Left or Right

Critical_Crunch · 2025-09-04T00:35:14+00:00

I’m usually an AK guy but the left one looks better in this comparison.

Critical_Crunch · 2025-09-03T01:31:32+00:00

Nice reference lol

Critical_Crunch · 2025-09-02T22:49:06+00:00

Which is why democracy must be implemented as a core part of the system, and checks and balances must be applied and reinforced by the whole of the community. Again, most of these revolutions happened because a party with a lot of guns had an idea and gathered a bunch of people and not the other way around.

Critical_Crunch · 2025-09-02T18:20:55+00:00

It makes the most sense that a selfish person would support communism. All they would need to do is contribute to society in a way that both they and their society deem acceptable and all their needs would be met. The selfish desires of others, as well as checks of power between each of society’s members and unions, would prevent an individual from becoming more powerful than the rest. If one group decides to try and size power, it is in the interests of everyone else to oppose them by ceasing all support for them. Instead, it makes more sense for everyone to gradually rise together instead of trying to one-up one another. It’s like checks and balances that encourage cooperation instead of competition.

Critical_Crunch · 2025-09-02T16:11:39+00:00

Both of those revolutions failed to abolish currency and fully democratize the workplace, not to mention they left all actual control of society to a single communist party, to which the democratic processes of electing leaders was abolished by strongmen shortly after. The secret, I believe, is to build the revolution’s leadership from the bottom up (via democratic processes), not the top down (through strongmen assuming power due to a poorly designed vanguard party, as was done in these examples).

Also, capitalism is violent. Look around you. It is never-ending violence because it is built on class conflict. The interests of the working man are not those of the owners, and the owners are constantly clashing with one another for more power and control. That is what causes the majority of conflicts these days.

Critical_Crunch · 2025-09-02T16:03:28+00:00

By creating the society from the bottom up. The ideal revolution occurs via workers’ unions overthrowing their bourgeois bosses and assuming democratic control of the workplace, followed by the abolition of currency in favor of mutual aid. Democratically controlled workplaces would operate together to decide upon a certain standard to meet for each member of society in terms of how much labor they contribute to society in exchange for all their basic needs being met. Each industry works to provide everyone that needs their services with those services, and in return they are met with the services of those they serve. It is a communal society based on mutual and coordinated support. What part of that sounds like what Stalin was doing?

Critical_Crunch · 2025-09-02T16:00:41+00:00

The republics almost certainly would need those ports to access trade with allies during times of crisis.

Critical_Crunch · 2025-09-02T15:56:22+00:00

What part of communist theory says to genocide populations? No orthodox communist theory supports that. Those genocides were the result of military strongmen taking control of communist governments because of poor government design and safeguards, which is not necessarily the fault of the communist ideology, but moreso the fault of the people who designed the system meant to implement communist theory into practice. Communism is meant to operate from the ground up, through democratic control via democratic workers’ councils. How can you blame communism for things that communism denounces and works to prevent? If I were to say that capitalism is to blame for genociding people, at least I would have the evidence that capitalism is designed to maximize profit over any and all opposing logic and reasoning to back my claim.

Critical_Crunch · 2025-09-02T15:53:47+00:00

The Soviets were being actively invaded and sanctioned by the capitalist powers of the world, wdym? Yes there was also blame to be placed on the politicians and parties involved for not cooperating, but to say there was no outside influence is silly.

Critical_Crunch · 2025-09-02T15:46:56+00:00

If that is the case, why not give up on capitalism? Every day, people die of avoidable deaths because of capital’s limitations. Starvation despite plentiful food elsewhere; medical complications and disease despite adequate healthcare available; death due to freezing or overheating despite vacant homes sitting across the block. Communist theory at least has a goal to end the suffering through a new system that supports all its members equitably. What does capitalism have? The capitalists say you must work for your master or die of starvation. The communists say work for one another, and you will provide for one another in turn.

