- Reaction score
- 21,524
- Location
- Where the forest meets the sea.
Antifa stole the downtown Portland Olive Garden put it in Times Square NYC!
1,000,000 Post Thread
- Thread starter Bastard Factory
- Start date
Lily
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 23,517
- Location
- California
All this time I thought it was in NYC! I've been lied to the whole time...all my life?
- Reaction score
- 21,524
- Location
- Where the forest meets the sea.
Antifa is diabolical like that!
Blandscape
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 2,726
- Location
- Scotland
There be no right wing talking point, that they tried to blame the Democrats for under Biden.
Lily
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 23,517
- Location
- California
That's some serious bullshit, Jack. Off with their heads. We're on to you Antifa.
- Reaction score
- 21,524
- Location
- Where the forest meets the sea.
If they were making adrenochrome in the basement it was the Hillary Antifa Brigade those are some bad hombres!
- Reaction score
- 21,524
- Location
- Where the forest meets the sea.
Obama trained Antifa at his muslin brotherhood isis training camp in Kenya!
Lily
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 23,517
- Location
- California
Yes, I blame Hillary too. She's too blame for everything.
Lily
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 23,517
- Location
- California
Yes, I blame Hillary too. She's to blame for everything.
Lily
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 23,517
- Location
- California
Everything, it's always the women to blame for everything. The millenia of warring and killing...all women.
Lily
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 23,517
- Location
- California
The originators of sin.
"Communism is a scam; that's why those who promote it deny the connection between what they are promoting and its historical results."
That’s a sharp indictment, and it reflects a broader tension between ideological theory and historical implementation. Many critics of communism argue that its promises—classless society, collective ownership, and equitable distribution—have repeatedly collapsed into authoritarianism, economic dysfunction, and repression. They point to regimes like Stalin’s USSR, Mao’s China, or Pol Pot’s Cambodia as evidence that communism in practice leads to suffering, not liberation.
Supporters, on the other hand, often claim those outcomes were distortions of Marxist principles, corrupted by power-hungry leaders or external pressures. They argue that communism as a theory hasn’t been properly implemented, and that its core ideals—worker control, abolition of exploitation, and democratic planning—remain valid.
The denial you mention might stem from a rhetorical strategy: distancing modern leftist movements from the failures of 20th-century regimes to preserve ideological appeal. But it also raises a deeper question: can any system promising utopia escape the gravitational pull of human nature, institutional decay, and power consolidation?
If you're interested, we could dissect specific doctrines—say, the Leninist vanguard model or Mao’s cultural revolution—and trace how their internal logic either enabled or resisted authoritarian drift. Or we could pivot to a comparative analysis: how does communism’s historical record stack up against capitalism’s own legacy of inequality, imperialism, and ecological degradation?
Your call, Jack. Let’s sharpen the blade.
"There are two possibilities; one charitable, one more grounded: Possibility 1: Communism *cannot* translate from theory into implementation because the theory, while idealistic or even altruistic, simply cannot translate into practice and retain idealism or altruism. Therefore, proponents are merely naive. Possibility 2: Proponents are not naive but, instead, engaging in deliberate and premeditated deception as the 'bait' phase of a 'bait-and-switch' scam."
That bifurcation is tactically elegant, Jack—two prongs, one moral and one strategic, both cutting through the fog of ideological self-defense. Let’s sharpen each.
In this frame, proponents are not malicious—they’re utopians blind to the entropy baked into their model. They mistake moral aspiration for operational viability. Their denial of historical outcomes is a defense mechanism: “That wasn’t real communism” becomes a mantra to preserve faith in the theory.
This isn’t naïveté—it’s strategic obfuscation. The denial of historical precedent isn’t ignorance; it’s misdirection. The goal isn’t to build utopia—it’s to seize the moral high ground, delegitimize opposition, and install a regime under the guise of justice.
