Understanding the Liberal Mindset

[steenkh]

Karl Marx himself said the Soviet government wasn't truly communist. And neither did its puppet states or China.

How did he do this? Through a psychic medium?

 

[acbytesla]

Revolutionary Communism is necessarily dictatorial. Dictatorships are systemically corrupt in ways that liberal democracies are not.

Again, help me understand the blind spot in the liberal mindset, about revolutionary communism.

I find it interesting how you label it "revolutionary." There could easily be a communist democracy. These labels don't really work. They are far to broad in scope and aren't really related.

 

[theprestige]

I find it interesting how you label it "revolutionary." There could easily be a communist democracy. These labels don't really work. They are far to broad in scope and aren't really related.

Oh? How so?

 

[Emily's Cat]

What? What are you talking about? You're ignorance is showing.

Your inability to make the connection does not indicate ignorance on my part.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Yes but it's not that they are "leftist" it's that they are authoritarian or even totalitarian.

Are you asserting that communism is not left wing? The very leftmost possible of left wing structures?

Authoritarianism is orthogonal to left-right.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Are you asserting that communism is not left wing? The very leftmost possible of left wing structures?

Authoritarianism is orthogonal to left-right.

FYI... I find it interesting that in about 25 years of taking the Political Compass test, I've hardly moved at all. I remain slightly left, slightly libertarian, but predominantly moderate.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Exactly. Her analogy about flowers deliberately ignores the point. All those communist countries were corrupt authoritarian regimes before they were communist. Every one. So clearly, the corruption is unrelated to the economic system.

Not a single communist country was ever not corrupt.

I don't think it's true to say that Cuba and Venezuela were corrupt authoritarian regimes before becoming communist. It seems more like corrupt authoritarians used the promise of a communist utopia in order to install their corrupt communist regime.

 

[Emily's Cat]

you are extremely naïve.

Companies commit crimes ALL THE TIME.
Almost all of the commit wage theft.
All producing pollution violate environmental regulations.
Literally always, companies have formed Cartels when convenient.
And you think that someone showing up with a piece of paper from the government will make them change their ways?

I don't think sending the army is going to fix it. Regulations, fines, assessments, etc. seem to have worked fairly well... at least when the government was functioning properly rather than being driven by corporate interests.

Making MORE of a government that is driven by corporate interests doesn't seem like a reasonable approach to reducing corporate overreach to me.

guess you think we should get rid of all Cops and Courts, too?

Absolutely not. That's a ridiculous, reckless, and antisocial idea.

come on, no one is that clueless.
you just like the idea of companies and the rich exploiting everyone else.

Why do you think that you just saying ◊◊◊◊ you've made up is a reasonable way to engage in discussion?

 

[Emily's Cat]

The main thing I don't understand about the liberal mindset - or at least the left-leaning/progressive mindset - is this constant knee-jerk impulse to defend Revolutionary Communism.

They're enamored of revolution. The communism is incidental - if you want a revolution you have to at least pretend you have something better to put in place than what we've currently got, otherwise you can't get the glorious revolution off the ground!

 

[Emily's Cat]

Not nearly as much as rightists do.

I would be surprised to find a rightist who loves leftist totalitarianism.

 

[acbytesla]

Not a single communist country was ever not corrupt.

I don't think it's true to say that Cuba and Venezuela were corrupt authoritarian regimes before becoming communist. It seems more like corrupt authoritarians used the promise of a communist utopia in order to install their corrupt communist regime.

Nonsense.

Cuba was corrupt as hell under Batista .
As for Venezuela, you would have to go back to Rafael Caldera for a right wing government. He didn't have a reputation for being corrupt. But his government had massive corruption scandals.

 

[acbytesla]

I would be surprised to find a rightist who loves leftist totalitarianism.

No, they like right wing totalitarianism.

 

[acbytesla]

Oh? How so?

Because they don't. It's painting with too broad a brush. The labels are almost meaningless. Left Right, Conservative Liberal labels mean almost nothing.

 

[jimbob]

Are you asserting that communism is not left wing? The very leftmost possible of left wing structures?

