Horseshoe theory is literally just

Where the left leaning practitioners are unable to do so, they will be forever tyrannized by the banded majority.

You are assuming no ideological changes of opinion are possible or useful.

People that vote right wing aren't better off just because they voted that way. They're not tyrants oppressing the left, they're fellow citizens who get oppressed just as much. Their vote for the winning team doesn't win them anything.

The solution to right-wing banding isn't left wing banding, it's disbanding the right wing by showing its voters that they're being had. And that takes a cohesive and functional alternative.

Leftist "infighting" is healthy. It's a process of discovering these alternatives, and it regularly churns out consensus issues such as consent-based queer rights, veganism, not funding genocide, and how the US government is now fascist.

Over time these issues get normalized through leftist action until liberal centrists rewrite the histories as if they are responsible for producing them through liberal democracy.

To put it more succinctly, the enemy of my enemy is my friend (when freedom is on the line).

Daily reminder that the DNC does not acknowledge that the US government is now fascist. Uniting under a common front doesn't mean we fight fascism together, it means we canvas for votes until we're black bagged one by one.

Ultimately it is important to vote in every election for a candidate that has a good chance of actually getting in to represent you, but that is just one day every year or two. Everything else should be dedicated to finding and testing these alternatives.

In a comic strip club.

SPLITTERS!

Yeah, that really nails it.

I was considering putting scare quotes around "communism", but refrained in order to avoid an argument about what is and isn't really communism. Yet here we are. So much for left unity! ;D

Of course. Real Communism is everything except AES. As soon as leftists begin making any kind of public policy decisions, they become reactionaries because the anti-communists in the US media told me so.

We're already seeing this in the NYC Mayoral Race and Mamdani isn't even elected yet.

Okay yeah I see what you mean.
I rescind my original post.

You can try to have a serious discussion where you want but don't expect to get anything much serious out of comic strips and memes.

How am I a genocide denier? Which genocide did I deny?

Why are you putting words in my mouth?

I quoted you directly

I didn't deny any genocide. And if you knew me better, you would understand how stupid this statement is.

I said your statement that liberal democracies have killed more people than regimes that are seen to be associated with communism is false.

To be frank with you, I think you are projecting an image of an enemy on me.

I do not like oligarchs, especially American ones because of their impact and their tendecy towards degeneracy.

I already told you I found standard US copytext around alleged differences between socialism and capitalism to be comically dumb. It's one of the reasons why my default mode of thinking is to assume that the content of common American socio-economic arguement is gibberish (unless proven otherwise).

I think Marx is prophetic and I believe his ideas will actually be realized in the future (maybe not in our lifetimes). In contrast the theological thought leaders of US-stope oligarchy (Friedman and other "economists") will go down in history as liars and criminal enablers; evil people.

That being said, communism as perceived by wider society is a dead end.

What we need is a new movement that reflects the dialectical materialism of the information age and offers a different mode of economic relationships to the oligarch regimes and the type of relationships that people associate with the word "communism".

I think we agree on a lot more things than you think, with the exception of "communism" as a brand, as opposed to it's end goals.

A professor in college once said something that stayed with me. He said that "bad ideologies will always find ways to self implode".

This stuck with me because it's true. Good ideologies tend to be pragmatic and flexible, and so they're able to adapt and evolve. However, bad ideologies tend to be more rigid and focus mostly on theories and ideals, and therefore they're unable to adapt or evolve. Far left ideologies firmly fall in the latter category which is why they are where they are.

A lot of the far left types would rather have fascists rule and ruin everything just to spite their opposition rather than make compromises by working with them.

The infighting amongst the left is entirely self inflected

The issue is that you're a minority in your camp. Broadly speaking, the left sees compromise as weakness, neutrality as cowardice, working with opposition towards a common cause as treachery. These are all symptoms of purity testing, and it's the reason why the left in so many places is completely paralyzed.

The Holocaust was so devastating because the Nazis were incredibly efficient. Soviet genocides didn't rely on efficiency, but malicious negligence.

Literally only tankies are stupid enough to believe old Soviet Propaganda about how Holodomer was not a genocide. when it clearly was.

Idk why you're downvoted, horseshoe theory has proven to be correct over time. There's that much that separates Marxist Leninist authoritarianism and Fascist authoritarianism

Liberalism is antithetical to fascism both ideologically and historically. Literally only online Marixsts are ignorant enough to think that liberalism is just fascism lite.