this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2023
89 points (84.5% liked)

GenZedong

4292 readers
162 users here now

This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.

This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.

We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] NothingButBits@lemmygrad.ml 35 points 1 year ago (21 children)

I hate how liberals can create a meaningless label like whataboutism and then repeat it endlessly until it becomes an argument for them. Most of these labels were created because they are too lazy or ignorant to counter argument. Their debate capabilities rival that of a child.

[–] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 43 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Pretty much, liberals never engage an argument in good faith. Their goal is always to shut down discussion whenever they see a point of view that's not sanctioned by the CIA. It's rather amusing how the same people who bemoan lack of freedom of speech in evil authoritarian regimes like China are actively censoring any dissenting opinions that run contrary to the state propaganda of their own regime. Zero self awareness there.

[–] relay@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 1 year ago

"I know you are, but what am I?"

[–] amemorablename@lemmygrad.ml 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There are some paranoid levels of thinking in some of that stuff. Like when a person thinks someone is a "x foreign country spy" because they disagree. It's possible for people to break out of that mode of thinking, but when they are in that mode, it's next to impossible to get through because everything you say that is in disagreement is "because you are trying to deceive them."

Liberals claiming someone is doing whataboutism seems like a component of this thinking, with a belief that the one doing the "whataboutism" is attempting to deceive. But although it's (probably? I haven't analyzed it in enough depth to say with certainty) possible for someone to deceive in that way, it's also possible to compare two things for a variety of rhetorical purposes that have nothing to do with dishonesty. Such as pointing out the US has the highest incarceration rate in the world if someone tries to say x foreign country is "authoritarian" in contrast to the US being "free"; that's not whataboutism, it's a factual point that undermines the narrative of the US having some kind of greater moral standing from which it can properly judge other countries.

If anything, I would say imperialists, liberals, tend to be more engaged in actual whataboutism, even if unconsciously. Like if you try to point out something fundamentally wrong with the US, claiming that alternatives are way worse. Which in that regard also seems to be in bed with doomerism (or more formally maybe, capitalist realism).

[–] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Oh yeah I've noticed that as well, it's absolutely inconceivable for these people that somebody could genuinely disagree with them. If you have a contrary opinion that must be because you have some secret agenda. It's kind of funny to unpack to be honest because what are they even saying there. When they say you're shilling for the see see pee or whatever, they're still acknowledging that you ultimately prefer that system. Yet, according to them, your view should be dismissed because anything that's not western liberalism is somehow evil.

The whole whataboutism thing is fundamentally a logical fallacy. It's basically a rhetorical device to create a double moral standard for yourself and your adversaries. Why should others be held to a higher standard than one holds themselves, it doesn't make any sense.

[–] DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think when they say people "shill for the ccp" what they mean is "you accept payment from this evil bad country in order to lie for them."

It's a moral statement. It both dismisses the argument from the "ccp shill" while also reinforcing the idea that the west alone cares about morality at all. It is such a common argument because it doesn't just allow someone to ignore their opponent, but also soothes them, insisting that they are on the "right side of history" and the only people who disagree with them are cartoonishly evil, doing things they know are wrong just for the money.

[–] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 28 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Absolutely, it's the highest stage of cope where they insist that nobody could possibly genuinely believe what you're saying, so you're just reading a script because you're paid to do so.

[–] DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think it goes back to things we've talked about before, with libs insisting that those "other countries" are worse in every way. Their worldview involves following a script, so tankies must really follow a script, extra, extra hard.

(Also, damn you are popular today, you keep getting a ton of likes on everything. I'll hit refresh and a comment will go from 5 or so to over 20.)

[–] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 24 points 1 year ago

Completely agree, and yeah dunno what's with so many upvotes today. Don't think I've said anything profound. :)

[–] PoY@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think it's because the programming cuts off the ability to see that the programming isn't actual education nor does it encourage thought, but quite the opposite. So if someone disagrees it's because they have different programming and that is the only explanation. It's all brainless knee-jerk reaction.

[–] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 20 points 1 year ago

Oh yeah I agree, it comes down to thermodynamics in the end. We all hold a graph of ideas in our heads, and no single fact exists in a vacuum. So, when we're presented with a new idea that doesn't fit with the existing graph, we either have to rebuild the whole graph of concepts that are associated with it, or just discard the conflicting idea. Unless there's a good reason to spend the energy doing the hard task the brain goes with the easy solution of just ignoring the information that doesn't fit what we already believe.

This is why change tends to only happen when material conditions start collapsing, because that's the point where it's too costly for people to continue ignoring alternate ideas. They're forced to recognize that their world model is divergent from their actual experience, and need recalibrating.

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] ImOnADiet@lemmygrad.ml 28 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Needs “Putler” on there

[–] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 33 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I knew I forgot something!

[–] ImOnADiet@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What the fuck is happening rn, why does this random response to me have so many upvotes? I assume it’s just some random lemmy bug???

