∞🏳️‍⚧️Edie [it/it/its/its/itself, she/her/her/hers/herself, fae/faer/faer/faers/faerself, love/love/loves/loves/loveself, des/pair, null/void, none/use name]

  We are sometimes inclined, I think unwisely, to treat democracy and dictatorship as two mutually exclusive terms, when in actual fact they may often represent two aspects of the same system of government. For example, if we turn to the Encyclopedia Britannica, to the article dealing with “Democracy,” we read: “Democracy is that form of government in which the people rules itself, either directly, as in the small city-states of Greece, or through representatives.”
  But the same writer goes on to say this: “All the people in the city-state did not have the right to participate in government, but only those who were citizens, in the legal and original sense. Outside this charmed circle of the privileged were the slaves, who had no voice whatever in the making of the laws under which they toiled. They had no political and hardly any civil rights; they were not ‘people.’ Thus the democracy of the Greek city-state was in the strict sense no democracy at all.”
  The Greek city-state has been cited time and again by historians as the birthplace of democracy. And yet, on reading the Encyclopedia Britannica, we find that in fact this was a democracy only for a “charmed circle of the privileged,” while the slaves, who did the work of the community, “had no voice whatever in the making of the laws under which they toiled.”
  The classical example of democracy was, then, a democracy only for certain people. For others, for those who did the hard work of the community, it was a dictatorship. At the very birthplace of democracy itself we find that democracy and dictatorship went hand in hand as two aspects of the same political system. To refer to the “democracy” of the Greek city-state without saying for whom this democracy existed is misleading. To describe the democracy of the Greek city-state without pointing out that it could only exist as a result of the toil of the slaves who “had no political and hardly any civil rights” falsifies the real history of the origin of democracy.
  Democracy, then, from its origin, has not precluded the simultaneous existence of dictatorship. The essential question which must be asked, when social systems appear to include elements both of democracy and dictatorship, is, “for whom is there democracy?” and “over whom is there a dictatorship?”

—Pat Sloan, in the Introduction to Soviet Democracy

https://main.un.org/securitycouncil/en/content/current-members

It’s not about being “extreme” (and liberalism is plenty extreme, see books like The Jakarta Method, Killing Hope, and Liberalism: A Counter-History), it’s about liberalism being pro-capitalism and therefore Liberals not leftists.

dbzero blocks grad.

Step 1: Search “Famines in Russia”
Step 2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droughts_and_famines_in_Russia_and_the_Soviet_Union

136+ million

Edit: wait your saying Soviet Russia which means only the RSFSR

Ah, that’s right. Very hard to tell, but in one of the photos of him it does seem to have a hammer and sickle on it.

Taking political science courses in university

Ah, that explains it

No it isn’t. Socialism has a state, only communism doesn’t. No matter how you define state.

Isn’t it interesting how this version of him has many medals, yet he is usually only pictured sporting one medal: Hero of the Soviet Union

From Teheran to Potsdam to Berlin

The guy is “Michael Does Life”

We’re not creating these, we are using words to describe how things are.

100%^[1] of new^[2] IUDs^[3] in China^[4] are being forced^[5] on Uyghurs^[6]

Also: I always hear Marxists refer to “socialist states” as if non of them ever reached statelessness. I wonder why.

It’s good to be curious! Marxism posits that classlessness and (therefore) statlessness can only be reached once all is Socialist.

And trying to make a stateless country while half the world is capitalist and you are under constant threat of invasion and CIA sabotage, while the (former) capitalists are working to reintroduce capitalism, is at best foolish, and at worst sabotage, betrayal of the people.

Exactly. Trump has supporters. Putin has supporters. Modi has supporters. Why wouldn’t Xi? The people that dislike him might not want to sit down with him, that doesnt make it staged.

The first wave one is of course a Capitalist.

Монархист | Кадет
Эсер | Меньшевик

Monarkhist | Kadet
Eser | Men’shevik

szmer.info has defederated from lemmygrad. lemmus is never going to see your comment.

I think it’s Indonesia, not Monaco. The flags are very similar, but the Indonesian one is slightly lighter red.

Homophobia/misogyny into a word that is removed, really? Do better.