Libs will never forgive Joey Steel for saving the world from fascism 
Straight from The Man himself.
this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2023
58 points (100.0% liked)
the_dunk_tank
15988 readers
3 users here now
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to [email protected]
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
I sincerely don't understand how anyone can think they are helping the left by doing anticommunism. It doesn't stand up to any critical thought at all, it functions solely to move things rightwards and reinforce the status quo.
It makes logical sense to me.
They still believe all of the atrocity propaganda. To them, socialism is this pure thing that deserves defending, but if they were required to defend socialist states, they would also have to disprove all of the stuff that they still believe.
So, in their minds, they are defending against tankies who just want to make the same "mistakes" as previous attempts at socialism. they are keeping socialism modern and adapting it to new circumstances with the power of hindsight. It's also easier to convert other people to socialism if you can convince them it won't be anything like those "evil authoritarian" socialist states.
In fact, if all the shit the state department said about socialist states was true, then I think it would probably be the right approach. But it's not, so it isn't.
You are right regarding some types of soicalists, but the Trots and other so-called Marxists who say "real Marxism has never been tried [or was immediately thwarted]" are the ones who have a completely incoherent position. "Yeah, I follow the principal of historical materialism, which means supporting an ideology that, in my own view, has 150 year history of uninterrupted failure and deceit."
They still believe all of the atrocity propaganda. To them, socialism is this pure thing that deserves defending, but if they were required to defend socialist states, they would also have to disprove all of the stuff that they still believe.
So, in their minds, they are defending against tankies who just want to make the same "mistakes" as previous attempts at socialism.
But that's why it doesn't make sense. That's why it doesn't stand up to the most basic of critical thinking, any conversation with literally any marxist-leninist starts with acknowledging mistakes were made but refusing to completely disavow them, taking a measured approach to their successes and their errors.
They don't allow ANY critical thought on the topic, because they are wholly committed to their nationalist and anticommunist position. If they weren't nationalists they wouldn't feel committed to defending the propaganda of the US, and would be far more interested in a balanced and nuanced take on the socialist states, just as balanced takes on capitalist states are deserved. They are committed to emotionally reacting and sticking to their trained response of "no thought allowed" on these topics instead of pursuing a proper understanding.
And the "tankie" that they describe publicly as a person who wholly defends everything with a red flag is a cartoon caricature that does not exist. Simply a demon used to make people treat communists as heretics before they've said a word that might sway them. It's almost religious in a way, like the way that the church of the middle-ages used to keep "believers" from listening to anyone outside of the faith.
Tankie at this point just means anyone who has said anything even mildly positive about the USSR or China. I was called a tankie for saying that Gorbachev's shock doctrine dissolution of the Soviet Union was a disaster for the standard of living for the average person - soon as I said it I had people asking about the Hungarian Revolution, like that shit mattered in any way
Propaganda is a hell of a drug, especially when you desperately want to believe that you're with the Good Guys
especially when you desperately want to believe that you're with the Good Guys
I come back to this over and over again. It's nationalism.
Once they take the position of being citizens of the world, they know longer see it in this baby-brained good vs bad shit, where the good is the US (they're all americans) or the general western empire. Once they're internationalists they stop this shit and they gain intellectual curiosity to learn.
Once they take the position of being citizens of the world, they know longer see it in this baby-brained good vs bad shit, where the good is the US (they're all americans) or the general western empire. Once they're internationalists they stop this shit and they gain intellectual curiosity to learn.
There are a lot of anarcho-bidenist types (like @[email protected] ) who consider themselves to oppose all the evil states including their own, declaring that they cannot be chauvinists because they disavow the US, while uncritically parroting State Department views on its enemies. That doesn't matter to them because they are calling all entities involved "bad," while some nebulous people are what is "good," and these people must exist as a third camp to the feuds between the bad empires (don't think too hard about what constitutes an empire, btw).
Perhaps I am just free-associating, but I remember Engels talking about the Enlightenment (from the viewpoint of a liberal):
Every form of society and government then existing, every old traditional notion, was flung into the lumber-room as irrational; the world had hitherto allowed itself to be led solely by prejudices; everything in the past deserved only pity and contempt. Now, for the first time, appeared the light of day, the kingdom of reason; henceforth superstition, injustice, privilege, oppression, were to be superseded by eternal truth, eternal Right, equality based on Nature and the inalienable rights of man.
