i’m NOT even sure if this is the right community for me to post this on. that said, i got banned from hexbear (and now banned from posting stuff on !slop@hexbear.net from this lemmy instance) for “history of repeating us state department talking points, antisocialism and zionism” as well as possible “fedposting”.

i DON’T usually complain about hexbear, but part is me’s glad i got banned from hexbear - of course that site is mostly run by tankies.

of course you DON’T have to be a tankie to support marxism-leninism - i asked this question here, and some people said ‘you DON’T have to support stalin to support ml’.

i think that the ussr would’ve been better off today if the ussr continued to led by a troika after lenin’s death in 1924, but who am i to judge? i prefer lemmy.ml (another lemmy instance).

i apologize to any hexbear people reading this, and i’m sorry i called you tankies. seriously!

  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
    81·
    1 day ago

    I still don’t see the advantage of “Marxinist.” Just say communist.

    One-party states are fine if the party is representative of the working classes, serves the people, and does a good job.

    Audiobooks are good, I don’t use them but others swear by them.

    The idea of competing types of socialist parties in a liberal structure doesn’t work in practice. These are fundamentally different systems both from each other and from liberal systems.

    Federations can be socialist, there’s a difference between segmentation and competition.

    • DylanMc6 [any, any]@lemmy.mlOPEnglish
      14·
      1 day ago

      can you explain how there are multiple political parties in a coalition in some aes countries?

      ie: china has minor parties that run with the ruling party, working under a ‘united front’ - they call these parties ‘democratic parties’:

      1. the communist party of china (the main party)
      2. left-kuomintang (left-wing nationalism - the three principles of the people in a socialist perspective)
      3. china democratic league (originally big-tent centrists, now supports socialism - consisting of mostly mid-to-senior-level intellectuals - i’d call it the ‘tech party’)
      4. china national democratic construction association (supports socialism, consisting of entrepeneurs and economic experts - i’d call it the ‘economy party’)
      5. china association for promoting democracy (supports socialism, consisting of high-level intellectuals - i’d call it the ‘cultural party’)
      6. chinese peasants’ and workers’ democratic party (founded by left-wing members of the kuomintang, supports socialism - consisting of medicine experts - i’d call it the ‘health party’)
      7. china zhi gong party (originally multi-party federalists, now supports socialism - consisting of overseas Chinese people who just came back, as well as people with overseas connections - i’d call it the ‘returning expat party’)
      8. jiusan society (supports socialism, consistings of mid-to-high-level intellectuals - i’d call it the ‘education party’)
      9. taiwan democratic self-goverance league (founded by surviving members of the taiwanese communist party, supports socialism - consisting of advocates for Chinese unification between the mainland and the island of taiwan and such)

      the dprk meanwhile has a few parties in the now-defunct ‘united democratic fatherland front’ coalition (dissolved back in 2024 because kim jong-un changed his mind on korean reunification):

      1. the workers’ party of korea (the main party, juche fanatics)
      2. the korean social democratic party (the social democrats - they wanted the country to be a bit more moderate)
      3. the chondoist chongu party (the pantheist ‘cheondoist’ socialists - pretty self-explanatory)
      4. chongryon (representing the zainichi koreans)
      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        7·
        21 hours ago

        China has a cooperative party system with the CPC being the main governing body. It’s different from a liberal system, and further these extra parties are more like interest groups. Their focus is on unity, not on competing with the CPC.

        As for the DPRK, it pretty much has full WPK control. The other parties aren’t genuinely competing with the WPK, more trying to tilt it in a different direction.

        No socialist country really has these intense liberal elections with competing interests.

        • DylanMc6 [any, any]@lemmy.mlOPEnglish
          12·
          12 hours ago

          if a socialist country has multiple parties that DOESN’T have any way of competing, what would it be like?

          also, can a socialist country have like-minded parties that “support the socialist order”, but regardless competes with each other (as their ideologies are in the socialist spectrum)?

            • DylanMc6 [any, any]@lemmy.mlOPEnglish
              11·
              6 hours ago

              i think that there’d still be multiple political parties, but all of them would support different forms of socialism/communism (from across the socialist spectrum); they’d still cooperate together in a ‘vanguard coalition’, led by the communist party which serves as the foremost social institution), but they’d still compete in elections and such.