202

As shitty as it is, this country 1. Isn't designed in such a way that would allow a third-party candidate a genuine chance of winning and 2. Has too many centrists that will vote for Biden regardless. Trump has repeatedly garnered heavy support in Republican polls, so they're pretty much almost all in on him. Splitting the blue vote between Biden and whoever else will only lead to a Trump victory after which we might not even be ABLE to vote in 2028.

I'm legitimately having a panic attack. These airheaded anarcho-kiddies are genuinely going to land us all in camps.

biden's doing literally nothing to stop states from criminalizing lgbt people's existence emilie-pain

their fears about a trump presidency are valid but i wish these libs would stop putting their hopes in the DNC when its clear they have zero interest in running a candidate that isn't complete dogshit

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] EelBolshevikism@hexbear.net 17 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

If Vaush became as popular as Kropotkin was in his day and remained that way long enough his interpretation would be as valid.

??? “If Racist Pedophile Marx became more popular than Regular Marx his interpretation would be as valid.” This doesn’t work, this isn’t some “no true Scotsman” fallacy, these people are genuinely just not anarchists by definition. Like, yeah, they call themselves as such, but I’m not saying they don’t exist, I’m saying they’re wrong about anarchism

[-] Great_Leader_Is_Dead@hexbear.net 8 points 5 months ago

“If Racist Pedophile Marx became more popular than Regular Marx his interpretation would be as valid.”

Not "valid" in the moral sense, but it would be a "valid" in the sense that people would consider it an interpretation, a horrible, awful one, but it would exist. We don't really pull this with anyone to our Right politically, nobody really gives a fuck that modern MAGA doesn't seem to have anything to do with Thomas Sowell or William F Buckley Jr.

these people are genuinely just not anarchists by definition.

But who sets the definition? With Marxism you do have the fact the ideology is named after a specific guy so you can argue people who claim to be "Marxist" but who's conceptualization of Marxism is too far from Marx's original ideas are operating in error, but even early anarchism had a lot of internal divisions and wildly different interpretation.

[-] EelBolshevikism@hexbear.net 7 points 5 months ago

Idk I’m blob-no-thoughts actually

this post was submitted on 28 Mar 2024
202 points (100.0% liked)

the_dunk_tank

15880 readers
518 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 !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml

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