Anonymous #2 10w

Those aren’t cons…

4

Anonymous ___joker__ 10w

Okay what would you say then?

1

Anonymous ___joker__ 10w

Lmao this is why it’s hard to argue against this bc you’re arguing with someone’s concept of a non existent thing while you have to defend a real thing. It’s like arguing with someone why unicorns are worse or better than horses.

1

Anonymous #2 10w

For example, a con of the current US liberal democracy is that the ability to pass legislation is slow and cumbersome.

5

Anonymous #2 10w

It has to be real and tangible. Saying something is hard to accomplish isn’t a real con…damn near every form of government is a huge struggle. Achieving fascism is a struggle, but the real con is clearly its lack of freedoms and alienation of certain groups of people due to the fact that fascism always requires an enemy to operate.

1

Anonymous ___joker__ 10w

Okay so what would you say are explicit cons of socialism and communism? You didn’t answer my question but you are positioning yourself as being able to answer it better 😭

1

Anonymous #2 10w

I’m not going to rattle off answers. I’m giving you a template. If all you can give is just mantras on how work is exploitation and seizing the means, then it’s hard to take you seriously. It shows you haven’t thought about the system you want to implement. It has nothing to do with communism and everything to do with being reactionary.

1

Anonymous ___joker__ 10w

We need to have an organized, revolutionary class that is able to revolt and abolish the private property that we are being exploited on. History proves that this transformation is not something that the ruling class will let happen easily/peacefully. We have to switch the priority of the system to be on utility rather than profit, meaning we produce as Marx said “to each according to their ability, to each according to their need”. The system in place should then be maintained through democracy

1

Anonymous ___joker__ 10w

Being a communist is the exact opposite of being a reactionary, as we address systemic problems as being precisely that- problems that arise from the capitalist system of private property and worker exploitation. Reactionaries are fascists and nationalists that try hard to preserve and defend the current system

1

Anonymous #4 10w

I certainly understand where you are coming from. However “Dictatorship” of the proletariat has a much different definition than a straight up dictatorship. It is more an acknowledgment of the fact that the bourgeoisie will try to claw back their position as capitalists if left unchecked.

1