Deleted
Well your take upsets me. It is wrong, dangerous and like all liberalism should be called out.
Global revolution. What a flippant, ridiculous response. What a myopic response. That the only things worth doing are those that immediately smash that communism button, that global communism button and if things don’t do that they’re not worth doing. People with that thinking have been backstabbing and sabotaging real gains for the proletariat for a hundred years. You want to leap to the finish line but that’s not how it works. You want magic not Marxism, you want tolerance for counter-revolution, for the people who commit genocides, who subjugate the working class, who commit a thousand horrible, mind-tearing horrors upon humanity under their system.
They had made their bed, let them reap the consequences. My pity is for the workers.
Idealism is an infection you must fight. If you want to object to the idea that China needs this info, go ahead, I agree that’s debatable though I think no modern spy agency is ever going to say “too much info” in the computerized age where plotting networks of people and interactions, metadata is the primary way of understanding and finding targets of real interest (NSA for example mainly scrapes and saves metadata, not content, but relationships, times, people, places). But that’s not what you said, what you said was that snitching was bad. Steps, process. What are they? What is historical development? What is building things slowly but surely? What is guarding the revolution? What is countering liberalism at every step and why must we do that? Why must we not allow a bit of liberalism to remain in stock people like you claim, what harm can it cause. An individual is only part of a group that becomes a whole. An individual liberal is not a threat, a group of liberals are but one cannot arrest just the group while leaving the individuals on their way, one cannot surveil the group without the individuals.
How does revisionism and counter-revolution start anyways? It starts with making little allowances, with giving an inch, with saying “oh what’s the harm of this person or that” until they’re everywhere and until the structure is rotten and the USSR’s collapse is what you get.
Mao’s “Combat Liberalism” has some good thoughts on this subject.
Well your take upsets me. It is wrong, dangerous and like all liberalism should be called out.
I made a general post against snitching, you then went on and made a bunch of assumptions:
Why then do you hate China? Why do you hate an in-power communist party?
That’s a leap, isn’t it. I hate snitching therefore I hate China and its communist party. lol what?
Global revolution. What a flippant, ridiculous response.
That’s what you said!
Do you think a revolution will succeed or endure in the face of external attempts at overthrow, pressure, etc without snitching?
You didn’t specify which revolution, so I assumed you’re talking about a global revolution.
Then you go on to make more assumptions:
You want magic not Marxism, you want tolerance for counter-revolution, for the people who commit genocides, who subjugate the working class, who commit a thousand horrible, mind-tearing horrors upon humanity under their system.
I want all that because I think snitching is bad?
You don’t want a discussion, and you’re not answering sincerely. You saw an opportunity to virtue signal and rant about all sorts of things that have nothing to do with me or what I said.
You don’t want a discussion, and you’re not answering sincerely. You saw an opportunity to virtue signal and rant about all sorts of things that have nothing to do with me or what I said.
Bet you that person couldn’t even organize the documents on their desk, let alone a global revolution. That person sounds like a future George Orwell to me not gonna lie… Or maybe they’re just some edgy 15 year old genzdong’er debatebro
