• Magicicad@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Neither Beijing nor Washington (but actually Washington cause we’re considering everything on their terms).

      • all4theTomatoes@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Well the US is in a sense also totalitarian, no? Or perhaps more appropriately authoritarian, but even then basically the same as any state everywhere.

        The state needs to oppress its citizens in order to exercise dominance. Wether that be through political purges like Stalin did, or how American cops kill people since… every fucking president as soon as the US started existing lol.

        So I guess my point is no matter what, if a state exists, it will inherently become oppressive and therefore totalitarian. I want a stateless, moneyless, classless society just like every other socialist wants. And don’t get it fucked up, thats what ALL socialists are inevitably fighting for.

        • Magicicad@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 hours ago

          I mean yeah states are institutions of class power. But believe that states can (and frankly must) be used strategically to suppress and eradicate the capitalist class.

        • ghost_of_faso3@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Its a meaningless term created by someone who said africans should be enslaved because they are of a lower caste in defence of an actual nazi in a war crimes trial.

          You should learn the context of the words you speak.

          • all4theTomatoes@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            7 hours ago

            No need to be so cold.

            I have a context of the word totalitarianism, I’m sorry it doesn’t include the person who you think came up with it. If you understand etymology you should understand that the word was, yes invented, but involves the word “totalità” and was purely meant to convey the idea of total control by the state over all aspects of life, political, social, and private. It was in fact used to describe the fascist regime by Benito Mussolini. (Link me any evidence of the contrary in case I’m wrong)

            I’m saying generally, as a leftist, I wouldn’t want a state that tells me what to do and what to think (and I wouldn’t want that for you either my friend, but who am I to say that).

            Edit: To loop it back to my OG comment, in most cases, and history proves this, a totalitarian state kills.

            • beleza pura@lemmy.eco.br
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              3 hours ago

              as a leftist

              you’re not a leftist

              also, you spent most of your words defending your right to defend your political stance and didn’t actually argue back much against the criticisms the other guy brought up, such as

              • totalitarianism was invented by a nazi
              • it creates a false equivalence between communism and fascism
              • it enables fascism to get off the hook (so many fascists deflect criticism by asking why communism isn’t criminalized as well)
            • -6-6-6-@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              6 hours ago

              Ah yes, sorry, “Don’t tell me what to doooo no bed-time!!” isn’t a real ideology. It’s a reactionary bastardization of an ideologue dedicated to liberation into an individualistic mental self-jerk. Besides for the origins of words…“totalitarianism” sounds like a really lazy way of saying “muh authoritarianism is bad”.

              While you can self-jerk in your ivory tower about perfect ideologues; practical applications of communism require a certain level of “authoritarianism” to defend the revolution from threats and to actually seize and control the means of production for the workers. Average Chinese citizen eats more protein and is slowly reaching a higher PP than the average American. Average Cuban has a higher life expectancy and lower infant mortality rate.

              Seems like “authoritarianism” is a hell of a lot healthier and kills less people than the rugged, calvinist “individualism” that the Western hegemony breeds in it’s own core and globally. By the way friend, communist states are told what to do and “what to think” by a party that is dedicated and made up by the workers of the state dedicated to servicing the working class. This is why most of China has state-owned industry directing resources to private institutions that fulfill consumer needs and a state-owned bank.

              Also, damn, Sovet Union had a higher home owner-ship rate?? What about muh individualliiiiisssmmmm to form your ooowwn destinnyyy not decidddeed by the staaaate pbbbttt

              • all4theTomatoes@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                5 hours ago

                Buddy we’re talking about a definition of a word. You need to control your emotions.

                I made a clear statement. Totalitarianism kills. I stand by that firmly. I didn’t say you’re stupid. I didn’t challenge your political position. I purely, fucking, said totalitarianism kills. And if you take my stance on authoritarianism as a political challenge, then I’d honestly hope to god your hands never get anywhere close to power.

                I don’t know how to say this without you thinking I’m trying to be condescending, but I wish you good health.

                • -6-6-6-@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 hours ago

                  Buddy, your slippery-slimey weaseling isn’t gonna work here. What is the context of totalitarianism being brought up here on a communist forum in a drive-by comment when the word is typically used by most as a “whistle” for anti-authoritarianism in a manner of anti-commmunist/anti-fascist “three arrows” bullshit?

                  It’s obvious what your intent was, you just don’t like it being deconstructed for the sake of what it is instead of whatever “moral principle” you’re putting on as a front. Democracy and rugged Calvinist individualism kills far more and you’re free to stand firmly by that statement while most of the western world has a higher death toll than any communist or “totalitarian” nation through just their economic actions via exploitation of the third world. Should we add military interventions as well?

                  I do indeed take it as a political challenge. Because it’s politically illiterate. My health is fine, thank you. I got work in a few hours and a lovely partner and family to talk to every day.

              • all4theTomatoes@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                6 hours ago

                I ask for evidence that the term wasn’t used to describe a fascist state and you send me… a news article? A news article that just plainly says “yea, they were racist”. It’s a fucking term dude. We’re talking about the term not the person and it has a definition, and I’m saying I don’t want a future with totalitarianism.

                What the hell are you on about? Are you denying that totalitarianism exists? Oh sorry, can’t use that term. Are you denying that states that controls its citizens exist? No more condescending comments. Tell me.

                • MarxMadness@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 hours ago

                  Are you denying that totalitarianism exists?

                  Every country has at some point been called “totalitarian” by its detractors, and no country self-identifies as such. It’s so imprecise and vague it’s useless for serious discussion, especially when there are actual ideologies (that various governments claim, and that have some sort of useful definition) you can talk about instead.

                  The only thing it is useful for – as others here have pointed out – is clumsily equating fascism and communism because both systems exercise state power.

                • ghost_of_faso3@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 hours ago

                  You gonna start telling us about the ubermench as well?

                  Come on lmao, the term means literally nothing, it can be applied to any state that holds a monopoly of violence and has only ever been historically used to try to paint socialist countries as being the same as the Nazi state (which itself is based off the American state)

                  All it does is flag you as a zionist sucker offer.

                  And I brought her up as the most famous example of the word being used was in defence of a Nazi that she was shagging.

    • m532@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Communism does kill

      Nazis

      Aristocrats

      Cia agents

      Totalitarianism didn’t kill anything, because it isn’t a serious ideology