The Soviet system used psychiatry as a weapon by diagnosing political opponents as mentally ill in order to confine them as patients instead of trying them in court. Anyone who challenged the state such as dissidents, writers, would-be emigrants, religious believers, or human rights activists could be branded with fabricated disorders like sluggish schizophrenia. This turned normal political disagreement into supposed medical pathology and allowed the state to present dissent as insanity.
Once labeled in this way, people were placed in psychiatric hospitals where they could be held for long periods without legal protections. Harsh treatments were often used to break their resolve. The collaboration between state security organs and compliant psychiatrists created a system where political imprisonment was disguised as medical care, letting the Soviet regime suppress opposition while pretending it was addressing illness rather than silencing critics.
This sounds very familiar to the CIA’s practices with MK Ultra… although in a different way.
Goes to show, that neither system would be optimal - and that it’s better to chase the path of democratic socialist movements.
Authoritarianism is authoritarianism, no matter the flavor. If there is hierarchy in an organization, it is essentially inevitable that ultimately, one day, it will terrorize it’s members. The spectre of collected abused power is more patient than the vigilance of active membership can ever persistently be.
It’s crazy to me that many people think ‘this is what communism does’ when it’s actually what authoritarianism does. You can get authoritarianism all over the spectrum, in anything from communism to fascism.
This isn’t a feature of any political ideology – rather it’s a feature of letting sociopaths gain power.
The US is trying to do this now, what with declaring the bogeyman known as antifa a mental illness AND a terrorist threat.
Part of it is that the vast majority (all?) of the communist regimes of the 20th century pretty rapidly descended into authoritarian hellscapes (Democracy/Capitalism took a few decades to catch up…). So people tend to less say “Well. The horrors that unfolded in X were a result of a misapplication of the core tenets of communism” and instead “My family literally had to flee a communist regime because we were being ethnically cleansed”
Part of it is that Democracy/Capitalism won and very much built up Communism as a bogeyman for obvious political reasons.
And the last part is that… Communism fundamentally requires a central source of power/truth. You can’t have a managed economy without folk managing it. Which, inherently, centralizes power which is one of the big first steps towards authoritarianism. Similar to how Democracy fundamentally enables populism and Capitalism oligarchy.
Good thing Americans didn’t ethnically cleanse in our history… Right.
Padme face
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
But thanks for showing your tankie ass. I have increasingly been assuming the shitjustworks instance is all right wing lunatics and libertarianisms. Good to know folk like you are trying to meet in the middle.
I have increasingly been assuming the shitjustworks instance is all right wing lunatics and libertarianisms
Your #1 mistake is assuming that users on a decentralized social media instance are a monolith.
* Hexbear has entered the chat *
Lemmy/the fediverse is a decentralized social media platform. Each instance is actually quite centralized. And, like all message boards, different cultures emerge. Whether it is because they have boards on given subjects (and shitjustworks has a shocking amount of “conservative” boards) or because people of a particular vibe have their friends join the same board.
I would say it is still very much at the dot ml level but I have increasingly noticed that most of the “The real problem are people who don’t support the troops” and similar dog whistles end up from shitjustworks.
Lol I’m just saying we’re not exactly the good guys either and maybe ethnic cleansing has less to do with the governmental system in place and more to do with other aspects
Edit: Also, tankie really? Y’all motherfuckers don’t know what words mean jfc
Edit: Also, tankie really? Y’all motherfuckers don’t know what words mean jfc.
Prrrr, shhh, let them have this. It’s been a pretty good thread, and they stand out as weird. It’s fine.
Hahaha fair enough, literally was in another thread the other day talking about exactly this, people throwing around tankie in contexts it makes literally no sense haha.
Anarchist communistic projects in Catalonia (1930s), anarchist Ukraine (around 1917), etc.: “Are we a joke to you?”
I don’t know much about Ukraine but I know the one in Catalonia had roving gangs of “law enforcers” who would execute “capitalists/fascists” without trial, so I’m not sure it’s an ideal to look up to.
It sure wasn’t perfect. But it was a libertarian socialist counter-example of revolutionary socialism to what the bolsheviks were doing.
Oh yeah, anarchists in Ukraine were doing fine until Bolsheviks decided there isn’t enough left unity
No, you don’t get it! The workers in Ukraine, who seized control of the means of production where somehow not class-conscious enough!
The workers can only
free themselvesbe freed by the most dedicated marxists!/s
The irony of the Makhnovist Movement is that it succeeded because of the Bolshevik Revolt in St. Petersburg and the subsequent splitting of Russian forces into the Red and White Armies.
But because Ukrainian agricultural production was so critical to the survival of pre-industrial Russia, the Reds weren’t inclined to let Ukraine exist independently any more than the Whites were.
