ImOnADiet🇵🇸 (He/Him)

he/him, 20’s, like games, reading, anime

  • 0 Posts
  • 68 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: May 15th, 2023

help-circle
  • Absolutely insane, please elaborate why you think lemmygrad (which had fucking 300 active users over a period of 6 (six) months before the reddit logo fiasco, and was founded in 2019, 3(three) years before all the propganda wars truly started in earnest) is a psyop and not hexbear which is infinitely more active and posts more about Ukraine and the war than we do (and I want the minimum amount of sourcing like I put into my comment. Like, have you ever looked at their news megathread???

    Regardless, maybe you don’t understand my claim. I think you developed these opinions of hexbear after they started shitting on you, which my reasoning is that you shit on lemmygrad for something that should be equally if not more applied to hexbear if you did more than 5 minutes of looking around. My point of linking that comment is that you never displayed any disdain for hexbear on a public comment before their users started shitting on you







  • I fucking love comments like this from people who have no clue that hexbear is mostly ideologically alligned with lemmygrad and then get dunked on for it. Here’s a quote for you from a super scary man named Mao that you should learn to take to heart so you don’t get dunked on like this (emphasis mine):

    I. NO INVESTIGATION, NO RIGHT TO SPEAK

    Unless you have investigated a problem, you will be deprived of the right to speak on it. Isn’t that too harsh? Not in the least. When you have not probed into a problem, into the present facts and its past history, and know nothing of its essentials, whatever you say about it will undoubtedly be nonsense. Talking nonsense solves no problems, as everyone knows, so why is it unjust to deprive you of the right to speak? Quite a few comrades always keep their eyes shut and talk nonsense, and for a Communist that is disgraceful. How can a Communist keep his eyes shut and talk nonsense?

    It won’t do!

    It won’t do!

    You must investigate!

    You must not talk nonsense!












  • Well you really weren’t having a conversation in good faith, dumb of me to expect better I guess, I’m a tankie after all

    I’m not going to keep talking to someone who refuses to admit that people use extreme hyperbole. I’m not going to sit here and fucking tell you another 30 times that is obviously not a fucking plan of action that user wants to commit.

    You also totally sidestepped my quote, which wasn’t really about his little comment. it was to explain why I believe violence will be necessary to take power, my belief in which this quote was your response

    And this doesn’t start your spider sense tingling that maybe you’re on the wrong side of things? Holy shit, do you do even half a minute of introspection? I’m sure fascists would say the same thing. Are they also justified in violence

    I’m not going to keep talking in hypotheticals. this is debate pervertry of the worst kind, I’m a marxist we believe in keeping things grounded in the real world, which is why I linked you that quote. I have actual hard fucking evidence (of which that quote is literally just the smallest part, we could sit here for fucking days going over everything the United States alone has done to maintain power) that the capitalist world order will resort to extreme violence greater than any socialist state has ever dreamed of using to kill all who stand in their way of profit.

    I dont give a shit about redeeming myself, I didn’t advocate violence against you in the slightest, but I’m saying how could you believe I’m telling the truth? I’m trying to follow the rules of this instance, so if I were to answer that you do deserve violence I would be breaking the rules, why do you keep concern trolling like this

    Anyways I’ll let you have the last word, done engaging after this



  • Nazi blames the Jewish people for all the wrongs in the world

    please for the love of god stop equating political ideology and ethnicity, absolutely baffling behavior. I would ask you something about Nazi’s but I’m going to tiptoe around the .world rules here

    And this doesn’t start your spider sense tingling that maybe you’re on the wrong side of things? Holy shit, do you do even half a minute of introspection?

    More than you would think I bet. do you think I just stumbled onto these beliefs happily? I’ve never even been in anything as violent as even a fucking fist fight in my life, I wish more than anything that it didn’t have to be this way. Here’s a quote from the Jakarta Method that sums up why I believe this quite nicely:

    Please read long quote below (emphasis mine)

    This was another very difficult question I had to ask my interview subjects, especially the leftists from Southeast Asia and Latin America. When we would get to discussing the old debates between peaceful and armed revolution; between hardline Marxism and democratic socialism, I would ask: “Who was right?”

    In Guatemala, was it Árbenz or Che who had the right approach? Or in Indonesia, when Mao warned Aidit that the PKI should arm themselves, and they did not? In Chile, was it the young revolutionaries in the MIR who were right in those college debates, or the more disciplined, moderate Chilean Communist Party?

    Most of the people I spoke with who were politically involved back then believed fervently in a nonviolent approach, in gradual, peaceful, democratic change. They often had no love for the systems set up by people like Mao. But they knew that their side had lost the debate, because so many of their friends were dead. They often admitted, without hesitation or pleasure, that the hardliners had been right. Aidit’s unarmed party didn’t survive. Allende’s democratic socialism was not allowed, regardless of the détente between the Soviets and Washington.

    Looking at it this way, the major losers of the twentieth century were those who believed too sincerely in the existence of a liberal international order, those who trusted too much in democracy, or too much in what the United States said it supported, rather than what it really supported – what the rich countries said, rather than what they did.

    That group was annihilated.

    • Vincent Bevins, The Jakarta Method

    Do you think it’s wrong that the ““status quo”” uses violence?

    I don’t oppose the status quo because it uses violence, I oppose it because it uses it against the working class, communists, minorities, really anybody who threatens the status quo. I would support the status quo if it was using that violence to protect the working class, communists, minorities, so that we will one day achieve a communist society where the state no longer even exists to use this violence. As long as the state exists, someone is going to use the violence it holds, and I want that violence to serve the interests of the working class, not the likes of billionaires who are currently hurtling us towards manman climate change disaster, if not extinction.

    “ebil tankies”

    I threw in the part about evil tankies because you seemed to be taking that comment as them seriously 100% wanting every single neoliberal to die and that there’s no hyperbole there, which is very consistent with what people who throw around the term tankie say, they say we’re the scum of the Earth who just find joy in murdering puppies or something. Seemed like where the conversation was going, forgive me, I’ve seen way too many people from .world head down that path so I had my guard up, it’s annoying to have a conversation derailed by it

    tell me if I personally deserve violence.

    I have no clue if you “personally deserve violence”. I don’t really like playing the hypothetical game, and tbh even if I wanted to say so I wouldn’t be able to because of the rules of this instance. If you’re really truly interested in that part of the conversation we could take it somewhere else. I wouldn’t be any more mean than I am now, I reserve that for people who come in to troll on lemmygrad and nazis