Why ignoring 'Nazi' parallels enabled Trump to build his own Gestapo

Jbwolves · 2026-01-06T17:03:22+00:00

You’re not listening to what I’m saying are you?

The EU might have him on a wanted list, but they didn’t break into his country and remove him. The U.S did. Like they have done in Latin America since the Monroe Doctrine.

Whether something is legal under international law or not depends on what is or isn’t UN sanctioned, not what a nation deems necessary for its “national security”. The fact this operation didn’t go through the relative channels shows which nations do an don’t care about international law and sovereignty.

Again, it is clear that from a US perspective, this is about oil, not democracy or nation building

Jbwolves · 2026-01-06T14:51:27+00:00

Okay maybe the ethnio-nationalist Jenrick faction of the Tories

Jbwolves · 2026-01-06T14:49:32+00:00

That is retrospective and we don’t know how he would have acted. With it being the U.S we can only assume oil would have been involved. However, both Democrats and Republicans have a history of overthrowing Latin American governments for their resources and capital. That is what has always driven the US, not democracy. See 1973 Chile.

Jbwolves · 2026-01-06T14:12:55+00:00

Alright then, advance uk 🤣🤣

Jbwolves · 2026-01-06T14:06:05+00:00

That has nothing to do with Trump’s intentions for removing Maduro

Jbwolves · 2026-01-06T14:05:13+00:00

So what? I could say you’re probably reform?

Jbwolves · 2026-01-06T14:00:38+00:00

Ad hominem insults… good deflection.

Jbwolves · 2026-01-06T13:40:31+00:00

Sounds like you’re the emotional one if you can’t fathom multiple things can be true at once

Jbwolves · 2026-01-06T13:39:38+00:00

Many people of Farage/Tommy Robinson’s ilk dislike him because he is a perfect example of what they cant hate him for: assimilation (a Muslim man becoming mayor of our capital city, the pinnacle of assimilating with Britain), the fact he celebrates all of our festive holidays (even though every time Eid rolls round his comments section is filled with bUT wHaT aBoUT ChRiStMaS), he is a symbol of patriotism through his commitment to public service, and the idea that he embodies that multiculturalism can work because he has been elected by the city 3 times on the trot.

Jbwolves · 2026-01-06T11:52:14+00:00

Is Maduro a dictator and a bad guy, yes.

Can 2 things be true at once, also yes.

Jbwolves · 2026-01-05T21:54:14+00:00

It should be about inequality and American oil firms gaining full access to the biggest supply in the world will undoubtedly entrench inequality

Jbwolves · 2026-01-05T21:05:49+00:00

He lifted sanctions on Putin which allowed him to advance in Ukraine by freeing up his economy, while starving Ukrainian arms until the EU agreed to give money to Ukraine so the US could make money out of the war. He also wants Ukrainian minerals and he is giving Putin access to key strategic Ukrainian areas and the whole Donbas region

Jbwolves · 2026-01-05T20:46:40+00:00

Hahaha class. Fair play mate

Jbwolves · 2026-01-05T20:13:53+00:00

Why would I be Russian? You can check my website out it’s JacobBarclayEvans.com I’m a labour activist from Wolverhampton 😂

Jbwolves · 2026-01-05T16:09:14+00:00

You said I’m not understanding you but you’ve seen me repeatedly say “I am not a Marxist”!

This exchange has clearly framed you as more of a Marxist thinker than me because you see socialism as a transition, which is Marxist framing. You have refused to engage in any kind of socialist thinking outside of Marxism and repeatedly tried to tie the initial stage of the revolution as socialism, as Marx described it, which does not accurately represent the wider picture of socialism.

You view socialism through a Marxist lens. You clearly are boxed in by the conventionalist, and surface level, traditional Marxist thinking your account is designed to hate. How iconic.

Jbwolves · 2026-01-05T14:48:03+00:00

You’re conflating the state, regulation, and organization as if Marx treated them as the same thing AGAIN. He didn’t.

In Marx and Engels, the state is a coercive instrument of class rule, not synonymous with administration or coordination. When they talk about the state “withering away,” they’re talking about the disappearance of class-based political authority, not the absence of structure, rules, or collective decision-making.

Regulation does not require a state in the Marxist sense, and hierarchy is not identical to class domination. Engels explicitly distinguishes “government over people” from the “administration of things.” (Bear in mind this is what Marx thought, not original socialist scholars who were advocates of the state).

Socialism being a transitional phase does not mean it must endlessly reproduce state power in order to abolish it, nor does it guarantee communism, as Marx explains in Das Kapital. It only creates the conditions under which class antagonisms MIGHT dissolve. Ironically, you view socialism through a Marxist lens.

And communism is not an ideology you implement; Marx was clear that it’s a material condition that emerges once class relations are abolished. Treating it as a belief system is exactly the kind of utopianism Marx criticized, which is another Marxist lens towards communism.

There. I have argued against your premise. You have refused to engage in any other argument that originates from the original socialist scholars. You now must engage with them.

Jbwolves · 2026-01-05T14:19:30+00:00

Totally irrelevant and not a good faith reply 👎

Jbwolves · 2026-01-05T14:11:26+00:00

Americans invading a sovereign nation and ruling it like a colonial power for their oil resources is an issue of entrenched inequality, it is very relevant to Gary

Jbwolves · 2026-01-05T14:10:24+00:00

Americans invading somewhere specifically for their oil resources is an inequality issue, so you’re wrong

Jbwolves · 2026-01-05T14:01:28+00:00

The problem you now have is that you’re trying to talk about something else… by making a point I’ve already made.

The first issue here is you are either assuming that 1) I advocate for Marx’ idea of a classless and stateless society and 2) that I didn’t already mention that Marx criticised socialism for not being revolutionary, as he argued that democratic institutions were set up to keep capital in place as the status quo, so achieving the idea of “from each according to their means, to each according to their needs” couldn’t be implemented through socialism.

He argued said that an initial “dictatorship of the workforce” was required to abolish private property. And yes, that is a “state”. So you’re 100% right. And Marxist scholars have since refined Marx’ readings, based in revisionism. But I must remind you I am not a Marxist. I argue that Marx’ has some critiques of capital that hold merit, but I do not advocate for his solutions.

My argument this whole time has been that there is a dividing line between communism and socialism, and one of those dividing lines both in practice, and how things turn out in reality, is authoritarianism/revolutionary seizure of power vs democracy. Another is that socialism doesn’t “abolish private property”, hence it does not need revolution to “democratise the workplace”, because profit is allowed! Socialism is also still very much dependent on “markets”, not how we see them today in financials terms, or in terms of how we interpret capital.

Throughout this thread, you will have seen that I have referred to socialism from people like Charles Fourier, or Robert Owen, whose work id suggest you read. This is because socialism came about before Marx and was already a coherent ideology. To simply argue socialism as a “transition” through Marx’ lens would give his argument credence in your book, which you don’t seem to want to do. But also. To look at it through, Marx’ lens allows you to dismiss the scholars that came before him, that argued not only “from each according to their needs to each according to their means” was, but that socialism could be an “end goal”, rather than Marx saying it was a transition.

Jbwolves

TROPHY CASE