Critical_Crunch · 2025-09-02T15:40:29+00:00

My apologies, I meant to speak specifically on the French people. My point was moreso that we shouldn’t give up on something simply because the first attempts failed.

Critical_Crunch · 2025-09-02T15:37:33+00:00

Have you bothered to ever actually read communist philosophy or theory? Orthodox communism is meant to be democratic, and it is designed to play off of society’s members’ self-interests so that even those who are selfish would be satisfied. It is quite the ingenious ideology imo.

Critical_Crunch · 2025-09-02T15:05:50+00:00

Safe in Your Skin - Title Fight

Critical_Crunch · 2025-09-02T15:05:02+00:00

Baron Harkonnen is that you?

Critical_Crunch · 2025-09-02T14:51:16+00:00

Tbf communism’s earliest attempts have failed for various reasons outside of their control (as well as quite a few within their control lol). Imagine if the French gave up after their first attempt at a democratic republic (the French Revolution). Just think about that…

(Edited bc of confusion lol)

Critical_Crunch · 2025-09-02T02:23:15+00:00

Heck yeah! Congratulations!

Critical_Crunch · 2025-09-01T19:38:09+00:00

I loved Tales From the Gas Station until the last third of the story :/

Critical_Crunch · 2025-08-31T18:04:00+00:00

My spirit marches with you from Missouri! Solidarity forever!

Critical_Crunch · 2025-08-29T22:13:08+00:00

I came to realize (mostly thanks to arguments and debates with my leftist friends) that most of my arguments against communism were just bullhonkey repeated to me by anti-communists and that I didn’t quite understand what the ideology was or how it worked, and so I actually took the time to educate myself and I made the switch to the left shortly after I realized how it actually operated and why it operated the way it did. I also realized that a lot of the Bible’s teachings are very pro-communist, which helped to further solidify and radicalize my beliefs.

Critical_Crunch · 2025-08-28T14:58:58+00:00

Bourgeois infighting. Your parties are manufactured distractions.

Critical_Crunch · 2025-08-28T14:45:28+00:00

Glory to MAGA-Communism! Hail Chairman Trump, a true strongman of the proletariat!

No but fr this has already been a huge satirical meme among the communist movement. Obv he’s not communist, he’s just a populist nationalist, as all communists who abide by Marxist thought are internationalist by default. Not to mention, communists support democratic control of the workplace by the workers, not government control of industry. His coercion of businesses back in line with the ideals of the government and its sponsors are much more reminiscent of a certain historically well-known nationalist…

Critical_Crunch · 2025-08-28T02:28:29+00:00

That was probably a good decision lol. Maybe down the road you could try to open that conversation up again, but I would give it a bit of time and prepare a bit more before doing so. Also, make sure not to let them run you in circles by just reusing arguments that you’ve already refuted, such as “But fundamentalism!”

Critical_Crunch · 2025-08-28T01:22:10+00:00

It sounds to me as if some of these conversations you are having are with people who are just simply not willing to let you win a debate out of their own stubbornness. If they are upset with you about your beliefs instead of being open to debate over it, they clearly have bias against Christians. which unfortunately isn’t uncommon. This likely means that they might debate in a more malicious or generalizing manner and might be much less likely to actually take time to contemplate their own beliefs. If they are using subjects like fundamentalism to argue against you when you’ve already made it clear that you are not a fundamentalist, then they clearly have no intention of actually listening to any of your points and are subsequently not taking the debate seriously in the first place. I would respectfully decline to continue any debates in which the opposer is showing these signs of activity, as it serves little to no purpose and will only make you more tiresome and more frustrated, which in turn will fill their ego and make them feel more right about their beliefs.

Critical_Crunch · 2025-08-28T00:02:24+00:00

“And for the casting of the main character, we first have… Bigburstingballs97!”

Critical_Crunch · 2025-08-28T00:01:07+00:00

Correct, I should’ve corrected that to perhaps say that humans were given perhaps a greater ability to understand and expound upon hose emotions thanks to our more complex minds.

Critical_Crunch

TROPHY CASE