The workers can only
free themselvesbe freed by the most dedicated marxists!Makhnovshchina gets to be a purist movement because it dies in infancy. Compare Ukraine to Yugoslavia, a country that embraced many of the same socialist tenants but managed to persist as an independent entity for half a century rather than half a decade, and suddenly they’re Evil Freedom-Hating Baby-Killing Communists again.
You’re never going to find half as many Tito-lovers on Lemmy as Nestor Makhno-lovers, because Tito died in his 80s while leading his country and Nestor died at 45 - alienated even from other anarchists - of tuberculosis as a penniless exile in France.
Meanwhile, the workers in all these countries vanish from view. No armchair Lemmy anarchist seems to care how Soviet-Era Ukraine prospered. Or how the Soviet collapse in 1991 brought in the corporate vultures to pick all these countries clean. We’re always and forever living in 1917, convinced a short-lived militia movement was the Secret Sauce to Real Working Anarcho-Communism, despite all historical evidence to the contrary.
You seem to make the mistake of subsuming the whole of anarchist Ukraine under Makhno. While he was vital for the civil war, he hardly was the architect of what happend in Ukraine.
The factory councils sure didn’t rely on him leading all of a sudden.
Soviet-Era Ukraine prospered
Oh yeah man, the 1930s brought some real prosperity. But I’ve already gathered that you believe Soviet Union to be a tragically lost utopia, so you needn’t bother make up another wall of text in response.
Imagine not falling into the Orwellian hole, not perverting language with conflations and inversions.
Imagine “communism” was still used in the original sense as coined by anarchist political philosophers, at least 5 years before Marx ignored Bakunin and usurped it, stripped the freedom aspect, and handed it over to the tankies (and all the capitalists and imperialists gladly played along).
Imagine communism like Kropotkin and Bakunin would have meant it.
Fully decentralised. Maximally mutually freedom affirming.
Imagine people were so thoroughly availed education instead of indoctrination, and thus were immunized against such perversions of language and thought. Not confusing totalitarianism for [anarcho-]communism, nor fascism for democracy, just because some deceivers intentionally mislabeled them to usurp all power for themselves.
Imagine “democracy” really meant organised by the people, not re-presented by the oligarchs.
Imagine not falling into the Orwellian hole.
Imagine undoing generations of this deeply entrenched Orwellian corruption of language and thought.
*Dreamer*
I would be interested in seeing compiled statistics of how many fell without capitalist interventions.
The CIA themselves have stated how active they were in the 20th century with corrupting, breaking down, and ultimately overthrowing communist regimes and installing dictators.
But also socialism with worker owned co-ops and only infrastructure and regulations through a central government may somewhat be a good direction to go.
The crux seems to be that all forms of government are susceptible to authoriatarians because people themselves are very susceptible to authoritarian strong men and propaganda, inherently.
it’s actually what authoritarianism does
“Authoritarianism” is just when the government leadership disagrees with me, ideologically. Nobody who supports the current state thinks their government is authoritarian, because it isn’t asking them to do anything they wouldn’t be doing anyway.
Meanwhile, an “insurgency” is just a group of people acting against government leadership’s intended policies. So much of the modern policy state exists to confront the contradiction between an individual pursuing their own interests and a state system that insists some share of the population to suffer in order for the rest to prosper.
If you ask liberals whether they oppose “authoritarianism” you’ll get an enthusiastic “Yes!” But then you tell them “better go out there and start doing crimes” and they’ll recoil in horror, because they don’t see a benefit to violating rules they fundamentally support.
The US is trying to do this now, what with declaring the bogeyman known as antifa a mental illness AND a terrorist threat.
They did this 40 years ago, under Reagan, with the “War on Crime” bullshit. And before that under Nixon with the “War on Drugs”. And before that under Eisenhower with the… checks notes… ah, yes, “War on Illegal Immigration”. Damn that sounds familiar for some reason.
This isn’t a feature of any political ideology – rather it’s a feature of letting sociopaths gain power.
Now if there was some kind of political ideology that focuses a lot on not letting power accumulate into the hands of the few… /hj
Ikr?
Anarchism mentioned without mentioning anarchism?
Congratulations! You got the hint!
Yes. That is why I am staunchly liberal. Keep your hands off my fuckin rights which in turn means keep your hands off my fuckin neighbors rights. Given the most perfect benevolent leader the state will either corrupt or kill them, so we should rally against corruption AND the rich.
Edit: because words are hard
On the topic of the US declaring dissidents mentally ill, The Adrian Schoolcraft story is a pretty horrific account of what it looks like when a modern cop tries to whistleblow.
