Like genuinely I’m not even sure how you could write that in response to this tweet stating literally the opposite of your point. Nonetheless, China exists which means this is literally animal farm.
Libs trying not to compare everything to Animal Farm, 1984, or The Handmaid's Tale. I hope whoever this is dies, the tweet is so incoherent and stupid I'm going to cry.
:soypoint-1: it's like Marco Inaros throwing a bunch of rocks at the Earthers! :mattjak:
At least this would mean that they read another book or at least watched another show.
this is literally just like tacobell putting fries on their menyu again
Ask not for whom the Taco Bell tolls; it tolls for, you know, the thing :biden-the-thing:
My local Bell gave up. They had the fries again for one day, and then just decided to not. I think they're just eating them all instead of selling them, which is what I would do in their position as well so I cannot blame them.
Imagine if American legislators had as nuanced an attitude toward the Constitution as Chinese legislators have toward Marx.
Uh, they absolutely do have that nuanced view. American legislators and judges have been bending that document so many different ways its basically a paper crane.
During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them. If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum. :parenti::parenti: :parenti::parenti::parenti:
Don't forget that most of them haven't actually read either of those books
Sometimes we branch out and do Vietnam.
Also, I don't know what kind of American you hang out with, but plenty of mine love "Joel Osteen Reads THE BIBLE"
What I'm getting is more of a "No, you have to do Marxism exactly as Marx wrote or you're doing a Stalin Lenin baderoonie!:wojak-nooo: " vibe
:parenti: :parenti: :parenti:
Rigidly follow exactly what Marx wrote
:frothingfash: YOU'RE DOGMATIST CULTISTS! BRAINWASHED!
Make some changes to adapt to the times and improve the base theory
:frothingfash: UMM SWEATY, YOU'RE CORRUPTING THE TRUE SPIRIT OF MARXISM. STALINIST FILTH!
:parenti: :parenti: :parenti:
now I'm just imagining a new type of guy that's an ultra-leftist CHUD who works at a syndicalist coop boat dealership and screaming about 'the dang Stalinists in the central committee' :frothingfash:
Rigidly follow exactly what Marx wrote
Two dozen different Trotskyists in a room just started arguing.
I learned to detect when an author writes from an aristocratic or pseudo-popular perspective, when an author, despite advocating for perspectives that superficially appear left-wing or progressive, manifests disdain and scorn for the people, for the working class and the oppressed. In other words, as Lukács might put it, the individual might have left-wing ethics, but a right-wing epistemology.
Really good point to think about.
Smh don't you revisionists know it's George Orwell o'clock every time you treat your ideology as a living thing, rather than something set in stone in the 19th century?
1984:
your devices watch you
all human intimacy: deliberately undermined
ritual affirmation of sharing an enemy
massive gulf between the exploiters and exploited
visibly slipping quality of life
fetishization of numb misery
steeped in Capitalist Realism
As a USian, I'll point out that I'm totally describing China and not the US. All problems in my life are false flags by China, Women, and the Woke NFL
I'm cancelling Xi Jinping. He turned the CPC political with his speaking at a scheduled congress of the party he leads. Let's just keep politics out of the running of nations.
:parenti-hands:
Communist projects are simultaneously too communist and not communist enough for libs. If you expropriate the wealthy and landlords and execute corrupt officials then it’s “totalitarian Stalin 1984” but if you don’t do those things then it’s “fake communism more equal than others animal farm revisionism”
Read something other than Orwell you stupid ass libs
To be fair rereading Harry Potter a million times leaves minimal storage for much else in the brain
It has talking animals and is a heavy-handed morality tale. It’s the most “for children” book that is discussed seriously by adults
