Infighting
-
[dude with glasses in a communist t-shirt, arguing]
I'm the only leftist here, your opinions are TRASH[dude holding a theory book on smug, arguing]
Read theory you losers, you're all WRONG[dude in an anarchist hoodie, arguing]
Nuh-uh, I'm the only leftist here, you're SHITLIBS[the three dudes are now caught in a cartoon fight, glasses gone flying, punches everywhere, while a firing squad of nazis are targeting them with rifles]
[a confused nazi asks]
Why… why are they still arguing?
Infighting | The Bad Website
Infighting - A comic on The Bad Website
The Bad Website (thebad.website)
The nice thing about the two party system is that there is no one else to vote for. Its how we got here. But at least we will have a chance of putting someone who has an idea how to run a country in charge
-
If you're throwing the word "liberals" around, you're an authoritarian, which is no better than being a fascist.
This is why I can't stand Tankies and establishment Democrats. You can't claim to be a champion of human rights, while simultaneously supporting the governments that egregiously violate peoples' human rights. Complete and utter hypocrites.
Edit: See what I mean? All of you suck.
If you’re throwing the word “liberals” around, you’re an authoritarian, which is no better than being a fascist.
Deeply fucking unserious person
-
Sounds like you're the one betraying us
wrote last edited by [email protected]You're literally the pink guy on this comic.
-
I don't care what someone calls themselves as long as they oppose fascism and understand that the only place where Pedophiles are welcome is the inside of a wood chipper.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I can understand the emotional impulse, but i would change it to "active pedophiles". They can't really choose what arouses them, but they can choose not to act on those impulses - that is what counts. This distinction is important, because i would very much prefer if inactive pedophiles (who probably beat themselves up constantly, leading to emotional instability, depression and therefore a higher risk of becoming active) had easy access to ressources to help them stay inactive like therapy or the equivalent to Narcotics Anonymous.
-
They would also tell me to my (virtual) face that they think my country has no right to exist, so that too makes it pretty hard to have any sort of productive collaboration.
No communist thinks any country has a "right to exist".
-
Not gonna mention the Secret Protocol in the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact that enabled the partition of Poland and the Baltics?
Or that Stalin actually fell for it all, trusted Hitler, disregarded all evidence of Nazi troop buildup until the day of Operation Barbarossa? Then Stalin spent weeks disappeared from public view.
Credit to the Soviets for defeating the Nazis. WW2 would have been lost without them. But they also acted as imperialists in reattaching Tsarist colonies to Russia, dividing Poland and the Baltics with Hitler, invading Finland, not to mention all the puppet states created postwar.
Liberals will never forgive the USSR for not letting the Nazis have all of Poland.
-
Still looking for a single leftist here who claims they support communism. I constantly see it being attributed to the left, but in real life scenarios I just don't see it, only in memes, unless you meant socialism, which is a healthy system of every country, including US.
EDIT: I guess I should stop waiting, this feels like strawman argument/gatekeeping
How does one get to be so ignorant, but also so confident about it?
-
You're literally the pink guy on this comic.
Wow, literally "I have already depicted you as a soyjack"
-
“Voting is actually bad”
Tankies
NazisThis is why far "left" and "right" are itself misguided labels. It's more like far opposite on the other end where they meet.
-
If you're throwing the word "liberals" around, you're an authoritarian, which is no better than being a fascist.
This is why I can't stand Tankies and establishment Democrats. You can't claim to be a champion of human rights, while simultaneously supporting the governments that egregiously violate peoples' human rights. Complete and utter hypocrites.
Edit: See what I mean? All of you suck.
Edit: See what I mean?
No. Using the word for a any political group does not make you anything. Also, your comment is extremely US centric, (neo-)liberalism has done a lot of damage on the other side of the pool.
-
If you're throwing the word "liberals" around, you're an authoritarian, which is no better than being a fascist.
This is why I can't stand Tankies and establishment Democrats. You can't claim to be a champion of human rights, while simultaneously supporting the governments that egregiously violate peoples' human rights. Complete and utter hypocrites.