Also I don’t think you even need sociopaths to wreck a hierarchy. Hierarchy collects power at the top of it’s organizational structure, and power by it’s nature becomes an end to itself, so hierarchy ensures abuse of it’s power. Honestly calling every human a sociopath who gives in to that One Ring-style allure might actually be the same kind of medicalization that the state does to it’s dissidents, in the opposite direction, but equally obfuscating. Yes it’s a human failure, but the organizational structure very much sets up humans to fail.
But it’s mostly sociopaths that insist on that hierarchy. Something like 3% of any population are sociopaths, and they’re not ‘mentally ill’, they just have a diminished capacity to feel empathy. Because of that, they don’t understand altruism and think the only way society can function is if everyone is in their place – if there are strict rules governing everything, because in their worldview, they see others like themselves, and they would need those rules to keep themselves in check.
It’s very similar to people who think without laws against raping and pillaging, everyone would rape and pillage. They’re mostly telling on themselves, as most of us rape all we’d like, which is never.
Billionaires are often sociopaths. That’s how they became billionaires – because it’s all me, me, me.
Strong disagree on sociopathy being linked to a hierarchy.
The reality is that pretty much EVERY system of governance (that is meant to scale beyond five people in a field) needs a hierarchy of some form. Its the Whitest Kids U Know gag on anarchy where you quickly find out that there are people better suited to certain jobs and you need some degree of a social safety net to allow them to keep all of you alive (n that case, keeping a nuclear power plant from melting down… and then making t-shirts).
It is why there are basically no flat Democracies. You inherently end up in some form of a Democratic Republic where The People elect representatives who can then (theoretically) spend all day educating themselves on important issues and figuring out how to make an educated vote that represents the will of their constituents.
The core concept is just the reality of needing special skills and knowledge to make many decisions. There can be arguments that the people in charge of Directing The Military are still equal to the custodial staff keeping the streets clean but… moving on.
Where sociopathy comes into play is that those roles tend to inherently attract power mad people (there is a DIFFERENT WKUK gag on this…). But hierarchical systems are a natural knock on from just having to have a socioeconomic system that scales.
Sociopathy is just vernacular for ASD, which is medically considered a disorder, and in my opinion it’s just as prescriptively hierarchy-brained, scapegoated, and invented as ODD which is in some ways it’s inverse. They’re just medicalizations of what I feel is more or less normal human behavior when encountering either extreme of a hierarchy - The boot that does the stomping gets assigned ASD when things don’t go well. The one to be stomped gets assigned ODD when they resist.
I really think that hierarchy creates these personality types. They’re not necessarily pre-existing mental types in a hypothetical blank state society. And I think that our belief in them as “natural” just serves to further legitimize the power structure that actually generates them. To add: I don’t think you have to be at the top or bottom of a hierarchy to exhibit the behaviors associated with these labels, existing anywhere in the hierarchy can get you hierarchy-brained. Like America’s “temporarily embarrassed millionaires”, you can learn these traits before you arrive at the social stations they’re associated with.
I should emphasize, as far as I’m aware this is largely my own opinion.
I love your opinion, it makes much more sense to me.
It’s not, though. There are extremes in all human thought patterns, and some have extreme low empathy (sociopaths), whilst others have extreme high empathy (which can also be detrimental).
All humans are somewhere on that curve, but when we give people with very low empathy a lot of power, very bad things happen.
My point was that these extremes aren’t necessarily ‘mental illness’ – they’re natural extremes, but giving them a lot of power is absolutely detrimental to society, because they can’t understand how the rest of us work, and they need to inflict their unnecessary and unconventional rules on the rest of us.
Well I suppose the fact that I disagree is entirely besides the point, as either way we can trust that a critical mass of people will abuse a power hierarchy. It doesn’t really matter if, as I think, the hierarchy created them or if, as you think, they already exist and are merely drawn to it. A hierarchy will abuse it’s power.
Chicken and egg feedback loop.
Wait wait wait… ASD as in “Autism Spectrum Disorder”?
You’re equating sociopathy with autism? Like it’s just another word for the same?
o_O
Double empathy problem turned malignant much?
Am I misunderstanding what you’re saying? You say this is largely your own opinion, that these are the same, or that others say they’re the same?
These are very much not the same. Dangerous to conflate.
Unless also having narcissistic personality disorder or other cluster B stuff, autistics are typically more empathetic. It just doesn’t show the same way.
And yeah, as for hierarchy creating… Asperger history’s as nasty as the rest of the Nazi stuff manipulating people, in ways both intentional and unintentional. Lots of manipulations and “externalities”.
Maybe he meant ASPD (Antisocial Personality Disorder)?
Respect to Mike C Rupert too.
