I get grim satisfaction from asserting my knowledge of theory against the smug liberals.
That checks out. Now if only the tankies would have the collective spine to admit that their countries of choice are capitalist-flavored imperialism under the self-proclaimed veneer of communism.
That requires them admitting communism doesn’t really exist in the modern world. Quite scary for them.
It is religious or something with them. Paradise exists on Earth, for real, but they won’t travel there. Like ancient polytheists who didn’t bother to climb up Mount Olympus for a peek.
I mean there’s Vietnam, Cuba and Laos. These are all communist systems.
They don’t really care about them tho
There’s undoubtedly at least a bit of projection there, but I think more what it is is just that tankies are driven almost entirely by righteous indignation, and they’ll take pretty much any chance they get to indulge in it. They don’t really stop and think about things - they just see something that could serve as a basis for a nice, satisfying righteously indignant screed and off they go.
And that leaves them susceptible to, among other things, hypocrisy.
I feel like solarpunk is definitely opposed to liberalism. I mean, it doesn’t enforce ideological purity the way tankies do so maybe that’s the source of the confusion? But it’s, at its heart, an anarchist movement.
Yeah, I mean, I’m not hostile towards solarpunk, but they’re very anarchist any time I’ve interacted with them (not necessarily as a bad thing - I just still believe in a more institutionally rigid post-capitalist government, so there are disagreements). ‘Liberal’ is only how I would describe them to US centrists who can’t hold more than one linear graph in their head at a time.
TBF, the Soviets had some fantastic aesthetics. They’re also largely responsible for brutalist, which is hard to forgive, but still. I think on balance they contributed more good aesthetics than bad, and we can partially blame the Germans for Bauhaus, which was the foundation upon which brutalist was built.
Brutalism is cool af fite me
Personal taste in aesthetics. I mean, you might have bad taste, but it’s not worth fighting over.
Seriously, though: a lot of the Soviet stuff tended to Art Deco or Bauhaus, and that stuff is fine. Brutalist can be impressive, but if I had to look at it every day, I think I’d eventually want to slit my wrists. It also explains a lot about the Russian zeitgeist.
asserting my knowledge of theory
Ah, the old “you just need to read a whole bunch more theory before you’re qualified to talk about anything” gauntlet.
Why should anyone waste time reading the prophecies when we’ve already seen how they’ve failed, time after time?
I appreciate the theories and even agree with them quite regularly.
But I like to think of myself as a realist, and I just don’t see these concepts ever coming true. Realistically, I think the best bet for communism is nuclear devastation, total societal collapse or an AI takeover, a la The Matrix. You know you gotta break down the system, not just change it. And good luck doing that.
Yeah some of the theories are really interesting but you have to accept how plausible actually pulling them off can be. The best fictional implementation I’ve seen is the Culture and that’s a post-scarcity society where humans aren’t really in charge of the big decisions.
Well, you can certainly start a revolution. But to make sure it doesn’t collapse or become what it was previously, you need to remove all the pillars, change the whole system.
The Chinese flag is also pretty funny. Silly Oblivion NPC, don’t you know China is hypercapitalistic?
By the nine divines!
Cowbee is the most patient and cordial person about discussing theory on Lemmy. They’re probably the person most able to make that comment without hypocrisy or irony.
They’re still kindof a nut? They patiently told me that unmarked vans snatching up BLM protestors and Donald urging use of the army against voters was the exact same as Palestine protestors deliberately getting themselves arrested as civil disobedience by trespassing.
Yeah, I can’t disagree they’re kind of a nut. You really have to be to continually discuss theory on social media.
Though I read that discussion as it happened and it’s still currently up. They specifically said they weren’t the same, but had similarities in the purposes they serve. Both ya’ll kinda just spun your wheels for like a dozen comments afterwards over the means but the point was on the ends.
Which serves as further evidence of the above, so to speak.
Yeah, I just gave up, realizing it wasn’t productive at all. Those similarities are too weak to be a point in what (I thought) we were discussing. They’re not saying “both sides are leading to fascism” but “both sides are leading to fascism equally quickly,” come on.
Yeah their calculus is much more binary to the idea where fascism will march unabated unless leftism gains an actual foothold in American culture.
That’s usually the chief perpetual disagreement I see when the American president election comes up. And yeah those arguments are usually more vibe checks than debates.
I am immensely curious as to what sort of theory can legitimately justify celebrating rape, denying genocides and glorifying violence.
I’d like to wager @PugJesus@lemmy.world as more patient.
Doubtful. First sign of genocide denial, I reach for the banhammer.
my banhammer is more of a stick i wave around