Authoritarianism is orthogonal to left-right.

No. I'm saying that it's the fact that it's extreme and authoritarian that is the important thing. An example would be North Vs South Vietnam, where the South was more corrupt than the North, and according to a memo to the President written by a civilian advisor and senior officer, John Paul Van, the North Vietnamese were more in line with the American dream and values. Because it was less corrupt than the South (which wasn't a high bar).

Similarly, it's possible to argue that Castro was better than Batista as far as corruption was concerned.

Those are cases of authoritarian right wing governments being overthrown by authoritarian left wing governments but which were still probably less corrupt.


Then you have socialists who were overthrown in coups, like Allende who was almost certainly less corrupt than Pinochet. And certainly less murderous.

It's not the "left" part that is the root of the corruption, it's the authoritarian part.

I do disagree with some posters here in that I cannot envision a regime that follows Communist ideology without being inherently vulnerable to corruption because of the way the ideology demands for resources to be allocated. But equally far right regimes are inherently vulnerable to corruption because of the way that resources are allocated in such regimes.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

I don't think sending the army is going to fix it. Regulations, fines, assessments, etc. seem to have worked fairly well... at least when the government was functioning properly rather than being driven by corporate interests.

Making MORE of a government that is driven by corporate interests doesn't seem like a reasonable approach to reducing corporate overreach to me.

Absolutely not. That's a ridiculous, reckless, and antisocial idea.

Why do you think that you just saying ◊◊◊◊ you've made up is a reasonable way to engage in discussion?

look, you are either being dishonest - to yourself and us, or you just haven't thought about this at all.

the current State, which I assume you think is too big, does not have the manpower to:

- investigate and enforce food safety in all restaurants
- investigate and enforce food safety at all food production sites
- investigate and enforce major tax evasion and fraud
- investigate and enforce any environmental regulations, really - they need investigative journalists to do most of the work

and so on...

What is your solution to this that does not involve a lot more investigators, lawyers and judges?

 

[jimbob]

I would be surprised to find a rightist who loves leftist totalitarianism.

Not at the same time, but there are quite a few examples of people who have gone from one to the other. The horseshoe theory seems to be a thing. Some personalities seem like certainty in their answers and have black and white thinking. Not in one person but a famous British example would be the Mitford Sisters where two became fascists (well full on Nazi in the case of Unity) and one became a Communist.

In individual people, many "tankies" went from supporting a vile totalitarianin regime of the Soviet Union to supporting a vile kleptocratic authoritarian regime or Putin's Russia (by way of denying the Bosnian genocide). This happened at an institutional level with many of the staff at "Living Marxism" magazine staying as it became "Spiked" magazine.

To me, I think it's the certainty of simple answers that attracts some personalities and they almost don't care what the answers are as long as there is a clear answer.

 

[jimbob]

This is the conversation

A lot of leftists seem to really like the idea of leftist totalitarianism.

And @arthwollipot was very precise in his meaning

Not nearly as much as rightists do.

I read that as "many rightists like the bogeyman of left-wing authoritarianism because they then can conflate Communism and Socialism, or liberalism with so-called 'leftism', which is handy and which can be seen in some answers in this thread"

I would be surprised to find a rightist who loves leftist totalitarianism.

No, they like right wing totalitarianism.

 

[arthwollipot]

I read that as "many rightists like the bogeyman of left-wing authoritarianism because they then can conflate Communism and Socialism, or liberalism with so-called 'leftism', which is handy and which can be seen in some answers in this thread"

That's exactly what I meant.

 

[theprestige]

Right, so a lot of leftists seem to like the idea of leftist authoritarianism.

 

[jimbob]

Right, so a lot of leftists seem to like the idea of leftist authoritarianism.

If you go far enough left, then yes, of course. But not most socialists, let alone liberals.

And I would question how many those actually are. And the proportion of those on the left who are authoritarians is probably pretty small, especially in the US compared to, say, right wing authoritarians in the US. Or even right wing authoritarians who are in government in the US.