And yeah, beware the overly structuralist approaches.
…so hierarchy ensures abuse of [its] power.
Very well put.
I have a discussion with my wife every so often about what our own little utopian island would be like, like how the government would be, how roads would be managed, what homes would be like, etc. I brought up the other day this exact point about how if there’s a position of wealth and power at the top controlling too much, then sociopths would gravitate towards that for the same of having power and wealth, which ruins the government system. It would have to be a heavily distributed system of government, but too distributed where it would make it difficult to implement standardizations, get stuff done, etc.
Idk how that would work exactly, because then you’d also have to make sure no greedy, power hungry Trump-likes get into a position with too much power. There has to be a way, though.
democratic socialism is just capitalism but now its toll is on 3rd world. A congolese would die lifelong in a mine so a war veteran in america get his medical bills paid. Its still wage slavery
Today it’s called ODD, “woke”, or “tankie” if an anarchist pisses off the wrong lib.
Has been spiteful or vindictive at least twice within the past six months
We all have ODD on this blessed day.
It’s fuckin insane that ODD is still in the DSM. That alone is enough for me to want to dismiss the entire text.
I think it’s more like if you’re so opposed to what any authority figure tells you to do that you will do the opposite of what your doctor tells you, for example, sometimes out of spite or vindication.
Yes but I think that perspective puts all the onus of change on the harmed individual and none on the institution that abused and broke their trust of authority, and therefore functions as a scapegoat for abuse of authority, or authority itself. “Healing” under this understanding involves getting a traumatized individual to trust their doctor, who’s authority likely chains back to the same powers who hold the reigns of their abuser, and to move on with their lives while that normalized abuser - The one creating the trauma in the first place - Continues to do untold harm. Someone labeled ODD is traumatized by authority yet the label exists not primarily to aid the victim, but to externalize blame away from the authority and onto the victim.
Furthermore I’ve at least read that more and more these days ODD “symptoms” are being reunderstood as expressions of various non-normative neurotypes that may place things like justice and ethical reciprocity at a higher priority than most. I myself have been introduced by my therapist to PDA type autism, Pathological/Persistent Demand Avoidance, which before it’s relatively recent recognition used to get a lot of people slapped with the ODD label. I don’t express my demand avoidance externally unless cornered, more it informs my entire lifestyle strategy in advance, so I escaped having a direct confrontation as a kid that would have gotten me labeled. But I identify strongly with and my heart goes out to ODD-labeled people.
Wait until you find out its entire contents and history… Total BS!
Read what was linked, it’s literally only diagnosed in children. In which case, yes, if they disregard all authority (including their parents), it is a problem.
it’s literally only diagnosed in children.
Wow sounds even more legit to victimize only kids… jfc.
It’s a problem for a hierarchical society that requires continual compliance for next to no explanation, not a problem for the child. It’s not a medical condition internal to an individual, it’s a social illness external to them, and therefore has no place in a medical text.
It’s a problem for a hierarchical society that requires continual compliance for next to no explanation
That’s simply raising children. Yes, you should ideally explain as much as possible to children, but some things you simply can’t because they’re not mature enough to understand it, it could traumatize them or there’s simply no time.
I mean, imagine a child suddenly deciding to run into a busy road and you start explaining why they should stop instead of giving clear orders: “you know, those cars are moving very fast and…” * Splat *
And even if you to have the option to explain, if the child simply says “I don’t care” and ignores you, then how are you supposed to raise them? That’s specifically what this diagnosis is about.
It’s a problem for a hierarchical society that requires continual compliance for next to no explanation
That’s simply raising children.
I’m deeply concerned for the wellbeing of your children.
I’m deeply concerned for the wellbeing of a society that’s even peppered (let alone prolific) with this naive-realist rationalised irrationality.
“That’s simply” authoritarian totalitarianism, normalised.
And of course, the totalitarianised psyche does not see this. Like the fish does not see water. Does not even know its a thing. Knows no other way. “That’s simply” how it is to them.
A couple other things spring to mind:
“If you’re old enough to ask the question, you’re old enough to handle the answer.” (And even before (and if not, plant the seed and they may get it later).
and
Try explanation before dismissing it out of hand. Better pedagogy. Explanation’s not even a high bar. There are better yet. Invite exploring ideas.
I’m not even remotely taking about hitting kids, jfc. But way to completely miss the point that explanation and exploring ideas sometimes simply doesn’t work and create a strawman.
How’re you going to imprison, drug, and profit from kids without physical coercion? Get a clue.
Just an example of not using reasoned explanations and instead conforming to “requires continual compliance for next to no explanation” that sprang to mind.
