Well, USAmerican govt’s propaganda(aimed to keep their people misdirected and supportive of invasions like that in Iraq) targets Stalin and other figures who had either looked at economic systems beyond capitalism or opposed USAmerican imperialism(directed by their ruling class), right?

Same for Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Fidel, Che and even Nelson Mandela.

https://time.com/5338569/nelson-mandela-terror-list/
The USSR and Cuba had aided anti-apartheid struggles in Africa.

Video snippets of Mandela talking about it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Je5R5E8SOSw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7cZBg4c4W4

Also, not saying that all those people were perfect, but the reason for the hate does not seem to be the imperfections, but them opposing or being threats to the interests of the USAmerican ruling class.

For most folks in the west, stalin is considered to be a brutal authoritarian dictator who made a deal with the nazis to carve up europe into spheres of influence.

Do they not know of how the western leaders enabled the Nazis to carve up Czechoslovakia and opposed USSR’s call for a united front against Nazis?

The Molotov-Ribbentrop non-aggression pact, USSR happened after the Munich agreement where Britain, France and Italy came together to allow the Nazis and Poland to annex Czechoslovakia.

And if you think there were no agreements before:
1934 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German–Polish_declaration_of_non-aggression
1935 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-German_Naval_Agreement
1938 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement
1939 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov–Ribbentrop_Pact

And the next para from the text you quoted goes into the reasons, right? Searched with the text you shared and got this:

The point is that Marxism and anarchism are built up on entirely different principles, in spite of the fact that both come into the arena of the struggle under the flag of socialism. The cornerstone of anarchism is the individual, whose emancipation, according to its tenets, is the principal condition for the emancipation of the masses, the collective body. According to the tenets of anarchism, the emancipation of the masses is impossible until the individual is emancipated. Accordingly, its slogan is: “Everything for the individual.” The cornerstone of Marxism, however, is the masses, whose emancipation, according to its tenets, is the principal condition for the emancipation of the individual. That is to say, according to the tenets of Marxism, the emancipation of the individual is impossible until the masses are emancipated. Accordingly, its slogan is: “Everything for the masses.”

https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1906/12/x01.htm

How do you see his critique? Do you think that anarchism cares less about wider social emancipation?
I don’t have much experience with literature on Anarchism(or Marxism, but relatively better there), so would be cool to know your opinions on it

Aah.

Posing a question on this same logic(I don’t agree with this, just asking to see whether you view it similarly. Also, assuming that you are USAmerican):
Are the Southern states of USAmerica under imperialism now?
Or is imperialism cool when it’s the Northern USAmerican states doing imperialism on the Confederate States?

Doesn’t Taiwan call itself RoC, while China call itself PRoC?
So they both are having claims, right?
The communists won in the civil war with wider support and the KMT escaped to Taiwan.

And atleast some people on both sides seem to be thinking about reunification. I think the communists are more correct, but ultimately let the people there decide on how they reunify.

But your leftists would need to try elections as a way to raise points that unite the people and check for support, right?

Though, structural changes via elections alone may be sabotaged. People like your current Pres or others may not respect election results if a decent left wins and tries to restructure and limit your issues like lobbying. So you’d need to be ready for that too.

Are you from USAmerica? If yes, you do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

If not, are they in this list:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_labour#By_country

Not really

We have more tech n all, right?

Who are they? I have heard of centre-left folk like Bernie Sanders and AOC. Any Marxist leader?

I think they seem as leftists only in the context of America

I’m from India, we have a Fabian socialist influence(but we have a RW party in power here for over a decade now) and from the net your available main party options seem to be centre-left to Right.

And you have no real economical left too, right? Bernie Sanders who was bit left of centre-left was restricted by his party, right?

Is it a big enough concern to not go in that direction?

Even if it can’t be 100%, wouldn’t 99% or even 90% be good, right?

Or is it a theoretical question?

If you are USAmerican, didn’t your govt actively kill/silence/sabotage the leftists?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Hampton
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio

You have no successful left because it gets actively killed by your govt. Your govt is even planning to send its military/national guard into the cities in your country where “liberals” are in power, right?

And regarding doubts on the claim on Xinjiang pushed by your govt, it looks like them manufacturing consent against their enemies rather than caring about the issue, because they are actively supporting genocide in Gaza.
With the history on the invasion of Iraq, why wouldn’t people doubt it?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_testimony

Democratic dictatorship of the Ultra wealthy, Capitalists etc. vs Democratic dictatorship of the Common people?

genocide

Wasn’t there a pic of Xinjiang and Gaza being shared to show that this was western exaggeration and blame shifting?

How does someone get funded by your cabal?

manipulate Tibet

Was not Tibet having theocracy and serfdom?

Uyghurs

Who were the folk mainly raising the point of Uyghurs tho?
The white supremacist govts who are enabling and engaging in the Genocide in Palestine?

Like, for MLs this would seem like anti-vaxx conspiracies, right?

Taiwan’s independence

Both of them are named Republics of China, right?
Their own people also seem to wish for reunification, right? Tho, they obviously seem to have dissimilar opinions on which govt they should come under after unification.

Their country bans abortion, but the term authoritarian is meant for countries outside the Western Imperial order.
Their police murders a black man by kneeling on his neck, but is it not authoritarian?
Their secret police is rounding up undesirables and displacing humans they term as aliens.

Lies, Injustice and the neolib way!

I recently got to know of the info from reddit that Black people did not have proper voting rights in USAmerica till the 1960’s:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1960

So, technically my country, India, is an older advanced democracy than USAmerica. That’s nice.

We need more red colour in the post modernity memes

Pizza hut commercial when?

The Bhaghat Singh profile picture is quite awesome

Would that actually do anything? There are allegations that he was an intelligence asset or so?
Or would they sacrifice Doland to avoid further investigation and others getting caught?

I often ask for source.
And sometimes I find that it’s headlines that are sensationalist or a specific interpretation of something.

Like, someone claims ‘XYZ believes/supports in ABC’, often to paint XYZ badly. I ask for source on it and they give an article where the XYZ is talking about something related to ABC or talking with someone related to ABC

I also ask for source, because of that.

As an example:
I had heard lots of anti-socialist stuff like the Molotov-Ribbentrop non-aggression pact, USSR invaded Poland etc. After joining lemmy and some reddit subs, I came to know about how the USSR was one of the last countries to create a non-aggression pact and other countries like Britain, France already had pacts and agreements. And that it happened after the Munich agreement where Britain, France and Italy came togethe to allow the Nazis annexation of Czechoslovakia.

I also learnt about how Poland invaded Czechoslovakia together with Nazi Germany and also denied USSR’s request asking permission for passage of its army to Czechoslovakia against the Nazi invasion.

So, I understand the value of asling for source and getting the context.

I do try to share sources as possible too. Though, it’s mostly wikipedia articles and may not be seen as a primary sources, but still.

1934 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German–Polish_declaration_of_non-aggression
1935 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-German_Naval_Agreement
1938 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement
1939 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov–Ribbentrop_Pact

So everyone had pacts and agreements with everyone, but when taken out of context and presented to denigrate, it has an effect on some.

So, generally I ask for source or context for most things