I guess I see it like this: if I think something is inaccurate should I debunk it or should I post “this random right winger online says it isn’t credible” (and MBFC is a right winger, but not a fascist)

You’re describing neo-colonial regimes that werent able to fully leave the imperialist economic structure.

Compare India to Cuba on women’s and lgbt rights

Oh wow, you’re conflating Israel and Jewishness, a common example of antisemitism. Lovely.

He is literally just some guy with no expertise in critical media analysis. He just made a website where he gives his opinions on how much you should trust a source.

Hey, just as a heads up we discourage the posting of " media bias checkers" here because it is intellectually sloppy to outsource whether you should trust a source to some guy who has their own bias. And MBFC is just some guy, who has no credentials and doesn’t do any sort of scientific analysis to determine his ratings.

Please reply acknowledging you understand this within 48 hours.

what that would mean for women, gays, children, people of non-muslim religions, in terms of personal freedoms, etc

So the wonderful thing about anti-colonial movements is that even if they start right wing they have to get more left wing as time progresses, simply due to the power dynamics that are created through the process of throwing out the imperialists. Once you stop foreign oppression, you have a grassroots mass of militant and armed revolutionaries that you’re accountable to and who get upset when you try to reproduce the same economic system. You also are tied at the hip to them as the imperialists seek a return to an old system.

This includes movements where there is no significant communist presence, but it happens faster when there are communists.

Luckily, the PLFP is the second biggest party represented in the Palestinian joint operations room and have significant military and political power, meaning that in Palestine it probably will take a lot less time to materialize.

Man, they wanted something better than the shit show that their life had become. They had many ideas about how they could reform their country. A new socialist constitution, a emancipated reunion with the West etc. All they knew was that it couldn’t go on with the current SED clique

They didn’t get something better though. They got capitalism, worse living conditions, and a bourgeois democracy that didn’t represent them either

How did the SED respond? Fucking off with the last money. They left their population with no help when they negotiated with Kohl. But hey, to you that’s just capitalist propaganda probably.

The SED literally lost influence and that let reunification happen. You’re blaming an organization that was trying to prevent something disastrous from happening for the thing happening disastrously.

Now it’s the people’s fault that they got screwed by the capitalists pfffff

Pretty sure it was the fault of the power dynamics at play, as reunifiers had taken control of the government and led to a massive looting of the GDR. And as for the SED “fucking off with the money” you get that the big impoverishment of east germany was that all the nationalized industries were given to private individuals, mostly people in West Germany who used to own(or whos parents owned) the industries prior to nationalization, right?

Also, I ask again: how did the Stasi respond to the lgbt movement in the 80s? Because that shit runs entirely contrary to the propaganda you’re trying to spew.

Sure you do, as long as you vote for the candidate that the state prefers.

That isn’t how soviet style democracies work. For example, the municipal assemblies of Cuba have multiple candidates for each seat, which are not chosen by the party. Those councils then choose a national representative for their municipality, which is confirmed by a popular vote.

Again, look up “Wir gehen falten”.

Link to what you’re referring to please, I didn’t find anything interesting in the search.

A US sponsored executive coup is not equivalent to collapsing due to its own problems.

I dont see it garnering outrage? It seems in line with what Kamala Harris said.

You get to vote in socialist democracies like China, Cuba, USSR, etc. You’ve been told you can’t. Who told you this?

If you don’t believe me, look up the process for how the Cuban 2019 constitution and 2022 family code were drafted. Socialist democracy is more advanced and democratic than liberal democracies.

You’re claiming that capitalism is better on having elected women officials? First off, no. GDR and west Germany had similar rates of women in leadership, and women had political organization through the democratic women’s front.

Second off the framing is bad: I care less about smashing the glass ceiling than I care about not being hatecrimed in a rampantly misogynistic culture. I care about having the economic independence to leave abusive relationships, and to date for love and pleasure and not financial security.

Wikipedia

I didn’t call it communism, and neither did the ruling communist parties. Transitional socialism is the proper word.

Calling something state capitalist when capitalism heavily relies on the state by default shows you need to hit the books on how capitalism actually functions.

Calling something state capitalist when capitalism heavily relies on the state by default shows you need to hit the books on how capitalism actually functions.

HOW THE FUCK CAN I STOP IT?!?!?!?

If you actually want to stop fascism in the long term you’ll need to join a socialist org. Liberals have historically acquiesced to fascism because of systemic forces inherent to capitalism.

If you’d like to know more, I’d recommend reading “The economy and class structure of german fascism”

Why is it inflammatory? As a mod I’m genuinely surprised people are upset by this, it is a white house press statement with an editorialized title that summarizes the event quickly and without any commentary on it.

when in reality people who showed a smidge of dissent were persecuted.

Look up how the stasi dealt with lgbt dissidents after being told to solve the issue and then come back here and say that with a straight face.

Dissidents for “hey we need to fix the problems of socialism” or dissidents for “we have to dissolve socialist democracy and let the capitalists pillage us” were treated very differently.

And the ones arguing for dissolving socialism got what they wanted, and the result is justification enough for their oppression tbh. Better to suppress right wing dissidents than let them oppress vast swathes of the population.

“communism” at least as practiced in the USSR, Cuba, North Korea and China.

What are you talking about? Research how many rights women and lgbt people lost when the GDR fell for an example of how wrong-headed this line of thinking is.

For those who want light reading, I highly recommend “Why women had better sex under socialism, and other arguments for economic independence”