Edit: See what I mean? All of you suck.
idk man, looks to me like Liberals (the political ideology, not the US term for leftwing people) seems to side with the Nazis almost as a rule whenever the faschists come about
-
I'm not uniting with people who will kill me later. We've done that multiple times. Your ilk always betrays us.
Saying this while shaking hand with Hitler, voting for the Nazi's enabling act.
"Heh I've really shown those socialists this time."
-
The nice thing about the two party system is that there is no one else to vote for. Its how we got here. But at least we will have a chance of putting someone who has an idea how to run a country in charge
You should try the every time somebody gets unhappy they splinter off and form their own party political system. It essentially amounts to the two-party system in any case but provides more entertainment.
-
If you're throwing the word "liberals" around, you're an authoritarian, which is no better than being a fascist.
This is why I can't stand Tankies and establishment Democrats. You can't claim to be a champion of human rights, while simultaneously supporting the governments that egregiously violate peoples' human rights. Complete and utter hypocrites.
Edit: See what I mean? All of you suck.
Perhaps you should broaden your horizons somewhat. Tankies are an international group whereas democrats only exist in the US, so you can't really compare the two. For one thing, they have different ultimate goals and motivations.
-
"poor management" is one hell of a way to put it.
I mean, even the Holocaust could also be said to boil down to poor management if we're just doing shitty arguments.
-
You should try the every time somebody gets unhappy they splinter off and form their own party political system. It essentially amounts to the two-party system in any case but provides more entertainment.
Such an american comment. So indoctrinated into the two-party system that it's impossible to even imagine anything else.
Have you heard of the concept of coalitions?
-
Well, up front, it's nice that you at least cleared up that you don't consider Marxism to be socialist. I disagree with that, of course, but now that we've established that your definition of socialism is exclusionary of Marxism, then that does at least mean we can have a consistent conversation.
As for delegates vs. representatives, the PRC's democracy extends beyond simply voting for candidates and representatives. I already explained that each rung makes decisions for that which their area needs, and elect from among themselves delegates that they can recall. People's integration into politics isn't relegated to simple elections, but consensus building, feedback, drafts of policy, etc.
As for ownership, your argument was that politicians are literally owners of publicly owned industry, which isn't how public ownership works anywhere. Even if the PRC is centrally planned for the majority of its large firms and key industries, that doesn't mean those large firms and key industries are run for profit, personal enrichment of capitalists, participate in markets, etc. There's nothing at all resembling capitalism there, so state capitalism is an absurdity. I gave clear examples of capitalist systems with heavy state involvement, like Singapore, that better fit "state capitalism."
Either way, this will be my last comment too. Have a good one!
-
Again, I'm aware of the anarchist critique, I used to be an anarchist myself, I just firmly disagree with it.
-
Again, I'm aware of the anarchist critique, I used to be an anarchist myself, I just firmly disagree with it.
yes, well, if u had watched it, u wouldve noticed its not about the anarchist critique.
-
Such an american comment. So indoctrinated into the two-party system that it's impossible to even imagine anything else.
Have you heard of the concept of coalitions?
Americans informally create coalitions. That's why you hear the term "caucus" a lot more often, like Bernie Sanders "caucusing" with Democrats. Many libertarians may not like Trump and the fascist Republicans, but they still caucus together. The problem with caucusing with Democratic party is that they sideline the left, especially Bernie Sanders, in favour of more corporate friendly candidates. As for the Republican party, well the right always act right and value group cohesion and appeasing the rich more, even if they become fascist.
Caucusing is hardly working and here is the hard to swallow pill for Americans: organise grassroots campaigns and plant actual progressives into primaries. Americans used to be good at doing that. That's how they got the Roosevelts, ended the first Gilded Age, and third party candidates being elected more. The duopoly system became entrenched sometime after the early 1900's, probably when Theodore Roosevelt ran third party and split the vote of progressives, which handed the presidency to the racist Woodrow Wilson.
