• mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Zero time between bolded assertions of misrepresentation… and ‘I bet you also mean Nazis.’

        Nah. I’m describing conversations that pivot like it’s just a word game. ‘We should do a communism.’ ‘That super didn’t work in several example countries.’ ‘They don’t count! That wasn’t true communism.’

        Okay… but they were trying.

        They tried to try communism.

        They had your stated goals… and often your planned methods… and it went a certain way. Why else would an example count? Is this not exactly the criticism y’all do for capitalism, when you say it inevitably tends toward the worst outcomes? You’d never respect some asshole insisting ‘capitalism is only when perfectly informed consumers make rational choices between unlimited options,’ and therefore ‘capitalism has never been tried.’ That inane hair-splitting wouldn’t dispel condemnation of observable problems. They know which countries and systems you’re talking about, when you talk shit about them.

        Y’all know which countries people are talking about, and why. There’s a flag in this image. Picking nits about word choice is not a meaningful defense of what they fucked up, and why.

          • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Right, because you know what people told me, and I don’t. I must never have had these conversations because they’re not what you want to bring up.

            Coupling that with ‘don’t use wrong terminology you didn’t use’ is illustrative.

            none of it was because tools turn people evil if they collectively own them.

            Oh is that all you’re proposing? Is it? Is it, though? Is it really? No further details that might be relevant?

            Do you not feel the slightest tug of cognitive dissonance, scolding someone for not inferring the exact sub-branch they’re allowed to critique, in a one-sentence joke?

              • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                I described conversations I’ve had and your hot take is ‘no you didn’t.’

                If what I say doesn’t matter then you can find someone else to project at.

                  • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Yeah why would a joke concern a related topic instead of absolutely precisely exactly what’s right there in the text, and by in-the-text I mean the fact there’s no text?

                    Nobody ever jokes about things unless they’re categorically opposed.

                    Obviously a meme community should be deadly serious, for scholarly discourse, and also nuh-uh nobody oversteps your position or misuses your rhetoric, never ever. A ghost did it!

                    Yeesh.

        • Gabu@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Imagine having such a tiny, useless brain that you think “hurr durr attempts at communism weren’t successful” is a good argument when we see capitalism failing worldwide.