Since I was not saying you were saying what you’re saying I was saying, that’s your own (both) strawman fallacy fallacy, and its own strawman fallacy. As I said, it’s just what also sprang to mind in that same vein of thought. At a stretch, maybe you could try claim it a slippery slope fallacy on my part, but again, I was not saying that’s the inevitable result from your line of thought(/dogma). It’s just a possibility [due consideration] within that philosophy.
Also, while we’re on the case of detecting fallacies, you’ve moved the goalposts from “That**’s** simply raising children.” to “explanation and exploring ideas sometimes simply doesn’t work”.
It’s raising children in a hierarchical society that requires continual compliance for next to no explanation. Again, it’s not a problem internal to the child, and it’s not medical, it’s wrong to frame it as a medical condition.
Busy roads that leave no nuance between safety and instant death, no safe introductory margin for a child to explore and understand, are a product of a hierarchical society. The only reason we require unwavering compliance from our children that bleeds into labeling them with medical conditions if they do not comply is because we have built a society that is hostile to them.
To balk and protest at that state of affairs is not a disorder, it’s entirely healthy. It’s the state of affairs that is ill.
I don’t think you’re understanding the problem here. Busy roads were one example, there are plenty of others, train tracks, the mixer or blender in the kitchen, a fork in a power outlet - these have absolutely nothing to do with hierarchy. There will always be dangers. And even if there aren’t any, if you don’t have a grip on children to prevent them from injuring other children or even adults, you have a serious problem on your hands. If you don’t correct that, you get the kind of adults that make our society ill as you put it.
And again, this is not about balking and protesting at the ill state of affairs, and the diagnosing factors make that very clear.
ODD is an excuse diagnosis. It’s literally “You rightfully criticise people for being authoritarian and us cops and fascists don’t like that, boohoo”.
It’s basically a perfect example for the sociological model of disability.
We need a diagnosis instead for people who are needlessly authoritarian and intolerant.
It’s called being a “fascist”.
(But seriously, is there no diagnosis for it?)
It fits in the authoritarian captalist system we’re living in. The system rewards this behaviour.
There’s no direct diagnosis as such, because being a fascist is more a description of the outward effect than what is happening inside the person, and other factors have a very strong influence as to if a person becomes a fascist leader or not (in other situations that person would “only” be abusive to the people around them, for instance). But there are diagnoses such as psychopathy, antisocial personality disorder and narcissistic personality disorder, which are often present in these cases.
Side note: ODD is a diagnosis that is only people under 18, so it’s explicitly not a political thing.
Side note: ODD is a diagnosis that is only people under 18, so it’s explicitly not a political thing.
Sounds explicitly political to me. Did you forget the “/s”?
is more a description of the outward effect than what is happening inside the person,
Doesn’t stop behaviorists coming up with diagnoses.
Oh, but then, behaviorists are authoritarians, and so likely are not going to shoot a diagnosis for their own.
At this point I’m starting to wonder whether you’re trolling. You’re equating behaviorism with authoritarianism, which is… Holy shit. I think some reading would help.
Which is what?
Use your words.
Happy to entertain counter arguments or refutations.
Aloof ad-hominem, uncompelling.
Have you looked into ABA? Look into that, and then take a fresh look at CBT.
Happy to hear any example of a behaviorist school of thought that’s not authoritarian.
[PS, 100% not trolling.]
ITT: A lot of people who have no clue what ODD is.
In America black people are diagnosed schizophrenic or psychotic because they talk about institutional racism to white clinicians that don’t believe them
W reporting
Something like this could never happen in a civilized country like Germany… Just ask Gustl Mollath about that…
not much different than the current era in modern nations - cf: a gov firebombing an entire philly block because one house had some anti US brown folk in it.
Russia does it too; transexual? Mental illness.
Did I forget to say they also forbid “mentally ill” people to have a driving permit?
USSR never went away. And if you dig deeper, it’s still just russian empire in a trench coat
Communism as a theme is definitely making a comeback if you talk to Russian people in Russian. They think theirs is different from “western Communism” though.
Imperialism?
Ah so Russians believe communism is imperialism?
Wat
I speak zero Russian but would love to know what “western communism” entails in the mind of a Russian person who holds these opinions. Alas.
The word communism has less to do with the original meaning than teachings of prosperity gospel church with the bible.
Russians have very different meaning for this word because of decades of Soviet indoctrination, Americans think completely different thing entirely about what it is.
However, there is a thing that is true for all of them: they don’t just believe that their version is the only one correct, they cannot fathom the reality where different definition even exists
took off the purple robes, but on a red hat.
took off the red hat, put on a capitalist neoliberal necktie.
now took off the capitalist neoliberal necktie, put on some ironheeled jackboots.
the goal is to take off the jackboots and put on the purple robe
And Soviet Socialism never went away either, it just reorganized upper management. Instead of the state owning a few mega companies, a few mega companies now own the state. In either case, it is the people controlling the human/natural resources paying off politicians to overlook all the horrible shit they do.
