Lol

Your username looks particularly funny in the context. I hope you know why.

A state only does welfare policies when it is compelled to by democratic forces.

Correction: by the need to disarm and pacify the proletariat, when class rule becomes too threatened. German Empire is a good example. Nobody would dare to call Bismarck’s rule “democratic”

And you’re still describing welfare. Most SocDems I know support things like this or similar ones, and food subsidies are done by many liberal governments, irrelevant of the democratic status.

using a different definition of a word that a community clearly does not use

I agree, MLs have long abandoned what communism was supposed to mean.

don’t remember making any references to “the will of the people”

I mean, your schpiel about welfare implying democracy is kinda it. You still haven’t made neither communist ties to mode of production, nor more liberal ties to the electoral structure. You’re only pushing the welfare angle.

Monarchs wanting to keep the populace docile, like in modern Saudi Arabia or in the German Empire would often implement welfare, and it would be ridiculous to call that in any way a democracy. However fascists often define “democracy” as the ruler following the will of the people, which is shown through fulfilling certain needs of the population, like food, healthcare, housing. Your “welfare implies democracy” take runs parallel to that idea, and can be argued to be a slight repackaging of the reactionary concept.

would make me a “liberal-fascist”

That is not how it works. It is possible to believe fascist things while being a liberal and to believe liberal and fascist things while being a socialist. The point is not that you are that shitty thing, but that you should change your position from the wrong one to the right one.

So democracy to you is when a state does SocDem welfare policies?

I would understand if, as a purported socialist, you wanted to tie democracy to communism, as bourgeois democracy democratizes only the superstrucure, and even that one just partially. But that tie-in would clearly be hard to accept if you wanted to argue for USSR being democratic, as it was far from a stateless classless moneyless society.

Still - why social democracy? Why welfare? It’s kinda of a weird choice, unless you tie the idea of democracy to the liberal-fascist “will of the people” concept. But that would imply very bad things about your views, friend.

There are multiple ways to interpret this. I have no interest in guessing.

State your point.

And what if it is? You seem to be fine with continuing on so far.

You keep thanking me time and time again. Is this a kink thing?

Thanks!

I am very mysterious, true

Shame, I really liked trolling your ass.

Time for arguments was around a day ago, but you was too overflowing with sass to engage. Davel was more coherent, so I wrestled with him until he realized he can’t really prove there was a genocide and left.

Bye, you silly liberal. I still have to discover if there’s any difference between positions of you lot and of an average TV-addled Russian boomer. The lack of class analysis in explaining Russia’s behavior is your bane, together with tankie brainrot.

Beep! Boop!

No pwease don’t caww me wibewal!!! You don’t know what it meanf!!! Get a downdoot you meanie!!!

Please explain me how you’re not a lib, you will get even more upvotes for this for sure.

we

You’re alone in the room calling people NPCs online. Get a life you silly lib.

Define deez nuts, lib

Tankies don’t exist, don’t you know? There’s no second half between which an enlightened centrist can position themselves. I am the furthest left there is, and you are a liberal.

Was USSR a democracy under Stalin? Are Russia and China imperialist?

So you know the genocide story is a lie and keep spreading it? That’s fucked up.

jokes on you I’m into that 😜

If you think you can just dump on me a bunch of articles and leave me to piece together what your argument might be or not be, you’re wrong.

You said Ukraine is/was doing a genocide. You did not provide any evidence, while ignoring that cries of “national integrity” and “national security” are barely something more than legitimization mechanism for imperialist conflicts and has been such since imperialism existed.

You said Russia is not imperialist, or that Russian invasion is not imperialist, and chose to ignore my actual stated argument.

The Nazis - please make a statement I can argue with.

successful communist states

It’s either an oxymoron, or you’re begging the question. Also no argument again.

Don’t be a lazy fuck and actually argue.

Yogthos is not defending Western/liberal values, he is pointing out the hypocrisy.

Appeal to hypocrisy is one of the lowest, filthiest of arguments, used by trolls, propagandists and hacks of all allegiances. You didn’t make him look much better.

Russia is not predominantly an imperialist state

Russian war against Ukraine is a textbook example of an imperialist war - a plunderous attempt to cut up and consume, annex a smaller neighbor in order to expand the sphere of influence of Russian capital, to turn back the losses of the 2010s, when Ukraine escaped, though not unscathed, the clutches of the Russian bourgeoisie in favor of apparently more appealing clutches of the US and EU capital.

Russia is also a colonial power, which you seem to disregard in favor of the following:

Russia is an interesting case: it has already liberated itself from the post-Soviet “shock therapy” neocolonizers.

Positioning the victory of Russian owning class in the act of class warfare which was the shock therapy, calling it and the following consolidation of power by the national bourgeoisie a “liberation” is just disgusting. It was class war, first and foremost. It could give birth to a neocolonial relationship, if it “succeeded” - but it did not. It was a boost for the capital class, which then metastasized into the current liberal turned fascist regime.

It’s also funny to me how you completely disregard oppressor part, which is as important as the imperialist part.

In a word, no. In a few more words, support for Russia is only a partial, temporary, tactical one

So, lesser evilism? Russia is definitely a smaller evil, but I’m not sure how it’s a lesser one. I might be biased though, given Russia’s desire to eradicate me.

It’s trying to resolve the genocidal attacks on the people of the Donbas

There were 25 civilian deaths on both sides during the whole of 2021; large portion of them due to mines and other wartime remains. The claims of genocide in Donbas are some of the most blatant lies there, and you should be ashamed of yourself for ever uttering them.

By ignoring the imperialist nature of the invasion, by repeating the position of Russian capital - “the genocide, the aggression, the protection of the motherland against foreign interests” - you inadvertently serve as their lackey.