DADDYCHILL [none/use name]

  • 12 Posts
  • 22 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 30th, 2023

help-circle





  • all im saying is even if you got rid of the money, the reactionary institutions, did as much education as possible, and most importantly abolished private property. there will always be people who will threaten progress with their beliefs. sure we can certainly reduce their numbers through nonviolent means, but just given enough time, reactionary outbursts are going to happen, and that is when the use of force is necessary, and it would be best to use it proactively before they can. and thats why i think nonviolence is incompatible with communism. we are always gonna need a guillotine on standby.


  • tell me, do you think we can get rid of religion? like maybe we can abolish the church or have some sort of state sponsored atheism, but some people will gravitate towards religion, they will form cults, no amount of education will change some peoples minds, if anything education will just make them more reactionary. i dont know where reactionary thought comes from, maybe its from birth, maybe its from environment, probably a little of both. either way it just seems like something that will always come about in humanity, some people are just naturally contrarian. we already dont understand where sexual orientation comes from, ive heard that it comes from birth, or that it comes from environment, or that its a bit of both. it would be absurd to think we can just get rid of gay people through better education nor should we since being gay is not a character flaw unlike reactionary political leanings. not to say sexual orientation and politics are one in the same but they both seem to not be by choice, and rather an innate part of someone. i did not choose to be a communist, communism chose me. i did not choose to be asexual, again, that’s sort of innate. and you know, beliefs change over time, my sexual orientation has changed over time, but what im really just trying to say here, beliefs isnt really a choice. you either gravitate towards one set of beliefs or the other. i have a rather fatalistic view on these things.


  • while i personally despise trotsky because his adventurism regarding his views on permanent revolution endangered the soviet union and communism as a whole, the concept itself is valid. the tree of liberty needs to be watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants from time to time after all, even if that quote specifically was made by a chud the sentiment is real. without the occasional violence in society to shake up the class structure, hereditary power and corruption will entrench itself into an utopian classless system given enough time and that endangers the project of communism as a whole, so we need purges, not reeducation, murder, the death penalty carried out on reactionaries basically until the end of time to maintain communism. communism is not pacifism, humans are innately violent and a utopian system would require it.











  • you probably must feel that weird feeling all those german kids felt when they asked their parents and grandparents what they did in the war. like both of us shouldnt have the right to exist for the sins of our parents but here we are, so basically we got to self obliterate ourselves in penance and use what privilege and wealth we have to fight for communism.

    its definitely a special kind of person who has the means to move across the world, like there’s economic necessity to move to a country that we consider like ultimately evil (or in canada case, a country trying to imitate its evil neighbor) but the economy good and you can send money back. but it has a cost on your metaphorical soul being here on your own volition. but like being second gen sort of takes that burden off you since you didnt choose to be here.

    as for the white person thing, personally i kind of consider how far one is from being black to how close one is to being a direct beneficiary of colonialism. it would be wrong to rank it but pacific asian people tend to side with white people on all the wrong issues since they are so close to “whiteness”. like in the united states at least (and by proxy canada) theres like a caste system and i feel like theres culpability for everyone except the direct bottom, who frankly are innocent in all the sins of this nation.






  • hasan isnt a gateway, he is a leftist. as long as you ignore the contradictions of him living in a hollywood mansion and engaging in treat culture, the dude is a very important internet personality because hes basically using his immense wealth and privilege to do praxis like every day. hes a bourgeoisie class traitor like fredrich engles. nothing less than complete uncritical support for hasan should be from this website. he is far more influential here than the chapo podcast.



  • im not trying to do a bi erasure, bi people are valid. im just saying as someone who was bi sexual who later became pan sexual after learning about the term i just think changing some of the letters around would be good ways to raise awareness about different genders and sexualities in the acronym. so many people know what lgbt is but they dont really know the plus part. the first four are really important to the broader conception of gender and sexual identity as a whole. look if we can change the flag i dont think the acronym is sacrosanct either, i do however think we need an acronym.

    i think lesbian, gay, and bisexual should be lower on the acronym. i think trans people should be first since they are receiving most of the targeting and attacks out of any group in the community right now, i think pansexuals, asexuals, and nonbinaries could really benefit from a representation bump. TPAN, rolls off the tongue. we can keep lgbt too. nobody got rid of the pride flag after the progress flag. both can exist at the same time. i just think its a representation issue.