• Roundcat
    link
    fedilink
    141 year ago

    If following the Marxist definition, I don’t think the end goal of communism is inherently a bad thing. The issue comes from the means of achieving it, and the issue with Marxist-Leninism and Maoism is its tendency towards purity, conformity, compulsory adherence and authoritarianism.

    I think you are right in the sense that because China calls itself communist, people are quick to defend it despite the fact that it’s current political economic system seems to resemble authoritarian capitalism moreso than even Maoism. Then again, North Korea seperated itself from its communist label decades ago, and Russia isn’t even the same political regime it was during the Soviet era, and a lot of self proclaimed communists still jump to their defense.

    I can understand being critical of or even hostile to the United States and other first world capitalist nations, but the enemy of your enemy isn’t always your friend. Otherwise Imperial Japan would’ve been based as fuck even though it raped and enslaved people under the guise of “antiimperialism” and “east Asian co-prosperity.”

    • vlad
      link
      English
      2
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I was wrong to say that the end goal leads to the outcome. What I should have said was that aiming for that end goal has led to the same outcome.

      I think you and I are on the same page regarding this topic though. Maybe a better term would be “authoritarianism”, but then people claim that Communism is not authoritarian, which doesn’t matter because Communism hasn’t ever happened… It’s so easy to loose sight of the problem when focusing on the definitions.

      There’s a song by Living Color called Cult of Personality that fits this well.

      https://youtu.be/7xxgRUyzgs0?si=SH_YZ8_dSwZdjWF-