also do you think they get off more on the idea of breaking the bestality taboo or are turned on by the danger that one wrong kegel movement might end their life or that niche is entirely occupied by black crack dealers
also do you think they get off more on the idea of breaking the bestality taboo or are turned on by the danger that one wrong kegel movement might end their life or that niche is entirely occupied by black crack dealers
I can't tell if you're just shitposting or not, so I'm going to take it at face value.
The fact that anyone could consider Gorbachev as a "traitor" underlines one of the many core problem with Communism that I still can't get a consistant answer on: Communists emphasize their power comes from a "dictatorship of the proletariat" mandate, however clearly enough people wanted Gorbachev (or at least what he represented, as seen on the intense resistance to the Coup)... and yet the August Coup still pushed forward because they thought they knew what the people wanted, that THEY represented a better form of Communism that Gorbachev was betraying. Y'know, one that forced people to agree with the state via might.
If Gorbachev was ever hated, it was either from Communist elite who ignored their "dictatorship of the proletariat" mandate and was threatened by the miniscule amount of agency Gorbachev was alllowing the Soviet people, who then used whatever parts of the Soviet propaganda aparatus at their means to undermine Gorbachev (an aparatus that, ironically, was given more freedom to criticize Gorbachev in the first place)... or by post-collapse post-Soviet people who were upset at him for allowing the collapse to happen to begin with... but even then, that was only because Gorbachev didn't want to play the classic Communist "if you resist my plans, you will be removed" card for once. Maybe if Gorbachev was the classically Communist-authoratarian, he could've knocked out the plotters before the coup ever happened, thus ultimately preventing the collapse, right?
Yes yes I realize people can be against both Gorbachev AND the Coup, but it feels like that goes right back to the classic "Communism was never done right before, but THIS TIME we'll get it right!" argument. On the other hand, if Gorbachev was allowed to give each Union Republic more autonomy like he planned in order to at least keep the USSR alive in some form through to the 21st Century, this might be a whole other discussion... however, the rot he was trying to fix was rooted all the way back to 1917, and the future of the Soviet Union needed something radical to fix it. Unfortunately, the Coup chose to maintain that rot, thus kicking the final rotten leg out from under the Soviet Union, thus condemining Gorbachev to be crucified on the altar of "damned if you do, damned if you don't".
...
inb4 "but Gorbachev WAS a traitor!"
According to what, tho? Someone in the US can be a traitor by rejecting the US Constitution—like, you can point to something in the US Constitution and say "you violated this value", easy-peasy. But a traitor to the Soviet Union? Was it because he didn't follow a right kind of Socialism/Communism? Then what was the "right kind"? Or maybe because he rejecting the Soviet Constitution? Which law, and was it something that was regularly enforced?
Or maybe it was because Gorbachev allowed for the state to collapse? In that case, most every member in the history of the CPSU was a traitor because their actions had a direct consequence to its ultimate downfall. Even if their actions didn't have an immediate consequence, it absolutely planted the seeds of that rot which grew to a point where Gorbachev was ultimately powerless to control. Like, because Stalin killed off almost all of the Old Bolsheviks, there was no one left to teach the younger generation what they fought for, thus dooming them to have no way to know what's working or not. There was also a push to encourage idology over science. In fact, so much about Soviet science and technology was dominated by ideology, many times to its own detriment, such as folk like Trofim Lysenko who rejected genetics in favor of some kind of ideology-driven pseudo-science, as a rejection of computer development that ensured the United States would dominate that field. The latter in turn was mitaged in the 1970s and 1980s by outright stealing that tech from the US, which further encouraged Soviet people about how theft was acceptable (at least from someone who is trying to withold stuff from the People... like what the CPSU was doing to them). Everyone who allowed for this to persist created the conditions for the collapse of the Soviet Union... which the Coup inadvertantly caused to happen because it made the Soviet people think "at this point, we should we even bother?"
Or worse, was Gorbachev a traitor only because he rejected such socialist ideals and principles like "keep the masses ignorant using a secret police aparatus" or "capitalism is evil and Gorbachev betrayed us all by being friendly to the enemy, he should've used the nukes that the Soviets had in their arsenal to wipe out Capitalism once and for all!"? Or maybe it was "it's OK to buy food from the Capitalist open market to make up for your own food shortfalls due to poor planning, as long as the people don't know about it"? How about "the only people who should run the country are geriatric 70-year olds because we can't trust running the state to young people like 50-something Gorbachev" or "who needs reform as long as the Politburo and Central Committee get whatever they want"? I guess it makes sense: if Gorbachev didn't give the Soviet people so much agency like being able to wear blue jeans, use toilet paper and listen to rock-and/or-roll, none of this would be a problem!
