CatrachoPalestino

I’m not entirely sure howmany of the politicians in america actually believe their propaganda about ukrainian heroes and democracy and stuff and howmany are neocons wishing to deal a blow against russia

I’m glad people are finally realizing why leftists fought so hard for freedom of speech back in the early 20th century especially when ww1 was ongoing

I meant the original one but the art style is pretty much the same in this one so basically, yeah. only difference is the sound is much worse IMO and the colour more modern

I don’t think this has much to do with liberalism. howmany leftists, might be more politically correct for me to use neo-nazis as the example but whatever, have you talked to who say things like navalny is a nazi, all ukrainian troops are nazis, the free syrian army are isis, also isis is isis, israelis are nazis, kulaks were parasites, or the most classical one germans were nazis. just seems like people in general prefer to be against caricatures and comically evil people rather than humans

the CPC has allowed muslims to be members during large parts of china’s history and most members don’t consider themselves athiests in different polls that have been taken. other countries like afghanistan allowed people to be religious in their parties and theres video proof of many of them praying at mosques and such. its not as outlandish as you’d be lead to believe

this is unfair, during his time kautsky was the most popular and well known marxist. that didn’t change until after the october revolution

from my personal experience the need to collapse as you describe it stems moreso from the geopolitical position the societies of these liberal countries find themselves in moreso than the nature of their political ideology. it is in order to convince themselves of the need to continually take actions to protect their own interests and preferential position. I imagine it was probably pretty similar within nazi germany toward their opponents or within the soviet union against nazi germany. this is something I feel a lot of americans don’t exactly realize. anti-americanism is not as pervasive across the world as you may be led to believe and is definitely not at the same level of hate you’ll see with americans regarding china or other examples. this was especially weird to me when I first heard the song Eve of Destruction with the lyric “And think of all the hate there is in Red China” because the chinese really do not hate americans they just want to work together with them for mutual benefit. same sentiment was heard when putin gave his now famous interview with tucker carlson

what about what he staked his claims on would be particularly damaging because I feel like in a post-soviet collapse world his writings and beliefs would resonate quite well with people who are anti-soviet union and its legacy along with the derrived countries and ideologies like china and trotskyism but also find themselves thoroughly revolutionary unlike social democrats and pro-organization unlike anarchists

I am not trying to pander to any sort of audience only talking about the attractiveness of kautsky and his beliefs to people today and giving my theory why. I’m also not very convinced by your line of reasoning because all you’ve said besides appealing to a number of historical figures not agreeing with him is saying he didn’t believe in the dictatorship of the proletariat which is confusing because he wrote an entire pamphlet called “the dictatorship of the proletariat” explaining how he believed in it and believed what russia was doing was not the dictatorship of the proletariat. especially weird since you included rosa luxembourg who famously considered russia to be a police state not adhering to the dictatorship of the proletariat

the russian empire did not exist in 1919… is your history that poor?

and here is a quote from rosa luxembourg on the russian revolution

The basic error of the Lenin-Trotsky theory is that they too, just like Kautsky, oppose dictatorship to democracy. “Dictatorship or democracy” is the way the question is put by Bolsheviks and Kautsky alike. The latter naturally decides in favor of “democracy,” that is, of bourgeois democracy, precisely because he opposes it to the alternative of the socialist revolution. Lenin and Trotsky, on the other hand, decide in favor of dictatorship in contradistinction to democracy, and thereby, in favor of the dictatorship of a handful of persons, that is, in favor of dictatorship on the bourgeois model.

as you can read for yourself she did not consider bolshevik russia to be a dictatorship of the proletariat but a dictatorship following the bourgeois model of a handful of people. now I ask again can you actually put out an argument instead of pointing to “rejection by every contemporary socialist” and calling him names please? no need to follow such a childish argumentation style