Not just trans people— all LGBTQ+ people are regarded this way
Also the whole idea behind Trump Derangement Syndrome. Unsurprisingly, those fuckers can’t even be original in their awfulness.
Thought crime for thee, freedom of screech for me.
OP misspelled “United States”.
Soviet propaganda literally revolves around deflecting criticism of their evil behaviors with whataboutism with the US.
When did the USA, in the last 50 years section people for dissent?
From the article, western sources claim some 15k people affected over the entirety of the Soviet Union. So yeah, something that did happen, but still quite a minor thing for a country with 300 million people over 70+ years of existence.
For comparison, over 700k people experience homelessness today in the USA, which is arguably at least as damaging to mental (let alone physical health), and if we count the number of people who have experienced homelessness over the past 70 years in the USA it’s several million if not tens of millions.
not to mention that 700k number is highly underestimated
according some studies, real numbers maybe 5 to 6 times of that https://abcnews.go.com/US/accurate-annual-count-us-homeless-population-misses-large/story?id=106671876
I feel like some random Austrian painter did the same thing.
I’m sure this comments section is going to be thoroughly hinged
Yeah, waiting utill guys from lemmy@ml and lemmy@hexbear come here and start protecting the USSR.
Jokes aside, is there any really independent instance? Or at least one that kinda in the middle?
Cause currently it feels like one side of lemmy on crack and support Soviets (which I can’t stand, cause I lived in post-soviet country and I know why soviet system failed = cause it’s piece of shit), while other heavily tripping on LSD, while supporting palestine (which I can’t stand, cause I’m not into killing and raping, no matter the excuse “Al Jazeera” propagandize).
From my perceptive both are in da wrong and I get shit from both sides, lmao. Do I like, get back to reddit? Or there some place that won’t ban me for my “radical opinion”?
Not a word of complaint about Israeli 4k livestreamed genocide? Shooting children in the head? Blowing up hospitals? Murdering aid workers? Starving an entire population in an open-air prison?
You could condemn both October 7th and Israel but you don’t. Your “middle” is skewed as fuck.
Your opinion isn’t “radical”, it’s straight up genocide-apologist.
Your opinion isn’t “radical”, it’s straight up genocide-apologist.
And just like that “I hate hamas and people that do raping\killing” turns into “you focking genocide-apologist”. That why I can’t stand you people.
Okay, maybe I need to add some clarity. I will try to explain it to you like you are 5, cause it’s most probably pretty close: hamas wants to kill everyone. Their current target: every jew. They won’t stop. Their religion - kill jews and kafirs. Google what “kafir” is. By condemning Israel you basically saying “stop fighting and give up”. That basically mean “stop resisting and let them kill you”. You saying that jews needs to die. You are the person that can be described as “genocide-apologist” here, not me.
Hahaha! You psychotic buffoon!
You must be a troll or deep inside an islamophobic rabbit hole to concoct that fairytale!
Israel is not all jews. Stop conflating the two. Many jews are horrified by what Israel is doing.
Fuck Israel. Fuck Hamas.
I am against ALL genocide without exception.
Try sh.itjust.works. Most folks don’t notice us.
Why would you recommend your instance to a Zionist?
Quite, I fully intend to have civil and reasonable fact based discussions about the USSR which will not trail off into tribalistic whataboutist tirades.
A big part of Soviet propaganda is their use of whataboutism is deflect criticism against their regime. Supporters of the USSR and far left ideologies have inherited this tactic, which is why whenever you see anybody criticize someone on the far left, they always resort to using whataboutism, especially about the US. It’s recycled material from a dead regime.
I don’t consider the USSR or CCP to be far left or really any form of left. They’re just red fascists.
Wow. How did you pull all of that out of your ass?
This isn’t something new, controversial, or some hidden secret. It’s something that’s academically studied and well documented. This was literally the USSR’s go to propaganda tactic when it was still around. Literally only out of touch tankies cannot comprehend common knowledge like this.
Sure, but does all of the far left do that and did they get it from the Soviet Union?
You made a far out strawman argument. Admit it.
That’s why we are on Lemmy though, to have broader points of view without much censorship.
This is exactly what the GOP is pushing for with “Trump derangement syndrome”.
The fascist and communists are very similar in regard to population control. Fuck them both.
what they have in common here, historically, is authoritarianism. that’s the best word to describe this, whether it dresses itself up as left or right.
