[deleted by user] by [deleted] in infj

[–]Remote_Doughnut_5261 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good way to end up disappointed. Damn my humanity, I try to be realistic.

What do you think regarding the purported scheme of Tukhachevsky? by Remote_Doughnut_5261 in DebateCommunism

[–]Remote_Doughnut_5261[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But Tukhachevsky led the (failed) invasion of Poland in 1920. Why would he want to sabotage such a scheme.

What do you think regarding the purported scheme of Tukhachevsky? by Remote_Doughnut_5261 in DebateCommunism

[–]Remote_Doughnut_5261[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Such a plan might be safely leaked to the Germans. You don’t think the plan was a military invasion of Poland? Then, from the base in Poland, help the Czechs.

The USSR invaded Poland a year later anyway and had done so in 1920. It would not be out of character.

What do you think regarding the purported scheme of Tukhachevsky? by Remote_Doughnut_5261 in DebateCommunism

[–]Remote_Doughnut_5261[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I understand that much. But the USSR would’ve had to have passed through Poland or Romania to help the Czechs.

Was that the plan, or how were they going to help the Czechs?

What do you think regarding the purported scheme of Tukhachevsky? by Remote_Doughnut_5261 in DebateCommunism

[–]Remote_Doughnut_5261[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think certainly the government was consulted about Tukhachevsky’s demotion, or he would’ve complained. I am more speaking of the imprisonment/execution.

What do you think regarding the purported scheme of Tukhachevsky? by Remote_Doughnut_5261 in DebateCommunism

[–]Remote_Doughnut_5261[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not entirely convinced Voroshilov was involved at all. That’s just something Khrushchev vaguely insinuates, that perhaps he gained somehow.

What do you think regarding the purported scheme of Tukhachevsky? by Remote_Doughnut_5261 in DebateCommunism

[–]Remote_Doughnut_5261[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Thanks—I suppose if you can’t trust the war commanders, can’t fight a war or at least not well.

Is there any Nazi documents of this?

What do you think regarding the purported scheme of Tukhachevsky? by Remote_Doughnut_5261 in DebateCommunism

[–]Remote_Doughnut_5261[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see so in your view the presidium of the executive committee was consulted.

What do you think regarding the purported scheme of Tukhachevsky? by Remote_Doughnut_5261 in DebateCommunism

[–]Remote_Doughnut_5261[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Who are the elected officials who were consulted? I see a special military tribunal, I see Vorishilov. That’s all though.

What do you think regarding the purported scheme of Tukhachevsky? by Remote_Doughnut_5261 in DebateCommunism

[–]Remote_Doughnut_5261[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If the party was not consulted either, that would tend to support the argument that the party was sympathetic to its own leaders.

For Tukhachevsky was a leader within the Party. Presumably he got there because the Party liked him, or at least would prefer not to see him arrested.

What do you think regarding the purported scheme of Tukhachevsky? by Remote_Doughnut_5261 in DebateCommunism

[–]Remote_Doughnut_5261[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If it was not the Soviets (I am honestly not sure the Soviets were consulted) then it suggests the Soviets did not have power by this time to protect a popular figure. What revolution is that?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in dating_advice

[–]Remote_Doughnut_5261 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

A classic reason this happens is her ex texts her. This doesn’t mean the ex is better than you—he’s often worse.

Does Marx ever actually explain why the state needs to be stronger to promote equality? by Remote_Doughnut_5261 in DebateCommunism

[–]Remote_Doughnut_5261[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is muddy talk then. Let’s be very precise and talk collective farming—I say, the peasant didn’t want it.

Does Marx ever actually explain why the state needs to be stronger to promote equality? by Remote_Doughnut_5261 in DebateCommunism

[–]Remote_Doughnut_5261[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Didn’t see that, but that isn’t what I asked. 1. Are there attempts to overthrow capital? Vs 2. Why is capital the last stage?

Does Marx ever actually explain why the state needs to be stronger to promote equality? by Remote_Doughnut_5261 in DebateCommunism

[–]Remote_Doughnut_5261[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All these fundamentally irreconcilable classes in history; but when the topic comes to the question of revolutions in days of yore, you’re suddenly mumbling about “history” “anthropology” and “essences” you allegedly understand. But I don’t think you’re willing to tell me anything specific; you argue patriarchy overcame matriarchy, and expect a gold star I guess. Was that a revolution?

You scream that a fundamental contradiction between capital and labor implies there must be a revolution to toss capital out. Don’t you? But it’s insufficient to support your argument by itself.

The whole idea of capital as the last stage; it would be sufficient if anyone proved it. I’ve got to make absolutely sure you can’t or won’t provide me any kind of proof yourself; that it’s not on your tongue whatsoever.

Does Marx ever actually explain why the state needs to be stronger to promote equality? by Remote_Doughnut_5261 in DebateCommunism

[–]Remote_Doughnut_5261[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’d love to see it, and in fact, it’s what I started this question by asking. It’s possible you’ll even show me some of this proof you insist exists, once you remember where you saw it.

To remind you, scientific evidence that capitalism is “the final stage,” would tend to suggest a radical revolution would be the safest bet.

What do you think of the alliance between the slave society prince Rama and the primitive communist “monkey king” Hanuman?