybody with even minimal historical knowledge would know.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 months ago (6 children)

What I'm pointing out is that all ideologies compete with others. That's the reality of the world. If Anarchists are not able to defend the way they want to organize society then their ideology ends up being trampled by others. That's the world we live in. Calling this victim blaming doesn't change the material reality of the world.

The difference between anarchists and communists is that the latter actually managed to build functional societies, and to effectively resist capitalism. Anarchists failed to do that, and the reasons for why anarchist approach fails time and again are well understood now.

What Bolsheviks achieved was the betrayal of all who fought for the liberation of the proletariat.

Repeating nonsense over and over will not make it true.

You speak as if the USSR only repressed the forces of reaction, but it also repressed the very same workers it claimed to support when they tried to claim the worker control of the means of production they were promised.

This is an idealist position that's divorced from realities of the world. USSR existed under siege from global capitalism throughout its whole existence, and that was the reason it was organized the way it was.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 months ago (8 children)

This clearly illustrates that anarchists are not capable of organizing in effective ways that can protect their ideology. The same way anarchists ended up losing to Bolsheviks, they end up losing to capitalists, and fascists. What Bolsheviks achieved was to build a socialist state that was able to defend itself and greatly improve the lives of the working majority. Anarchists simply aren't capable of doing that as the past century has shown beyond all doubt.

USSR was the first ever attempt at building socialism at scale, and while it may have collapsed, other socialist projects live on today and continue to improve lives of over a billion people on this planet.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 months ago (10 children)

Nah, I'm going by the actual tangible achievements, or lack of thereof as the case may be, of anarchists based on the teachings of their thinkers.

This was true of the Russian revolution when “all power to the Soviets” became hollow words and “war communism” became the new oppressor of the people.

Having actually grown up in USSR, I can tell you that listening to anarchists regurgitate this nonsense is incredibly offensive. It completely discredits your argument and shows that it is you who's opining on a subject you have no understanding of. All people like you accomplish is enable capitalist oppression by rejecting real world solutions.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

it's so materialist that the only thing it managed to produce in the past century is a lot of hot air

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 6 points 5 months ago

That's right, being a foul tankie, I'm completely incapable of independent thought and simply do what my betters tell me like an automaton that I am. Only enlightened dronies are capable of truly independent thinking.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 months ago

I mean you clearly have a compulsion to keep talking to me, so just can't get enough of that foul tankie opinion I guess. 😂

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 months ago (2 children)
[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

lmfao took you half an hour to come up with this "comeback" 😂

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 2 points 5 months ago

You're contradicting yourself little buddy, just earlier you were claiming that mass popular support is democracy. But apparently an uprising of the oppressed is just a coup. 🤡

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 months ago (5 children)

I do, that's why I don't spew nonsense the way you do.

1
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/nuclear_power@lemmy.ml
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
view more: ‹ prev next ›