Absolutely, and despite reporting many of them they seem to stay up.
I think it's pretty ironic that you call others "transphobic" on the basis of them claiming that Hexbear is a trans-positive instance, when in other areas you directly attack trans users' identity and defend chasers as "allies."
This is monstrous levels of transphobia. With "allies" like you, who needs transphobes? You do the work of transphobes for them.
Do some self-crit.
Bukharin was considered "right" from the standpoint of a far-left ideology, as a point of comparison to the standard party line. That's like saying -5 is a positive number because it is closer to positive numbers than -10.
That's a coup, not a revolution, and as such has no real historical examples of representing the interests of the Working Class. The point of revolution is that it is a mass movement of an organized working class, not some random hero commanding the masses into a better existence.
To be clear, If you truly believe lib is a slur, then you also believe "tankie" is a slur but is justified.
Rather than making a silly argument equating pejoratives for political positions being equal to slurs based on immutable characteristics, you could just not do that.
Revolution varies in the quantity of violence required, but requires at minimum threat of violence. You can't have a revolution by asking politiely and tying your hands behind your back.
You'll find a good amount of transphobia on this post too, proving them correct. One user is directly attacking trans users by claiming that the trans user is "faking it" and attacked another user by defending chasers, calling chasers "allies."
It truly depends on your own political views. What do you consider yourself?
What do you believe "leftism" means? I can't see a world where an ideology based on public ownership, collectivization, and working class liberation could be seen not as left.
Do you have a link? Would be interested to see.
I don't really understand what you're getting at here, you're being very vague. I'm a Marxist, I enjoy my time there, I don't really think I can say I share your same views on it.
Defending chasers attacking someone is transphobic, and you need to do some serious self-crit if you consider yourself an ally. However, elsewhere in this thread you are attacking transgender individuals and accusing them of "faking it," so this is a pattern and not a one-off.
Deliberately discounting a transgender person's identity and accusing them of being transphobic is wildly transphobic. With a moderation history like yours though, it seems this is a pattern, where you pretend to be an ally for xyz group and then accuse people from said group of "faking it" if they disagree with you.
You found it, the answer is tribalism.
I don't see how that discounts anything, why would right wingers create a relatively isolated community to read Marxist and Anarchist theory, protect and advocate for trans rights, and frequently pin donation threads for Palestinians? Seems like way too much effort to be ironic, and defederating from other instances would hurt their supposed goal of "trolling."
This is a very bad take. It is well-documented that Hexbear's userbase is around 50% trans, and has a well-developed moderation team in order to protect their userbase. Discounting trans people because they disagree with you politically is in fact transphobia.
You don't think it's important to consider that the specific life expectancy you reported as a cause of Socialism was in-fact during World War II, when the Nazis invaded the Ukrainian SSR (the whole USSR's breadbasket at the time), deliberately starving the populace in an attempt to weaken them? Where the Nazis torched the land they took and destroyed so many buildings that the Soviets were forced to mass produce the "Soviet Bloc" style apartments in order to provide housing after the war? Slavic people were considered genetically inferior by the Nazis and were subject to genocide.
As for the "human waves" tactics, reports of such originate with Americans that went into Russia during the Civil War in order to support the fascist White Army that wished to reinstate the Tsar. Not only is this a dubious source at best, historians agree that during World War II Soviet Tactics were roughly on par with the Nazis. The "Human Waves" myth has always drawn on racism, trying to draw parallels between the asiatic slavic peoples and the idea of the Mongol Horde, a propaganda tactic employed by Goebbels.
There was famine in the USSR, during the 1930s and during World War II. Outside of those periods, food became far more secure over time, as collectivized agriculture was better than the previous system.
As for comparing to thr US, that's akin to comparing a trust fund kid to someone who grew up poor. The United States began the 20th century as one of the most developed countries in the world, while Russia began as a semi-feudal backwater. In the mid 20th century, the US began to profit massively off of World War II, while the Eastern Front saw 80% of the total combat in the entirety of the war. To compare the two directly is just bad science.
As for Marx and Engels, they would see the analytical tools and analysis of Capitalism and classes being used in the Soviet Union and would have generally approved. Today, they'd see the various Marxist states like Cuba, China, and Vietnam learning from the successes and failures of the Soviet Union and likeky approve as well. However, such a thought experiment doesn't mean much, as Marx was no prophet nor a god, just a man who developed a brilliant critique of Capitalism, philosophical framework of Dialectical and Historical Materialism, and broadly described Scientific Socialism as opposed to prior Utopianism.
A bit dishonest to point to the drops in life expectancy and the general 1940s and 1950s period without mentioning World War II, where the Nazis waged a war of extermination and genocide on those they considered genetically inferior, don't you think? Same with comparing a highly developed country that saw no land fighting in World War II to the country devastated the most by it that was a feudal backwater only a couple decades prior when it comes to infant mortality. The bit on literacy is also misleading, the vast majority of all SSRs pre-Socialism were illiterate.
Outside of curiously leaving out World War 2 and the massive devastation it brought (80% of combat in World War 2 was on the Eastern Front), as well as comparing directly to the United States that never saw the same destruction and started the century several laps ahead, your only real criticism was a lack of consumer goods. This is true, light industry was lacking and being closed off from the Global Economy was indeed a contributing factor to its dissolution, but you could have pointed to that honestly.
No, most Marxists don't want to go back in time to the first Socialist state, they would rather learn from what worked and what didn't and be part of building a Communist future.
So you want a bottom-up, loosely organized revolution but don't think it requires any threat of violence to pull off? Has that ever happened anywhere and lasted more than a year or two? Even Anarchists, who espouse decentralization, recognize the necessity of violence in revolution.