• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    67 months ago

    A few things here. You have consistently, in this conversation even, many times lumped together and conflated all capitalists as a monolithic group. Do you have a right to object when someone does similar back at you?

    Second you aren’t “Marxist” or representative of all marxists. You are on a domain specifically dedicated to leninism. A specific sub branch of Marxism not representative of the group as a whole. Which also includes other groups like Marxist Libertarians and communists etc. Hi! While defending ML against Marxist and adjacent critiques. What are we supposed to think?

    If anyone has put words in your mouth. Consider the fact that you’ve repeatedly deflected and ignored what was said. Leaving everyone to assumed your answers. Nothing was stopping you from being direct.

    If everywhere that’s implemented capitalism largely becomes violently exploitative. (And they do) And everywhere that’s implemented governments based off ML ideology has always become violently oppressive. (And they have) Then neither is a flaw of their respective ideology, or they both are. And if an ideology is flawed, our allegiance should be to outcomes. Not the ideology. Herein lies the rub. And where the similarities in capitalism and Marxist-Leninism shine. And why the rest of the left dislikes both. Both have been tried and found lacking. We need to move beyond both at this point.

    • Cowbee [he/they]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      I lump together classes with their class interests. Nuance exists among individuals, but not among the average. If a Capitalist violently attacks others, they should be rehabilitated.

      Lemmy.ml is explicitly a FOSS and Privacy instance. I do not have a Lemmygrad.ml account, which is explicitly Marxist-Leninist. I am a Marxist. I defend Marxism.

      What did I ignore? What did I deflect?

      Either way, I would say without analyzing trajectories and whys behind movements, you’re doomed to repeat their failures and cannot be counted on to replicate success. You ought to mechanically and logically explain systemic failures and systemic victories.

      If we strictly go off of track record snapshots devoid of any context, then nothing is good, and nothing can be done to improve, as Anarchism, Marxism, Marxism-Leninism, all have failed to exist perfectly. If we can learn, however, then we can move on.