i’m just reading what you wrote here:

a failed country that didn’t have free speech.

you seem to strongly value the control capitalists have over our government.

so are you opposed to ‘free speech’ for capitalists or not?

you cited unlimited ‘free speech’ for capitalists as a positive ideal that the USSR failed to uphold. what else am I supposed to infer?

you seem perfectly fine with liberal authoritarianism tho, does that make you blue maga?

I’m not getting all the boobies everyone is excited about, though.

oh they’re out there, i’d post mine but i’m probably too infamous to do that and get away with it

every political tradition has to defend its history, i see no value in running from it. but thank you for the lesson in marketing

That’s just basics, you’re trying to twist it.

It isn’t about a stupid picture that people relate to a failed country that didn’t have free speech.

if i’m trying to twist things you’re fully succeeding. ‘free speech’ in american context means unlimited speech for those with money.

the USSR was actually quite successful, it did fall to capitalist encirclement eventually, but i don’t think we’re going to agree on metics if ‘free speech’ is your highest priority.

marketing is important

this just treats socialist organizing like a consumer product that needs rebranding

pursuing “proper messaging” for something like this tends to just mean water down the substance until nothing’s left

a lot of the communists on here are on hexbear.net and lemmygad.ml which are not federated with .world.

Yet again, you’re using a niche definition and acting as though readers should have known it.

yes, i am using a definition other than the liberal moralizing version. if you actually read and engaged with what i have said i would expect you to be able to follow that, it’s not the first time i’ve outlined that.

You should instead say “I find the rates of peaceful reform for the better to be too slow and unlikely.”

this is being pedantic. peaceful reform has a track record of being rolled back whenever capital feels threatened

So when kids on the playground said “takes one to know one,” you understood that to be true and wise?

its more that not even other anarchists are in a position to dictate to other anarchists who is and isn’t an anarchist. having someone who seems completely fine with the carceral state calling me not-an-anarchist just makes me laugh

Right, but you’re for dictatorship of another flavor, ergo you are not an anarchist.

I am opposed to unjust and imposed hierarchies as an anarchist. Capitalists want to maintain and continue those hierarchies. A revolution which overturns their domination is authoritarian towards them, but liberatory for everyone else.

All revolutions are going to be authoritarian towards someone, and you are acting as if the status quo isn’t also authoritarian. Passively voting and trying to reform a system of oppression does not have a track record of success. It does nothing to actually challenge the system of oppression either.

Also are a cop, incredible gall to call me not-an - anarchist lmao

it’s not mental gymnastics, all definitions of authoritarianism have ideological assumptions baked in. i am opposed to capitalism. overthrowing capitalism is going to be authoritarian from the perspective of the capitalists. i am in favor of that.

i am opposed to a dictatorship of capital, which is what both republicans and democrats are in favor of. that is liberal authoritarianism

i am in favor of being authoritarian towards capitalists, yes.

Then why the hell say “MLs want to get rid of the boot entirely” when you are advocating for that very boot?

as i said here, earlier in our correspondance

for me the boot is capitalism and its associated political economy and hierarchies.

please try to keep up

i love the amount of power i have in your mind

Don’t worry babe, officer Harris won my state 😎

Okay so now that you’ve moved the goal-post from “There is zero despotism under M-L” to “Well, a little despotism is okay. We can exterminate certain people we disagree with,” you align with fascists more than you align with liberals (or anarchists, for that matter).

i am in favor of being authoritarian towards capitalists, yes. you literally work/worked for the carceral state, you are in no position to accuse anyone else of being aligned with fascists.

believe it or not there are people in the reformist org who are not interested in seeing capitalism go; the org is not a monolith.

have you even been to a DSA meeting? i feel like i have probably been to more DSA meetings than you.

it’s called paraphrasing, you wanted to make it very clear that you’re one of the good ones for the liberals, as opposed to tankies who are the bad ones. i don’t think i misrepresented you.

the term is literally a left facing pejorative the way it’s used, especially how you were using it.

if they’re pro capitalist it’s just describing their position, sorry that the term offends you