The point still stands that left wing authoritarians like Marxists and right wing authoritarians like Fascists tend to mirror each other in policy because there’s so much overlap with the authoritarianism.
i’m already agreeing with you, and elucidating the common element…
I wasn’t arguing, I was just restating the point you made
They absolutely do not. As I said in my other comment, authoritarianism isn’t a leading feature of communism.
We can have a conversation about when and why it happens and what the nature of the authoritarianism is within communism…but it’s not a 1:1. Many Marxist scholars frequently argue that authoritarian communist states are not, in fact, communist because having an authoritarian class is antithetical to the concept. They argue what we saw in the USSR and what we see in China are hybrid systems where socialism is prioritized over capitalism, but they use fascist teqniques to maintain power. ie a country isn’t communist because they call their party communist. The Congo called itself a Democratic Republic…why didn’t anyone buy that label?
But authoritarianism is literally part of the definition of fascism.
This is an ignorant argument because the ideology of communism is not the communist utopia. These are two distinct concepts.
Marx and Engels were both notorious authoritarians who made fun of the pacifist socialists of their time for being too weak and cowardly, and they preached violence for as long as they lived, and this reflected in their works. The communist ideology as described by them has three stages:
- A violent revolution that overthrows capitalism
- A tyrannical transitional socialist state that rules with an iron fist on the “behalf of the workers” is tasked with protecting the revolution by any means and bringing about the social conditions necessary to realize communism (dictatorship of the proletariat)
- Actually realizing communism
Since communism is a utopia, it will never, ever be achieved, and so the communist ideology will always get stuck on stage 2 forever… and that’s exactly what we’ve seen in history. Every single communist attempt in history that has resulted in a successful violent revolution ended up being tyrannical hellhole with a regime that always swore that communism was around the corner but they’re not quite there yet.
The only people who try to conflate the communist utopia with the communist ideology are Marxists who are too disingenuous to admit that their crappy ideology is in fact inherently violent and inherently authoritarian. No amount of True Scotsman fallacies about “real” communism is going to change reality. Those were real communist attempts, those were real communist policies, and those were real communist principles at work. No, it’s not fascism, it’s communism. This is what the ideology results in every single time. No amount of attempts is going to change the inevitable outcome. People forget, but Fascism and Communism are sister ideologies. They’re not opposite ideologies, but adjacent ones.
No Of course the ideology of communism is utopian. All ideologies are utopian, don’t be silly.
No, they weren’t authoritarians. Insofar as they defined the transitional state as a “dictatorship of the proletariat”…there wasn’t a blueprint for the nature of that authoritarianism, how long the transitional state would last, and most importantly: the transitional state isn’t communism.
Marx and Engels were also drunks and capitalists…not being able to separate the men from the theory just tell me you want to shoot the messenger. You’re just choosing to define the communist state as the transitional state, and cherry picking the worst words you can find from the men and not the theories.
This “hellhole” you’re describing is your hyperbolic and incomplete take…it’s not true or universal.
Yes, I get it…leftists who strive for peace and class equality are both utopian ideologists and violent. The straw men critics build are just boring at this point.
Meanwhile, here in reality, socialism/communism/Marxism have seen different forms with different results, and you can’t just ignore that these regimes don’t operate in a vacuum…they’re polluted by capitalism and fascism whether or not they have failed, just like in The Soviet Union. They also don’t always fail…we have several ongoing projects that have resisted capitalism and fascism and are not particularly violent in their present state.
You’ve learned just enough about communism to say a bunch things you think are “sick burns”…but sound vapid and propagandistic to anyone who knows what they’re talking about. The theory, you’d know if you had any idea what you’re talking about, is a remedy for the collapse of capitalism…which we haven’t seen yet - and, by many indicators, we are progressing through late stage capitalism at the moment as monopolies coalesce, wealth is concentrated, and more and more people are driven into poverty/servitude.
Finally: the theory isn’t static. Marx and Engels are far from the only theorists. Sure…you can pretend nobody else has ever written on the subject or that the attempts at communism actually followed the “blueprint”…but that’s all bullshit. Every single country in the world had adopted varying degrees of socialism…because it works. Generally, the more a capitalist society is moderated by socialism…the healthier it is - because, at the end of the day, Marx was a capitalist who was a critic of capitalism and communism/socialism can’t exist without capitalism failing spectacularly…which is why we keep seeing it pop up in Latin America…nowhere has capitalism failed so badly as in those countries. The only reason capitalism got a stay of execution after its first collapse is because of the various New Deal type systems out in place around the world - but, as we’re seeing now, it was only temporary because it didn’t go nearly far enough.
and what about the capitalists?
One should hide their oil reserves.