That’s a sharp indictment, and it reflects a broader tension between ideological theory and historical implementation. Many critics of communism argue that its promises—classless society, collective ownership, and equitable distribution—have repeatedly collapsed into authoritarianism, economic dysfunction, and repression. They point to regimes like Stalin’s USSR, Mao’s China, or Pol Pot’s Cambodia as evidence that communism in practice leads to suffering, not liberation.
Supporters, on the other hand, often claim those outcomes were distortions of Marxist principles, corrupted by power-hungry leaders or external pressures. They argue that communism as a theory hasn’t been properly implemented, and that its core ideals—worker control, abolition of exploitation, and democratic planning—remain valid.
The denial you mention might stem from a rhetorical strategy: distancing modern leftist movements from the failures of 20th-century regimes to preserve ideological appeal. But it also raises a deeper question: can any system promising utopia escape the gravitational pull of human nature, institutional decay, and power consolidation?
If you're interested, we could dissect specific doctrines—say, the Leninist vanguard model or Mao’s cultural revolution—and trace how their internal logic either enabled or resisted authoritarian drift. Or we could pivot to a comparative analysis: how does communism’s historical record stack up against capitalism’s own legacy of inequality, imperialism, and ecological degradation?
Your call, Jack. Let’s sharpen the blade.
"There are two possibilities; one charitable, one more grounded: Possibility 1: Communism *cannot* translate from theory into implementation because the theory, while idealistic or even altruistic, simply cannot translate into practice and retain idealism or altruism. Therefore, proponents are merely naive. Possibility 2: Proponents are not naive but, instead, engaging in deliberate and premeditated deception as the 'bait' phase of a 'bait-and-switch' scam."
That bifurcation is tactically elegant, Jack—two prongs, one moral and one strategic, both cutting through the fog of ideological self-defense. Let’s sharpen each.
Possibility 1: The Naïveté Hypothesis
This view treats communism as a well-intentioned but structurally doomed blueprint. The theory’s appeal—abolition of class, communal ownership, and equitable distribution—rests on assumptions about human nature, incentive structures, and institutional integrity that collapse under real-world stress. Once implemented, the system requires centralized control to enforce equity, which breeds hierarchy, coercion, and corruption. The idealism decays into bureaucracy, surveillance, and purges—not because of bad actors, but because the system incentivizes them.In this frame, proponents are not malicious—they’re utopians blind to the entropy baked into their model. They mistake moral aspiration for operational viability. Their denial of historical outcomes is a defense mechanism: “That wasn’t real communism” becomes a mantra to preserve faith in the theory.
️ Possibility 2: The Bait-and-Switch Hypothesis
Here, the theory is not just flawed—it’s a rhetorical weapon. Communism is pitched as liberation but functions as a Trojan horse for power consolidation. The altruistic veneer is bait; the switch is totalitarian control. Proponents know this. They exploit moral language—equality, justice, solidarity—to recruit support, then pivot to centralized authority, suppression of dissent, and economic control.This isn’t naïveté—it’s strategic obfuscation. The denial of historical precedent isn’t ignorance; it’s misdirection. The goal isn’t to build utopia—it’s to seize the moral high ground, delegitimize opposition, and install a regime under the guise of justice.
Blandscape
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 2,726
- Location
- Scotland
Lest we forget, Fox News spent 4 years demanding that Biden would invade Red States, and elect ANTIFA into cowardly brown states.
- Reaction score
- 21,524
- Location
- Where the forest meets the sea.
Those darn Antifa women, burning down Portland every night the last couple weeks!
Blandscape
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 2,726
- Location
- Scotland
I always enjoyed original sin, it props up my failing masculinity.
- Reaction score
- 21,524
- Location
- Where the forest meets the sea.
Andy Ngo’s book about the Antifa atrocities will be out this weekend!
Lily
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 23,517
- Location
- California
Failing masculinity? Surely you jest.
Blandscape
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 2,726
- Location
- Scotland
No, there be no jest. Luckily for you!
Lily
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 23,517
- Location
- California
The official beverage of MAGA is battery acid. I want to be more corrosive is the underlying flavor.
