Yes it is, because authoritarianism isn't the end goal of ML. You readily acknowledge that we currently live under an authoritarian Capitalist system, can you tell me what the end goal of this system even is? I mean most workers are one missed paycheck away from homelessness. While vast sums of wealth are horded by the top 1% of society with the only end goal being more wealth being extracted from the working class, with no actual goal besides more profit and greater wealth. The end goal of Marxist-Leninism is a classes society where each person contributes what they can to society and receives back what they need to live a fulfilling life. They are extremely different.
Alright, firstly, I think you're mistaking me as advocating for capitalism. I'm not. Whilst I'm not a fan of labels (they're so easily contorted away from their original meanings by those seeking to undermine the ideologies they describe), I believe "Socialist" would reasonably describe my beliefs.
Secondly,
[...]authoritarianism isn’t the end goal of ML.
I think you've got that backwards. Marxism-Leninism starts with democratic means, then implements an authoritarian regime.
[...]can you tell me what the end goal of this system even is?
No, because there isn't one. Capitalism actively punishes any form of forethought or long-term planning.
[...]The end goal of Marxist-Leninism is a classes society where each person contributes what they can to society and receives back what they need to live a fulfilling life. They are extremely different.
In theory, maybe. Just like in theory Capitalism self regulates through competitive pressures, or whatever nonsense it is that Capitalists spout.
I'm more concerned with actual effects, and empirical evidence than hypotheticals. Authoritarian regimes invariably turn oppressive, one way or another.
Capitalism does not self regulate, it consolidates. You should try reading Marx and Lenin's actual writings, you seem very earnest and dont come off as a troll. There are multiple free audio recordings on YouTube of their works. Humanity must escape the all powerful driving forces of the profit motives Capitalism enforces or perish off the face of this earth. That process if it is to take place will appear extremely authoritarian to those who value profit above all else.
Capitalism does not self regulate[...]
Correct, hence "In theory" and "nonsense" in the words surrounding that phrase.
You should try reading Marx and Lenin’s actual writings[...]
I certainly would like to read at bare minimum some of Marx's works, but ADHD is really not conducive to being able to read even mildly long texts, like I couldn't even get all the way through Einstein's Why Socialism?.
There are multiple free audio recordings[...]
Audio is even worse on that front, as I'll end repeatedly tuning parts out and have to go back and listen to those parts again, which just isn't good for motivation.
[...]you seem very earnest[...]
I like to think so at least. I just don't like when people fall into the "A is bad, B opposes A, therefore B is good" trap.
Humanity must escape the all powerful driving forces of the profit motives Capitalism enforces[...]
Agreed. Wholeheartedly.
That process if it is to take place will appear extremely authoritarian to those who value profit above all else.
They may attempt to paint it as such, but it need not actually be so. Even if that process were to take the form of a violent revolution (which, to be clear it doesn't need to.)
I like to think so at least. I just don't like when people fall into the "A is bad, B opposes A, therefore B is good" trap.
I do think this is a bit of a thought-terminating cliche. It implies people who are actively recommending reading and understanding the theory that supports their beliefs so you can better judge for yourself are just assuming means from ends.
In reality, Marxists have to read Marx to understand his critique, his philosophy, and his recommendations, because it simply isn't taught in western education. Lenin is even more unknown to the average person.
Grayox isn't telling you that you must agree with them, but suggesting reading the same theory they have so you can better discuss it.
Just my 2 cents.
That particular statement wasn't directed at Grayox specifically, it was more about a particular subset self-identified communists on the internet, including (some of?) the lemmy.ml admins, and many users of lemmygrad and hexbear. The ones that correctly identify that the USA is bad, but then prop up the likes of the Soviet Union, the PRC, the DPRK, and even Russia (which doesn't even claim to be communist) as paragons of good, when often times they're worse than the US.
I know you don't see Lemmygrad and Hexbear on a .world account, but none of them think the Russian Federation is a paragon of good, just a bourgeois dictatorship fighting against the worst bourgeois dictatorship, the US. That doesn't mean Russia is good.
As for support for the USSR, DPRK, and PRC, there is that, yes, but their reasoning certainly isn't "Capitalism bad, therefore Communism and Socialism good." You can make an account and ask them about it and they have genuine reasons for their views. You don't have to agree with these reasons or views, but dismissing them as simply being anti-US and not doing any actual thinking is reductive.