Engels is speaking in a somewhat different context, but you can see over and over a refusal to examine these "bad" entities more closely, to understand how they work and why they have survived except by the most generic gestures towards tyranny.
There are a lot of anarcho-bidenist types (like @[email protected] ) who consider themselves to oppose all the evil states including their own, declaring that they cannot be chauvinists because they disavow the US, while uncritically parroting State Department views on its enemies. That doesn't matter to them because they are calling all entities involved "bad," while some nebulous people are what is "good," and these people must exist as a third camp to the feuds between the bad empires (don't think too hard about what constitutes an empire, btw).
These ones are just liars.
Engels is speaking in a somewhat different context, but you can see over and over a refusal to examine these "bad" entities more closely, to understand how they work and why they have survived except by the most generic gestures towards tyranny.
It is again a rather religious behaviour. One that seems more like faith in a coming salvation rather than making salvation for themselves. Anyone actually trying to make salvation is to be rejected as not having the correct faith.
These ones are just liars.
How do you know?
while uncritically parroting State Department views on its enemies
For this reason.
Ultimately they are either self-aware liars or oblivious to the nationalism that lies within them. One way or another this is nationalist behaviour. The internationalists don't have such blatantly obvious national loyalties.
The key to unlocking these people is breaking the religious faith, and breaking the national loyalty that they lack consciousness of. They have a false consciousness.
Fair enough. How would you say that one could break such a person's religious faith, as you put it?
If I had that answer we'd be well on the way to revolution. If we break this wall the sheer numbers that marxists gain as allies skyrocket, you've seen how it is.
I don't know about the religious faith part yet, but we don't do much at all to promote internationalism or break this nationalist mindset. I think it's a prerequisite to further advancing this crowd of people.
These ones are just liars.
I know a fair few people like this. Some are "Freinds" that I dont discuss geopolitics with to avoid arguments. My experience with them is that its a pretty sincerely held belief. Not cynical at all.
Yeah I don't believe the descriptioned types either.
load more comments
(8 replies)
Realizing that America, NATO, Europe, and all the other imperial states and settler colonial states and all their cronies and hatchetmen weren't just the badguys, but were staggeringly evil in a way that cannot be completely encompassed by one person in one lifetime was a gradual process that took me like 8 years, and even then I'm still a lib sometimes.
Meh. Americans are Americans, and it takes a hell of a lot of deprogramming to shake that off. 
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Antifa Supersoldiers ended the holocaust 
Liberals sure are anti-liberation
Remind a liberal of a well known but somehow constantly ignored fact and a fascist bans you
Wow. I'd love to hear their exact reasoning on why you were banned.
Liberals and history mix like oil and water
As our beloved CARCOSA would say
Suck off a liberal and a fascist cums 
reminder that Andor S1 was partially inspired by young Stalin's life
i was wondering if there was a lenin or trotsky analog or is it a part of his life before he knew them? the young dude with the manifesto about political economy and the empire seemed like star wars karl marx (if marx died during paris commune)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Don't forget that while the USSR was the closest humanity got to saving itself from capitalism, "Joey Steel" was a pedophile. He wasn't the USSR, he was just a man and he shouldn't be venerated. It just as cringe as being one of the freaks who sucks off Churchill. 
Stalin didn't speak breathlessly about the "triumph of the Aryan race" or how the Indians inflicted famine on themselves by "breeding like rabbits". In fact, in the latter case, Stalin used both his executive power and personal sway to expedite aid to Bengal.
Stalin can and should be criticized (e.g. he was deeply homophobic from what I can tell), but drawing an equivalence between him and a monstrous colonialist and racial supremacist like Churchill is frankly disgusting.
Stalin can be criticised, personally and politically, but let’s not pretend he’s bad on the same level as Churchill.
Interesting. Do you have a source, or further reading about this? If you're talking about Nadezhda, he married her when she was 18.
No I'm talking about Lida Pereprygina
It's a good read.
Most people rejected His message. They hated Jesus because He told them the truth.
view more: next ›