There’s no such thing as “authoritarian socialism,” and “democratic socialism” is a redundant statement purely to pretend communism isn’t democratic.
That’s why I say “tankie” is the new woke. Show me tankies on lemmy, and I’ll show you people advocating for democratization of the economy and government, even if they don’t want bourgeois democracy.
As someone who decided on the impractical major choice of Sociology when they were young, all I can say is that there a lot of economists, political scientists and sociologists that would argue otherwise.
A lot of folks would argue that democratic and authoritarian systems of government can be applied to economic systems that lean toward both the capitalist and socialist ends of the spectrum.
As someone who decided on the impractical major choice of Sociology when they were young, all I can say is that there a lot of economists, political scientists and sociologists that would argue otherwise.
Sure, in Capitalist countries you can find an endless supply of anti-Marxists.
A lot of folks would argue that democratic and authoritarian systems of government can be applied to economic systems that lean toward both the capitalist and socialist ends of the spectrum.
Sure, a lot of folks don’t actually know what Marxists advocate for as well. The vast majority don’t, in fact.
I really don’t need to be linked the Wikipedia pages on these concepts. I am aware that liberals exist and their ideas of Marxism and Socialism exist. This isn’t a book-reading competition, but I’m a Marxist-Leninist, I have read lots of Marx, Engels, Lenin, etc. I know what I advocate for, and what others advocate for, and what they advocated for.
Can you explain the State Structure advocated by Marxist-Leninists, and why it is considered “authoritarian” in a manner that isn’t arbitrary and vibes-based?
To restate this entire argument, it is essentially this:
Scary Words are a type of Socialist that is Spooky Word type of Socialist, as opposed to Nice Word type of Socialist. Spooky Word isn’t a structure, it’s an adjective, and Spooky Word Socialists also advocate for Nice Word structures, but because they actually exist in the real world, liberals call them Spooky Word Socialists instead of Nice Word Socialists.
Authoritarian is an adjective, not a structure. Democratic is a type of structure, Authoritarian is not. It’s a buzzword that means nothing at all.
“Tankie” is generally a meaningless term, it’s the new “woke.”
“Woke” can be pretty broad, but IMHO, “Tankie” very specifically refers to authoritarian socialism (as opposed to democratic socialism.)
There’s no such thing as “authoritarian socialism,” and “democratic socialism” is a redundant statement purely to pretend communism isn’t democratic.
That’s why I say “tankie” is the new woke. Show me tankies on lemmy, and I’ll show you people advocating for democratization of the economy and government, even if they don’t want bourgeois democracy.
As someone who decided on the impractical major choice of Sociology when they were young, all I can say is that there a lot of economists, political scientists and sociologists that would argue otherwise.
A lot of folks would argue that democratic and authoritarian systems of government can be applied to economic systems that lean toward both the capitalist and socialist ends of the spectrum.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_socialism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarian_socialism
Sure, in Capitalist countries you can find an endless supply of anti-Marxists.
Sure, a lot of folks don’t actually know what Marxists advocate for as well. The vast majority don’t, in fact.
I really don’t need to be linked the Wikipedia pages on these concepts. I am aware that liberals exist and their ideas of Marxism and Socialism exist. This isn’t a book-reading competition, but I’m a Marxist-Leninist, I have read lots of Marx, Engels, Lenin, etc. I know what I advocate for, and what others advocate for, and what they advocated for.
Can you explain the State Structure advocated by Marxist-Leninists, and why it is considered “authoritarian” in a manner that isn’t arbitrary and vibes-based?
To restate this entire argument, it is essentially this:
Scary Words are a type of Socialist that is Spooky Word type of Socialist, as opposed to Nice Word type of Socialist. Spooky Word isn’t a structure, it’s an adjective, and Spooky Word Socialists also advocate for Nice Word structures, but because they actually exist in the real world, liberals call them Spooky Word Socialists instead of Nice Word Socialists.
Authoritarian is an adjective, not a structure. Democratic is a type of structure, Authoritarian is not. It’s a buzzword that means nothing at all.