If Gorbachev was a traitor, it was because he came from a system that considered everyone a traitor, and there was effectively zero incentive to NOT act that way outside of "natrual death caused by unexpected-lead-object-in-brain disease". Hell, arguably the consequences of the CPSU continues to this day by giving Putin all the tools he needed to maintain his grip over Russia. Blaming Gorbachev for any of this is to treat him as a scapegoat.
I can't tell if you're just shitposting or not, so I'm going to take it at face value.
The fact that anyone could consider Gorbachev as a "traitor" underlines one of the many core problem with Communism that I still can't get a consistant answer on: Communists emphasize their power comes from a "dictatorship of the proletariat" mandate, however clearly enough people wanted Gorbachev (or at least what he represented, as seen on the intense resistance to the Coup)... and yet the August Coup still pushed forward because they thought they knew what the people wanted, that THEY represented a better form of Communism that Gorbachev was betraying. Y'know, one that forced people to agree with the state via might.
If Gorbachev was ever hated, it was either from Communist elite who ignored their "dictatorship of the proletariat" mandate and was threatened by the miniscule amount of agency Gorbachev was alllowing the Soviet people, who then used whatever parts of the Soviet propaganda aparatus at their means to undermine Gorbachev (an aparatus that, ironically, was given more freedom to criticize Gorbachev in the first place)... or by post-collapse post-Soviet people who were upset at him for allowing the collapse to happen to begin with... but even then, that was only because Gorbachev didn't want to play the classic Communist "if you resist my plans, you will be removed" card for once. Maybe if Gorbachev was the classically Communist-authoratarian, he could've knocked out the plotters before the coup ever happened, thus ultimately preventing the collapse, right?
Yes yes I realize people can be against both Gorbachev AND the Coup, but it feels like that goes right back to the classic "Communism was never done right before, but THIS TIME we'll get it right!" argument. On the other hand, if Gorbachev was allowed to give each Union Republic more autonomy like he planned in order to at least keep the USSR alive in some form through to the 21st Century, this might be a whole other discussion... however, the rot he was trying to fix was rooted all the way back to 1917, and the future of the Soviet Union needed something radical to fix it. Unfortunately, the Coup chose to maintain that rot, thus kicking the final rotten leg out from under the Soviet Union, thus condemining Gorbachev to be crucified on the altar of "damned if you do, damned if you don't".
...
inb4 "but Gorbachev WAS a traitor!"
According to what, tho? Someone in the US can be a traitor by rejecting the US Constitution—like, you can point to something in the US Constitution and say "you violated this value", easy-peasy. But a traitor to the Soviet Union? Was it because he didn't follow a right kind of Socialism/Communism? Then what was the "right kind"? Or maybe because he rejecting the Soviet Constitution? Which law, and was it something that was regularly enforced?
Or maybe it was because Gorbachev allowed for the state to collapse? In that case, most every member in the history of the CPSU was a traitor because their actions had a direct consequence to its ultimate downfall. Even if their actions didn't have an immediate consequence, it absolutely planted the seeds of that rot which grew to a point where Gorbachev was ultimately powerless to control. Like, because Stalin killed off almost all of the Old Bolsheviks, there was no one left to teach the younger generation what they fought for, thus dooming them to have no way to know what's working or not. There was also a push to encourage idology over science. In fact, so much about Soviet science and technology was dominated by ideology, many times to its own detriment, such as folk like Trofim Lysenko who rejected genetics in favor of some kind of ideology-driven pseudo-science, as a rejection of computer development that ensured the United States would dominate that field. The latter in turn was mitaged in the 1970s and 1980s by outright stealing that tech from the US, which further encouraged Soviet people about how theft was acceptable (at least from someone who is trying to withold stuff from the People... like what the CPSU was doing to them). Everyone who allowed for this to persist created the conditions for the collapse of the Soviet Union... which the Coup inadvertantly caused to happen because it made the Soviet people think "at this point, we should we even bother?"