[–] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 33 points 1 year ago

lol I got nothing

[–] Shinhoshi@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 1 year ago

At least you tried with “Putin Puppet”

[–] someuser123@lemmy.sdf.org 28 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

For the liberals who downvoted, here are some high IQ jokes.

Why is the USA more authoritarian than China? Because in the USA, you have to pay for freedom and everybody is poor!

Why doesn't Tibet need to be freed twice? Because China already did it once and they're not going to do it again!

[–] fire86743@lemmygrad.ml 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Posted on here some time back about how I had this argument with this one "Marxist" kid who probably believes all the stuff on here, he literally said Lenin (probably the least "authoritarian" Soviet leader minus Gorbachev) was an authoritarian, and that the Soviets (along with literally every other ruling/former ruling communist party since they were just like them) were basically Nazis who lied about being socialist to get power, to the point where he even called me a Nazi, along with unironically saying the horseshoe theory was true because "MLs are far-right."

It annoys me whenever liberals try to pretend that they are leftists when they actively antagonize actual leftists. COINTELPRO and its consequences have been a disaster for the western left.

Marxism-Leninism is an ideology that is followed by a minimum of one hundred million people (add up all the members of the ruling communist parties worldwide to see how I got that number), and that doesn't even count all the sympathizers and non-party members which is probably a billion or two. Yet apparently every single one of them is just lying about being socialist just so they can seize power and be authoritarians. The Nazis actively hated Marxism and stated that they were trying to take socialism from the socialists, while Marxist-Leninists quoted Marx and Engels all the time in their writings and talked about how they would achieve a socialist society.

The idea that Marxist-Leninists are all just lying authoritarians is something I find utterly ridiculous and laughable. You have to think outside of reality in order to believe that claim.

[–] amemorablename@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 1 year ago

I like to tell people like this to read Blackshirts and Reds by Parenti. I forget in what detail atm, but he specifically goes over how Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy co-opted working class energy, while being opposed to working class power in actuality. In contrast with the Soviet Union, which had its issues, but was genuinely by/for the working class.

Like the thing these kind of people are talking about is sort of real?... but it's a rightist thing, it's not something Lenin did or Stalin did or Mao did. There are shades of that happening now in the US, the rightists who claim to be ML or communist, but are also "patriots" (claiming there's nothing wrong with being patriotic for a genocidal settler state developed into a global capitalist empire).

Also, I would say the use of the word "authoritarian" generally betrays how lacking a person's political education has been and how desperately they need some grounding in history+theory from non-imperialist sources. Idk the origin of "authoritarian" as a term, but in practice, it gets used as a propaganda buzzword to contrast, claiming that "democracy for the rich" systems are "freedom" and other stuff is "authoritarian." Meanwhile, the US has the highest incarceration rate in the world. Under what rock the freedom is hiding, I don't know. People get told such spooky ghost story narratives about how "authoritarian" those "non freedom" countries are, while ignoring what's in front of them: the "rights" written on a constitution that is as reliable as you are rich and that's about as far as it goes.

[–] Valbrandur@lemmygrad.ml 16 points 1 year ago (3 children)

No "West Taiwan?" No Tiananmen? No accusations for accusations of being a bot? Smdh this bingo lacks content.

[–] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 21 points 1 year ago

we're gonna need a bigger bingo card 😂

[–] Shinhoshi@lemmygrad.ml 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No accusations for accusations of being a bot?

Wumao comes pretty close

[–] Valbrandur@lemmygrad.ml 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ah but you see, it's the Chinese the ones who pay people to post opinions favourable to them. The Russians, on the other side, program robots to post opinions favourable to them. It's a very important difference.

[–] Shinhoshi@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 1 year ago

compiling 46 of 401 source files

Not even "vatnik" 😔

[–] GarbageShootAlt@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Missing "totalitarian," "red fash," something or other about Tibet, and of course no food holodomor

[–] PoY@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

was it edited because i see red fash and tibet in there?

[–] GarbageShootAlt@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think so? I've been blind before but I thought I remembered "agenda" being on there too.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Catfish@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Free space should say "20 gorillion dead"

[–] GarbageShootAlt@lemmygrad.ml 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Pick a fake number that isn't used by Holocaust deniers

[–] Catfish@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Forgot they like that number, that's okay we can just add another zero to it. The number goes up every year anyways.

[–] GarbageShootAlt@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My issue was the "gorillion", not the 20. There are other options like, idk, "bazillion" that work just as well, or just a nice simple "trillion" for the absurdity.

[–] Jonathan12345@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] PoY@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 1 year ago
[–] MaoWasRight@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

I think free space should say slavi ukrini

[–] Addfwyn@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 1 year ago

So how many times per day do we have to fill the full card for a bingo?

[–] lemat_87@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 1 year ago

So many downvotes, so many victims of non-liberal fun 😥

load more comments
view more: next ›