Best capitalists in capitalist system get to be Big Baron.
Inbuilt mechanistic derivation of authoritarianism maximizing (aka, monopoly), despite the advertising otherwise.
All the way to corporatism (like Mussolini’s). … Also known as fascism.
Lol, no.
You can’t “both sides” communism and fascism.
The common factor is malignant authoritarianism…which is innate to fascism, but not communism…even if the USSR happened to be authoritarian in many cases.
Yeah. No BigBs are good.
Not Big Brother. Nor Big Barron, nor Big Bully.
Nor Big Bot, Big Blight, Big Bank.
Fuck 'em all.
“Liberalism is a mental disease!”
A phrase often said by MAGAs. It’s no distance at all saying the same thing about nationalism.
Liberalism is not as dogmatic as other ideologies, because liberalism itself encourages free thinking and going against the grain.
The phrase comes from a shitpile book with the title: Liberalism is a Mental Disorder by some guy trying to eclipse Rush Limbaugh in 2005.
It’s not just a thing they say - these people genuinely believe that compassion is a mental illness.
I’ve seen “conservativism is a mental disease” too. People love that shit.
I think that’s far less common among the left than the saying “peer reviewed study shows conservatism highly correlates with mental disorder”.
fundamentalism+ actual mental illness is a dangerous mix. i once saw a video of a guy with schizo and said he fell into alt-right views, and really screwed up in the head.
How about liberalism + actual mental illness, is that dangerous?
(Or any ism for that matter.)
To be fair, you have to have zero empathy—or extremely low intelligence—to still vote Conservative, when we’re literally living in the Information Age. Either way, I say both are in fact mental disorders.
A lot of it is fear, too. Those people are raised to fear anything different.
I would put their fears in the “low intelligence” category.
also LOW information to. i saw some pseudo-leftist YTUBERS(whole drama behind them if you followed them) that are magats that are very low information. pre-pandemic they brought up an OBAMA era, oil pipline(canada-usa) and they could not even formulate sentences or words how to discredit the news. (but any trump related events they were immediately silent on, hmm seems like people figured out your allegiance to which party)everyone in the comments said you shouldnt comment on things you do not know.
That’s the spirit.
Sure they did Wikipedia, sure they did
Tankies literally can’t handle facts so they resort to toddler levels of denialism like this
Nice riposte.
I know
You have wrong profile photo. Try this one instead.
A fine effort patriot, the state department thanks you
The denialism is real
Why on earth would I not deny such obvious bullshit? And why aren’t you?
It’s a well documented and studied thing
So are UFOs
You don’t believe there’s any unidentified aerial objects? That tracks
I don’t believe anything more than that the dipshits who witnessed them failed to identify them, alien abductions and “close encounters” are extremely well documented and yet they are also obviously not true at all. For all the documentation and eyewitness testimony we have absolutely no actual evidence for anything other than “they believe they saw some shit”. Same with Bigfoot and Nessie and God. Documentation is not evidence, eyewitness testimony without substantiating physical evidence is worthless, be less gullible.
Unidentified flying object is just something unidentified in the sky, not an alien
Thats government 101. It was done in the USSR, its still done today in the USA and China.
Really? I am not seeing Soviet style weaponization of mental illness in China or the U.S. Like rightwing nut jobs talk about “Trump Derangement Syndrome” but that isn’t recognized in the U.S. or China.
What are you referring to?
The only times I’ve ever seen mental illness weaponized against someone is when they’re running for office and all of a sudden HIPPA doesn’t exist anymore and if Depression pops up. Hoh boy.
I think it’s a case of bothsidesing.
I suspected so, but I am open to evidence.
It something both sides do.
They have entire “diagnoses” for this. Do some basic research.
I read the articles and strongly disagree. ADHD is real and meaningful. It’s not a reaction to “illegitimate authority” or “working a boring job”.
Your sources are pushing ADHD denialism and read as ableist right wing nonsense. ODD too.
Many people with severe anxiety and/or depression are also anti-authoritarians. Often a major pain of their lives that fuels their anxiety and/or depression is fear that their contempt for illegitimate authorities will cause them to be financially and socially marginalized; but they fear that compliance with such illegitimate authorities will cause them existential death.
Going stupid — or passive aggression — is one of many nondisease explanations for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Studies show that virtually all ADHD-diagnosed children will pay attention to activities that they enjoy or that they have chosen. In other words, when ADHD-labeled kids are having a good time and in control, the “disease” goes away.
This is an insult to people who suffer from real conditions and an insult to those who suffered under Soviet style weaponization of mental health.
Tho has nothing to do with Soviet style weaponization of mental illness.
This is plain old political prosecution which the U.S. is well known for.
