Hands

it did!!! immediately know it's you when i see it, meanwhile i can't tell what this one is at initial glance lmao

Hey hey❤️ Almost didn't recognize you with the avatar haha, used to your old sprite

Maybe I should change my username for "Cleaning Substance" lol

You didn't, you just said that his plans were good before ranting about Farron and May, and I will check them now.

Don't lie, I asked what plans corbyn has for the UK, and you avoided the question..

You avoided my last question, so I will not answer yours.

I don't read the daily mail, yes, I could be a more accurate in most posts, but your last post was frankly rude.

What if they don't agree?

Yeah, spot on with your geography there.

Looking at a map I'm around a 10 minute walk from the edge of the NR6 boundary.

Small world. I live and work in NR4. We should meet up and swap Pokemon cards.

I'm doing alright. How about you

hi Paz

jk I'm doing it to be pals ofc <3 :D

OK. I'll try that. thanks!

Friend requesting you just to kick Klippy off your visible friends list.

Again, no. I'm not crying everything is Communism/Witches/Other examples of historical McCarthyism.

By the way, you seem to understand very little about Communism. The end goal of it is anarchy because it seeks a stateless society, but it calls for a dictatorship of the proletariat as one of the transitioning phases. This is where you get your authoritarian forms of Communism that never manage to get to anarchy. Even in the manifesto it calls for a stateless society after all of these transitional phases, in which anarchy does not help the worker.

Also, when Marx did write this, there were political avenues to better the conditions. The problem is that they were extremely slow, but it had eventually won out. From exposes on the meat industry, to the eventual creation of the secret ballot, to mainstream political parties adopting some aspects of the Progressive and Populist party ideals, there were some avenues.

And yes, while it is clear who is labeled bourgeoisie, lest us not forget that Communism will call anyone who is against it a class enemy even if they are in the working class.

Also, you're a bloody idiot if you don't believe MLK didn't help with the Civil Rights of African Americans within the US. Rioting in the streets only gives the oppressors the tools to justify their repression. Civil insurgency should only be used if it is the only thing left.

Also, Capitalism is again an economic theory. Racism and the above had existed before the advent of Capitalism, those were carryovers for the most part. Capitalism does not promote slavery, nor does it promote any of those listed. The only thing it promotes is classicism by economic standards. The rest are affected by culture.

Again, not wrong. If an Islamic country attacks an ally like Israel, they had provoked it and will be put down with the maximum force of the military.

Citation please, because otherwise, this is all jargon. We're all a democracy and every vote is for the most part equal (except for the Electoral College, that shit needs to be removed).

By the way, if we're going to go by the extremists of our sides, maybe you should look at the Khmer Rouge and how they turned Cambodia into a backwards agrarian society for the sake of Khmer nationalism. "But-but they're ultranationalist, obviously they're Fascists" you say, but it's not like they were communist. /Reagan is cancer, so is Stalin and so is Pol Pot.

By the way, you're using the hyper-capitalists to jab at me again. Last time I checked, killing all of those intelligent people back with the Khmer Rouge didn't plummet the quality of health care, it totally didn't at all! Social Democrats aren't this uber-capitalist cancer you are talking about; they want stuff such as the NHS but still want a capitalist economic model.

Also, I was assuming the illiteracy you were talking about was the ability not to read, not grammatical issues/spelling issues. But I digress.

Actually, that is incorrect again. After all, who would take positions like, oh I don't know, anything in Health Care besides CNA/other aides or any vocational education?

Nice try there bud, but Juche is a Communist ideology and is debated to be a revisionist form. If you go to any scholarly source, it is listed as Communist. The only reason why you deny that is because it's uber-Nationalist.

And no, I did not "deliberately" try to put down the Irish famine. Why would I put down a famine that affected my ancestors? Or are you really that McCarthyist and want to accuse me of everything?

Also, Ukraine was a part of the USSR at that time, not a sovereign country, but as either a state or a puppet. Try again.

By the way, Oligarchy isn't just a "Capitalist" thing. By definition:
"a small group of people having control of a country, organization, or institution."

Guess who tends to control the country during any authoritarian transitional phase of Communism? That's right, the political organization that installed Communism in that country.

