Banned from r/196 for telling the truth
Libs will never forgive Joey Steel for saving the world from fascism 
Libs will never forgive Joey Steel for saving the world from fascism
I sincerely don't understand how anyone can think they are helping the left by doing anticommunism. It doesn't stand up to any critical thought at all, it functions solely to move things rightwards and reinforce the status quo.
Propaganda is a hell of a drug, especially when you desperately want to believe that you're with the Good Guys
Realizing that America, NATO, Europe, and all the other imperial states and settler colonial states and all their cronies and hatchetmen weren't just the badguys, but were staggeringly evil in a way that cannot be completely encompassed by one person in one lifetime was a gradual process that took me like 8 years, and even then I'm still a lib sometimes.
especially when you desperately want to believe that you're with the Good Guys
I come back to this over and over again. It's nationalism.
Once they take the position of being citizens of the world, they know longer see it in this baby-brained good vs bad shit, where the good is the US (they're all americans) or the general western empire. Once they're internationalists they stop this shit and they gain intellectual curiosity to learn.
Once they take the position of being citizens of the world, they know longer see it in this baby-brained good vs bad shit, where the good is the US (they're all americans) or the general western empire. Once they're internationalists they stop this shit and they gain intellectual curiosity to learn.
There are a lot of anarcho-bidenist types (like @boredtortoise@lemm.ee ) who consider themselves to oppose all the evil states including their own, declaring that they cannot be chauvinists because they disavow the US, while uncritically parroting State Department views on its enemies. That doesn't matter to them because they are calling all entities involved "bad," while some nebulous people are what is "good," and these people must exist as a third camp to the feuds between the bad empires (don't think too hard about what constitutes an empire, btw).
Perhaps I am just free-associating, but I remember Engels talking about the Enlightenment (from the viewpoint of a liberal):
Every form of society and government then existing, every old traditional notion, was flung into the lumber-room as irrational; the world had hitherto allowed itself to be led solely by prejudices; everything in the past deserved only pity and contempt. Now, for the first time, appeared the light of day, the kingdom of reason; henceforth superstition, injustice, privilege, oppression, were to be superseded by eternal truth, eternal Right, equality based on Nature and the inalienable rights of man.
Engels is speaking in a somewhat different context, but you can see over and over a refusal to examine these "bad" entities more closely, to understand how they work and why they have survived except by the most generic gestures towards tyranny.
There are a lot of anarcho-bidenist types (like @boredtortoise@lemm.ee ) who consider themselves to oppose all the evil states including their own, declaring that they cannot be chauvinists because they disavow the US, while uncritically parroting State Department views on its enemies. That doesn't matter to them because they are calling all entities involved "bad," while some nebulous people are what is "good," and these people must exist as a third camp to the feuds between the bad empires (don't think too hard about what constitutes an empire, btw).
These ones are just liars.
Engels is speaking in a somewhat different context, but you can see over and over a refusal to examine these "bad" entities more closely, to understand how they work and why they have survived except by the most generic gestures towards tyranny.
It is again a rather religious behaviour. One that seems more like faith in a coming salvation rather than making salvation for themselves. Anyone actually trying to make salvation is to be rejected as not having the correct faith.
Don't forget that while the USSR was the closest humanity got to saving itself from capitalism, "Joey Steel" was a pedophile. He wasn't the USSR, he was just a man and he shouldn't be venerated. It just as cringe as being one of the freaks who sucks off Churchill. 
Reminder that the allegations of Stalin being a pedophile came from a friend of Jeffrey Epstein.
Stalin didn't speak breathlessly about the "triumph of the Aryan race" or how the Indians inflicted famine on themselves by "breeding like rabbits". In fact, in the latter case, Stalin used both his executive power and personal sway to expedite aid to Bengal.
Stalin can and should be criticized (e.g. he was deeply homophobic from what I can tell), but drawing an equivalence between him and a monstrous colonialist and racial supremacist like Churchill is frankly disgusting.
Interesting. Do you have a source, or further reading about this? If you're talking about Nadezhda, he married her when she was 18.
