“blind following” Yeah alright, sorry for reading something, relating it to what I know, investigating its claims, find them to be well-founded and the arguments to stand up to reason, and therefore I decide to incorporate it into my worldview. I suppose a much better method would be to read falsehoods written by someone the CIA decided to fund or whoever you want.
Great then you would remember the blatant lies he drivels about needing an interim autocracy for a short period to transform to communism where the proletariat have ownership… oh but wait jinx we still need an overseer to fight off any imperialist attacks. The entire theory relies on the same logic of kings.
Then you have the heinous bloodlust of the killing off the bourgeois, I mean he puts it in nicer terms: saying that people of a certain capitalistic idealism must be punished and removed and that the bourgeois will stab you in the back if you make him a pauper and give him a penny. As if the bourgeois are a different race and must be eradicated.
But the proletariat will definitely have thier communist democracy just under the confines of what I want. It’s using the bait of democracy to reel in a bad kings replacement.
Yes context matters and that’s indeed why I’m so puzzled for the current backing of Russian, Chinese North Korean autocrats. And the perl clutching of Leninist beliefs that Trotskyism and more democratic values are self defeating. It is Plato all over again.
Meanwhile the material conditions are completely different (even for the *.ml professional revolutionaries /j) the proletariat in more democratic countries have a stronger influence on policy than since the tsar and emperor, while mechanical barriers to reform through revolution have strengthened considerably.
“blind following” Yeah alright, sorry for reading something, relating it to what I know, investigating its claims, find them to be well-founded and the arguments to stand up to reason, and therefore I decide to incorporate it into my worldview. I suppose a much better method would be to read falsehoods written by someone the CIA decided to fund or whoever you want.
Have you read the Red Book?
Maos quotations?
Yes
Then yes. Been a bunch of years though and the translation seemed shoddy.
Great then you would remember the blatant lies he drivels about needing an interim autocracy for a short period to transform to communism where the proletariat have ownership… oh but wait jinx we still need an overseer to fight off any imperialist attacks. The entire theory relies on the same logic of kings.
Then you have the heinous bloodlust of the killing off the bourgeois, I mean he puts it in nicer terms: saying that people of a certain capitalistic idealism must be punished and removed and that the bourgeois will stab you in the back if you make him a pauper and give him a penny. As if the bourgeois are a different race and must be eradicated.
But the proletariat will definitely have thier communist democracy just under the confines of what I want. It’s using the bait of democracy to reel in a bad kings replacement.
This would probably be really sound if the only thing I’d ever read was Mao’s quotations and I didn’t have any historical knowledge either.
Here’s a cool video for you to argue against
Here’s some words for you to misunderstand
Yes context matters and that’s indeed why I’m so puzzled for the current backing of Russian, Chinese North Korean autocrats. And the perl clutching of Leninist beliefs that Trotskyism and more democratic values are self defeating. It is Plato all over again.
Meanwhile the material conditions are completely different (even for the *.ml professional revolutionaries /j) the proletariat in more democratic countries have a stronger influence on policy than since the tsar and emperor, while mechanical barriers to reform through revolution have strengthened considerably.