Basically, if you do the reading like Grayox recommended, many of their views become far less mysterious or confusing, even if you don't agree with them at all in any capacity. Pretending they are just random crazy people is myopic and just weakens any points you may have against them.
Yes it is, because authoritarianism isn't the end goal of ML. You readily acknowledge that we currently live under an authoritarian Capitalist system, can you tell me what the end goal of this system even is? I mean most workers are one missed paycheck away from homelessness. While vast sums of wealth are horded by the top 1% of society with the only end goal being more wealth being extracted from the working class, with no actual goal besides more profit and greater wealth. The end goal of Marxist-Leninism is a classes society where each person contributes what they can to society and receives back what they need to live a fulfilling life. They are extremely different.
Alright, firstly, I think you're mistaking me as advocating for capitalism. I'm not. Whilst I'm not a fan of labels (they're so easily contorted away from their original meanings by those seeking to undermine the ideologies they describe), I believe "Socialist" would reasonably describe my beliefs.
Secondly,
I think you've got that backwards. Marxism-Leninism starts with democratic means, then implements an authoritarian regime.
No, because there isn't one. Capitalism actively punishes any form of forethought or long-term planning.
In theory, maybe. Just like in theory Capitalism self regulates through competitive pressures, or whatever nonsense it is that Capitalists spout.
I'm more concerned with actual effects, and empirical evidence than hypotheticals. Authoritarian regimes invariably turn oppressive, one way or another.
Capitalism does not self regulate, it consolidates. You should try reading Marx and Lenin's actual writings, you seem very earnest and dont come off as a troll. There are multiple free audio recordings on YouTube of their works. Humanity must escape the all powerful driving forces of the profit motives Capitalism enforces or perish off the face of this earth. That process if it is to take place will appear extremely authoritarian to those who value profit above all else.
Correct, hence "In theory" and "nonsense" in the words surrounding that phrase.
I certainly would like to read at bare minimum some of Marx's works, but ADHD is really not conducive to being able to read even mildly long texts, like I couldn't even get all the way through Einstein's Why Socialism?.
Audio is even worse on that front, as I'll end repeatedly tuning parts out and have to go back and listen to those parts again, which just isn't good for motivation.
I like to think so at least. I just don't like when people fall into the "A is bad, B opposes A, therefore B is good" trap.
Agreed. Wholeheartedly.
They may attempt to paint it as such, but it need not actually be so. Even if that process were to take the form of a violent revolution (which, to be clear it doesn't need to.)
https://youtu.be/igfycERc6Js?si=39naQ0WCyfa0oxgW i gotchu
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/igfycERc6Js?si=39naQ0WCyfa0oxgW
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
I do think this is a bit of a thought-terminating cliche. It implies people who are actively recommending reading and understanding the theory that supports their beliefs so you can better judge for yourself are just assuming means from ends.
In reality, Marxists have to read Marx to understand his critique, his philosophy, and his recommendations, because it simply isn't taught in western education. Lenin is even more unknown to the average person.
Grayox isn't telling you that you must agree with them, but suggesting reading the same theory they have so you can better discuss it.
Just my 2 cents.
That particular statement wasn't directed at Grayox specifically, it was more about a particular subset self-identified communists on the internet, including (some of?) the lemmy.ml admins, and many users of lemmygrad and hexbear. The ones that correctly identify that the USA is bad, but then prop up the likes of the Soviet Union, the PRC, the DPRK, and even Russia (which doesn't even claim to be communist) as paragons of good, when often times they're worse than the US.
I know you don't see Lemmygrad and Hexbear on a .world account, but none of them think the Russian Federation is a paragon of good, just a bourgeois dictatorship fighting against the worst bourgeois dictatorship, the US. That doesn't mean Russia is good.
As for support for the USSR, DPRK, and PRC, there is that, yes, but their reasoning certainly isn't "Capitalism bad, therefore Communism and Socialism good." You can make an account and ask them about it and they have genuine reasons for their views. You don't have to agree with these reasons or views, but dismissing them as simply being anti-US and not doing any actual thinking is reductive.
Basically, if you do the reading like Grayox recommended, many of their views become far less mysterious or confusing, even if you don't agree with them at all in any capacity. Pretending they are just random crazy people is myopic and just weakens any points you may have against them.