The book is about all Authoritarian ideologies. Not just Fascism, not just Feudalism, not just Monarchism, just pure Totalitarianism. You're better off refuting my point by pointing at the CIA (which needs to be dismantled; I'd argue it's heavily Fascist in its current form myself).

I'm not going to bother with the Holodomor tbh anyways, we're never going to agree to that at any point anyways (since we're just going to be pointing at stupid shit and trying to kafkatrap each other). By the way, those famines were caused when India had a colonial government (which tends to be Mercantalist). Capitalism in its moderate forms does not cause this kind of famine on purpose anyways, but back then I highly doubt the UK had any form of moderate capitalism (probably Laissez-Faire or something like that).

hey there

In fact, 1984 is mainly talking about the totalitarian regimes of tomorrow. Just because there is a hint of ultranationalism does not mean Communism can evolve into this, especially with the aforesaid ultranationalistic variants of Communism (Khmer Rouge, Juche.)

"Everyone I don't like is a McCarthyist!"

Anyways, this isn't a "lack of understanding for basic history", we can all agree that Laissez-Faire Capitalism and enslavement is terrible. However, that does not excuse the fact that Marx created an ideology inherently against the proletariat you want to defend (as last time I checked, anarchy never goes well) and to even create this utopian anarchy requires a dictatorship that will never fall because it will be given to the hands of those same corrupt individuals that you would call bourgeoisie. Instead of actually trying to negotiate with reasonable debate, your ideology calls for the violent overthrow of anyone who you label bourgeoisie. Funny thing is the most successful attempts to fix these problems all happened to be peaceful (MLK, Gandhi, etc).

Secondly, this is not true under Capitalism because Capitalism is merely an economic theory. Communism encircle economic theory and political theory, and most of the time, we're at war because those "dissidents" either provoked us into war or because we're petty imperialists wanting to oil because we can't use our own oil for some reason.

And yes, I know what Batista is, but last time I checked, you must be deluded to think Cuba is anywhere close to anything outside of a pure dictatorship. We backed Batista because the Truman Doctrine said to back anyone who is not Communist (which isn't capitalism at work but idiocy) and sadly the states felt a non-Communist dictatorship was the best thing.

In regards to HIV, Capitalism is again not the problem here. They simply eradicated it, we have to many people with it screwing around. Not a problem. Also, that same health care system can happen under a capitalist system (see Social Democracy) and illiteracy is not 100% eradicated because we still have people alive from the time where African Americans were discriminated against and could not receive a decent education (which is not capitalism, it had to do with the bullshit racialist ideals of the time).

The Amish are not communist because they haven't either installed anarchy (if they even manage to get that far) or installed a one-party totalitarian system. Just because they raise a barn together doesn't make them communist. Also, no Communist state has ever gotten to the anarchist Utopia because every single one became a bloodthirsty dictatorship (and some of them even look like Fascism on paper; look at Juche).

Also, considering you're openly defending anarcho-Communists, all of those oppressors are essentially dissidents, especially since you even suggested once that the definition of alt-Right to you is centre-Right,

Also, that isn't revisionism at all. I'm calling it a potato blight because the famine was caused by a water mold that infected potatoes. Therefore, it is technically a blight that cause the famine, in which the terminology is still correct.

What I'm saying here is that you're giving your trust in the same governments that denied the Holocaust until after the war was over (they wouldn't believe Pilecki's reports of what was happening in Auschwitz). The same happened here.

Just because Stalin is an idiot does not absolve him from his crimes. He still forcibly starved a rebelling part of his country. While yes, the Kulaks did burn the crops, he still increased the quotas even during the drought and the loss of crops.

Also, the foreign aid was in response to the general famine at that time period. The Holodomor is a specific part of this famine; just because they don't find it "man-made" doesn't stop them from giving the USSR foreign aid to alleviate the situation. The actual thing does not mention any specific country, however this website takes it from the UN Convention on the Prevention of Genocide of 1948.

Actually, 1984 wasn't specifically talking about ultra-nationalism but the threat of oligarchy and dictatorships of the future (secret police, police state, punishment of dissidents, cult of personality around the leader, etc). Besides, it's not like there have been forms of ultra-nationalist Communism either (again, see Juche and whatever the hell the Khmer Rouge were trying to create). Hell, even the USSR had some forms of nationalism (not on the levels of ultranationalism) in regards to the country.