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 @[email protected] ) 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appeared the light of day, the kingdom of reason; henceforth superstition, injustice, privilege, oppression, were to be superseded by eternal truth, eternal Right, equality based on Nature and the inalienable rights of man.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 @[email protected] ) 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.
while uncritically parroting State Department views on its enemies
For this reason.
Ultimately they are either self-aware liars or oblivious to the nationalism that lies within them. One way or another this is nationalist behaviour. The internationalists don’t have such blatantly obvious national loyalties.
The key to unlocking these people is breaking the religious faith, and breaking the national loyalty that they lack consciousness of. They have a false consciousness.
If I had that answer we’d be well on the way to revolution. If we break this wall the sheer numbers that marxists gain as allies skyrocket, you’ve seen how it is.
I don’t know about the religious faith part yet, but we don’t do much at all to promote internationalism or break this nationalist mindset. I think it’s a prerequisite to further advancing this crowd of people.
I know a fair few people like this. Some are “Freinds” that I dont discuss geopolitics with to avoid arguments. My experience with them is that its a pretty sincerely held belief. Not cynical at all.
I don’t give a shit what you say about him when you repeat what he says about his enemies. You’re the very definition of a useful idiot, the kind the state has made an effort to foster.
(The mention wasn’t for you but so that people could see a recent example on this website of a certain type of )
Hey I get it. It’s hard to find a stereotype to someone who doesn’t fit. Send an honest dm some day if a person is more valuable than that show. In the meantime, I’m not the subject of this
We have those who you speak of as well and they’re not that tough to spot or to mistake me as one.
Hey I get it. It’s hard to find a stereotype to someone who doesn’t fit
“I’m not like other leftcoms!” I don’t care, you aren’t special and I’ve heard your dogshit opinions a thousand times before from other ultras who also thought they were special. Your opinions on the enemies of the imperial core are still inherited from its mouthpieces. Disavowing the state while repeating its lies does not actually give you a pass.
Here’s a fun game: What do you think about Xinjiang?
Now you’re getting it! I’m not special. I’m just a nobody and I don’t need anyone’s imagination going wild about me.
Go on and comment on things on a random board. Let the people be.
It’s ironic that all the monikers you are trying to slur me with are actually groups I’ve seen in the past want to exterminate the likes of me. You’re registered on an instance which is described to oppose our oppressors so I’ve given you the benefit of the doubt for long.
I guess it’s just human tribalism. Your imperialists and such despise the likes of me who are not. It’s just a cognitive mistake. I don’t hold it against anyone as humans have the capability of not following that urge if they want.
As I recall, it was you who went on a communist instance and after the slightest provocation on another topic, went and insisted on your imagining of subjects, people, and places of which you know nothing, refusing all reasoning and evidence to the contrary.
Thanks for admitting provoking. Consider also that anticommunists try to provoke the likes of me with ad hominems, pejoratives and baseless assumptions. I don’t see that being a behavioral path someone else would want to take.
There are a lot of anarcho-bidenist types (like @[email protected] ) 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):
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.
deleted by creator
Yeah, good take on those kinds
These ones are just liars.
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.
How do you know?
For this reason.
Ultimately they are either self-aware liars or oblivious to the nationalism that lies within them. One way or another this is nationalist behaviour. The internationalists don’t have such blatantly obvious national loyalties.
The key to unlocking these people is breaking the religious faith, and breaking the national loyalty that they lack consciousness of. They have a false consciousness.
Fair enough. How would you say that one could break such a person’s religious faith, as you put it?
If I had that answer we’d be well on the way to revolution. If we break this wall the sheer numbers that marxists gain as allies skyrocket, you’ve seen how it is.
I don’t know about the religious faith part yet, but we don’t do much at all to promote internationalism or break this nationalist mindset. I think it’s a prerequisite to further advancing this crowd of people.
I know a fair few people like this. Some are “Freinds” that I dont discuss geopolitics with to avoid arguments. My experience with them is that its a pretty sincerely held belief. Not cynical at all.
Lol at the mention. Biden is a useless American right winger. Disawowing that and chauvinism is a long way to suddenly frame me into a bidenist 😉
I don’t give a shit what you say about him when you repeat what he says about his enemies. You’re the very definition of a useful idiot, the kind the state has made an effort to foster.
(The mention wasn’t for you but so that people could see a recent example on this website of a certain type of
)
Hey I get it. It’s hard to find a stereotype to someone who doesn’t fit. Send an honest dm some day if a person is more valuable than that show. In the meantime, I’m not the subject of this
We have those who you speak of as well and they’re not that tough to spot or to mistake me as one.
“I’m not like other leftcoms!” I don’t care, you aren’t special and I’ve heard your dogshit opinions a thousand times before from other ultras who also thought they were special. Your opinions on the enemies of the imperial core are still inherited from its mouthpieces. Disavowing the state while repeating its lies does not actually give you a pass.
Here’s a fun game: What do you think about Xinjiang?
Now you’re getting it! I’m not special. I’m just a nobody and I don’t need anyone’s imagination going wild about me.
Go on and comment on things on a random board. Let the people be.
It’s ironic that all the monikers you are trying to slur me with are actually groups I’ve seen in the past want to exterminate the likes of me. You’re registered on an instance which is described to oppose our oppressors so I’ve given you the benefit of the doubt for long.
I guess it’s just human tribalism. Your imperialists and such despise the likes of me who are not. It’s just a cognitive mistake. I don’t hold it against anyone as humans have the capability of not following that urge if they want.
As I recall, it was you who went on a communist instance and after the slightest provocation on another topic, went and insisted on your imagining of subjects, people, and places of which you know nothing, refusing all reasoning and evidence to the contrary.
Thanks for admitting provoking. Consider also that anticommunists try to provoke the likes of me with ad hominems, pejoratives and baseless assumptions. I don’t see that being a behavioral path someone else would want to take.
What a silly thing to say