• LANIK2000@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    Only if there are no checks and balances. The typical “communist” regimes like Russia and China can hardly be called communist by any definition. Just like nobody would call nazi’s socialist, despite it being in their name (national socialism).

    Fucking “I take all and ya’ll better belive I’ll redistribute favorably or fucking die” is hardly even left. I especially hate when people say “in theory it makes sense, but in reality…”, no it fucking doesn’t even in theory!

    • TimeNaan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      There can be no checks and balances on a state.

      States only act in a way to preserve themselves. If that means by helping the working class - so be it. If it means oppressing the working class - that’s ok too. As long as the structure and elites remain in place.

      Which is why authoritarian state communism always degenerates into a kind of state capitalism where the owner class is the state instead of capitalists. In communism there is no owner class