It’s really suspect how specific democrats proposals are. It’s either “We were in complete control of the government and this is the only concession we could get for giving all of your taxes to the MIC” or “We made this plan up because it applies to nobody”.

That was Mao’s problem tho right? He didn’t liquidate the landlords but instead allowed them to form a counter revolution.

Him going back to this well every election year has to be intentional lol

Ian Miles Cheong walked so could run

it’s actually really easy for them, because they’re so bereft of intellectual rigor and honesty, and the cloud-like consistency of their idealism so unfettered by any material reality; context; or need for honesty and internal consistency, that none of these things actually create cognitive dissonance in them to have to confront and contort around in the first place. Their cognitive stride does not stutter or even notice the incomprehensibility and self-refuting in the garbage they say, because they don’t in reality possess a methodological framework for their thinking which requires it. And if pressed too hard toward Our God’s Green Planet Earth on their own statements and beliefs, they inevitably either:

• deflect: ( “but 100 gorillion vuvuzela ifone!” | “X fallacy!!” | “Yeah well every country does bad things” | “that sounds good on paper but [status-quo reinforcing trope]” | “You say Y movement/country did good thing or has lesson to teach, but Y country/movement [Imperialist or actual Nazi propaganda or half-understood historical circumstance learned from a youtube video or mid-argument-wikipedia-scan]” | “you’re just a [thought-terminating juvenile insult ie. ‘tankie/bot/social credit/wumao/putin asset’ etc.]” | and so on )

• project/accuse: ( “not voting for Kamala means you want trump to win/support fascism!” | “so you’re saying [Z outragious hypothetical that no one, in fact, said]” | “you think you speak for A,B,C, and treat them like a monolith!” then talking about the ‘international community’ or what ‘people who really lived under communism think,’ etc. | [baseless accusation of being an advocate for/denialist of some terrible thing] | and so on )

• or otherwise 'indicate that the time for conversation has passed’.

.

It is Marxists who have to struggle against cognitive dissonance when holding or confronting contradictory ideas. Due to having our conceptions actually be necessarily rooted in material reality, and there existing analytical criticality in the foundation of the methodological framework of the marxist worldview.

It’s from this that they derive their ability to seemingly-endlessly exhaust us and wear us down jumping all over the place with no rhyme or reason expecting us to slog through the 50 different ways the things they said are wrong or inapplicable, without ever engaging materially and critically with the things we ourselves say. There’s no compulsion or need within them to chew on new information and how it jives with their preconceptions, particularly when they are still benefiting, or at least not sufficiently crushed by their material conditions to have any incentive to change their minds and seek alternatives to smug status-quo-reinforcing.

It is also why the revolution can’t be built from propaganda alone, but from having the agitation and education already un-ignorably there loudly and vigorously critiquing all that is happening and will happen out of all that has happened, laying bare the mechanisms and consequences of maintaining the current way of things better and clearer than our opportunist and fascist opponents, at the same time as (and alongside) organizing and safeguarding better than them those alternatives and solutions our propaganda agitates for; so that when lived political experience and concrete material reality of their conditions and station in a system which only tolerates them insofar as they are needed as a class of laborers kicks their face in, they need only turn away from the boot to see the ways in which we were and are right, and are and have been struggling for what is right; to from there, having been brought back to reality by the tightening crunch of structures in which even their vaporous idealism can’t escape its own reckoning, be in their masses obligated to move toward either active support for or passive sympathetic neutrality toward the communists; or otherwise for those among them who it applies, drop the mask of having been anything but a fascist-in-waiting and so lose the protection of the shell-game deniability that they previously so enjoyed.

Or you’re just jealous of Vaush

who have not missed rent in the last two years

Come the fuck on. What in the hell kind of means tested bullshit is this?

So funneling money to local government jobs stacked with friends and relatives of the DNC? What else is new?

Damn, that’s so radical! No wonder everyone’s calling her a communist.

Is that really the shit that republicans froth at the mouth over?

This shit sucks lmao

Remove tax benefits for corporations that buy single family homes to rent

Wait are we actually encouraging this specifically right now? Even libs know its contributing to the housing crisis.

I believe in this context he quoted something Marx wrote about supporting “revolutionary parties in Bourgeoisie elections” and either missed the “revolutionary” part or he claimed the Democrats to be revolutionary.

He took a quote about Marx supporting Communists running in Bourgeoisie elections and twisted it to support voting for Bourgeoisie parties.

it came to me in a dream

You’re assuming he is being intellectually honest and actually believes this.

The fact that he provided zero quotes to back up his claims about this, given that he positioned himself as having read these figures works thoroughly, says it all.

Three million new homes!*

*at $1,000,000 each.

a badly written one too

I like to believe he is, he’s like the opposite of the Jackson Hinkle op, one is for chud-adjacent, the other is for libs

That’s one time only

You beat me to it 😞

I don’t have one for Mao and Lenin.