Or worse, was Gorbachev a traitor only because he rejected such socialist ideals and principles like "keep the masses ignorant using a secret police aparatus" or "capitalism is evil and Gorbachev betrayed us all by being friendly to the enemy, he should've used the nukes that the Soviets had in their arsenal to wipe out Capitalism once and for all!"? Or maybe it was "it's OK to buy food from the Capitalist open market to make up for your own food shortfalls due to poor planning, as long as the people don't know about it"? How about "the only people who should run the country are geriatric 70-year olds because we can't trust running the state to young people like 50-something Gorbachev" or "who needs reform as long as the Politburo and Central Committee get whatever they want"? I guess it makes sense: if Gorbachev didn't give the Soviet people so much agency like being able to wear blue jeans, use toilet paper and listen to rock-and/or-roll, none of this would be a problem!
If Gorbachev was a traitor, it was because he came from a system that considered everyone a traitor, and there was effectively zero incentive to NOT act that way outside of "natrual death caused by unexpected-lead-object-in-brain disease". Hell, arguably the consequences of the CPSU continues to this day by giving Putin all the tools he needed to maintain his grip over Russia. Blaming Gorbachev for any of this is to treat him as a scapegoat.
barely skimmed, didn't read the bulk
expecting consistency from an ideology that isn't consistent is part of your problem
there's trotskyists, tankies, hoxhaists, maoists
hell, even the sino-soviet split
there are many different ways to be socialist
personally a fan of syndicalism myself but still recognize the collapse of the soviet union led to a huge drop in quality of life, population, caloric intake, and increase in human trafficking and prostitution post-collapse. not to mention the slow dismantling of our quality of life since the u.s. didn't have to pretend to care about a large enemy anymore (immediately after the collapse our congressmen voted for huge pay raises for themselves)
and most of the citizenry in those countries voted to remain in the union so i guess fuck the will of the people?
it's not a hivemind n you're consistently such a fag about it. in your own communist thread you re-posted reddit shit like "lol why don't they agree with each other" like i was legitimately hoping that thread could be for something cool like contrasting n comparing different writers or leaders n left severely disappointed because of your immense faggotry
barely skimmed, didn't read the bulk
expecting consistency from an ideology that isn't consistent is part of your problem
there's trotskyists, tankies, hoxhaists, maoists
hell, even the sino-soviet split
there are many different ways to be socialist
personally a fan of syndicalism myself but still recognize the collapse of the soviet union led to a huge drop in quality of life, population, caloric intake, and increase in human trafficking and prostitution post-collapse. not to mention the slow dismantling of our quality of life since the u.s. didn't have to pretend to care about a large enemy anymore (immediately after the collapse our congressmen voted for huge pay raises for themselves)
and most of the citizenry in those countries voted to remain in the union so i guess fuck the will of the people? View attachment 91704
it's not a hivemind n you're consistently such a fag about it. in your own communist thread you re-posted reddit shit like "lol why don't they agree with each other" like i was legitimately hoping that thread could be for something cool like contrasting n comparing different writers or leaders n left severely disappointed because of your immense faggotry
barely skimmed, didn't read the bulk
expecting consistency from an ideology that isn't consistent is part of your problem
there's trotskyists, tankies, hoxhaists, maoists
hell, even the sino-soviet split
there are many different ways to be socialist
personally a fan of syndicalism myself but still recognize the collapse of the soviet union led to a huge drop in quality of life, population, caloric intake, and increase in human trafficking and prostitution post-collapse. not to mention the slow dismantling of our quality of life since the u.s. didn't have to pretend to care about a large enemy anymore (immediately after the collapse our congressmen voted for huge pay raises for themselves)
and most of the citizenry in those countries voted to remain in the union so i guess fuck the will of the people? View attachment 91704
it's not a hivemind n you're consistently such a fag about it. in your own communist thread you re-posted reddit shit like "lol why don't they agree with each other" like i was legitimately hoping that thread could be for something cool like contrasting n comparing different writers or leaders n left severely disappointed because of your immense faggotry
you're from discord i thought you liked gulags?
if you wanna upgrade to flaying n impaling that's fine i'm not judging... could have the gulaged ppl (may i suggest dogfuckers for the gulags?) build a full-on torture dungeon jussayin' there's benefits to keeping the gulags around if you wanna do that
