I would welcome you with mounted cavalry

If I had one.

“We have no choice but to accept fascist policies to prevent fascist policies”

Ha yes, you can just do that. It’s totally not out of reach for all the peoples who have to work 2~3 jobs at once and still can’t save any money because even the basic necessities for survival are sold at extortion prices not to mention possible medical, college debt or mortgages.

You’re confusing private property with personal property. While this is a very common mistake, you can’t claim to have an informed opinion about communism while still making it, it’s 101 level stuff.

Further, you are also making the other very common error of assuming the state is oppressive because it is like some kind of monolith somehow cut off from the rest of society as though the peoples staffing it weren’t as much part of society as everyone else, this is not the case, whether a state apparatus is oppressive and against whom it is oppressive is dictated by the class character of the state, a factor that is systematically neglected by the peoples using variations of “power always corrupt” truisms to “analyze” a state.

tl;dr: you’re knowledge of communism and communist theory and praxis is very surface level at best, go read some reading list from prolewiki’s library, To criticize something you need to know at least the basics of it first.

Least cringe blue MAGA

Yes but not only, small business owners, small landlords and “casual traders” who own some stocks but not enough to be considered rich or have influence in the company the stocks are from are also part of the petty bourgeoisie.

Generally, the petty bourgeoisie are peoples who technically own means of productions and may even have a few employee working for them, but don’t make quite enough from that to not have to work anymore. They are constantly under the threat of being out-competed by larger businesses, especially corporations owned by the high bourgeoisie, and becoming a proletarian.

Basically, they are the subclass at the boundary between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. They are better off than the proletariat and own means of production and private property but are under constant threat to lose these privileges and become part of the proletariat, especially in time of crisis.

They are the source of the overwhelming majority of fascists as I’ve said, because they still benefit from capitalism and generally aspire to become part of the high bourgeoisie even tough they are very much the underdogs. The bourgeois state will intentionally let fascism grow unopposed so that if the bourgeoisie feels their privileges are threatened by working class movements, they can give power to the fascists who will crackdown on the proletariat and protect the capitalist system from being overthrown.

Material analysis is an analysis using the method of dialectical materialism and historical materialism.

To put in in a grossly oversimplified way, one of the most important concepts of dialectical materialism is that ideas aren’t independent from society. Peoples don’t pull ideas out of some Platonist void, their ideas are shaped by and consequences of the society and material conditions they live in.

For example, writing didn’t appear just because some guy one day said “what if we drew funny shapes in clay and pretended the shapes are words?”. When the first human societies started accumulating reserves of food, lumber, domestic animals and materials and to exchange these with other groups of humans, keeping track of everything was becoming a problem. The first writing systems were invented as a way to solve that problem, they figured out that by associating each resource with a symbol they could easily keep track of what they had and how much of it they had.

The same logic apply to fascism. Fascism didn’t appear because some guy woke up one day and decided to be an asshole for no,reason. As the contradictions of capitalism worsened (contradictions are also a concept from dialectical materialism btw), peoples were becoming radicalized against capitalism and the bourgeoisie which created the threat of a potential revolution overthrowing capitalism, in order to protect capitalism from that threat, the petty bourgeoisie tried to hide the class struggle between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat by fabricating a fake struggle against a group of the proletariat (typically a “race”) that they could point to to divert attention from the class struggle.

This is what is meant in this context. Since liberalism is the main ideology of capitalism, when the contradictions of capitalism inevitably makes everything break down, liberals will either be radicalized to the left and stop being liberals, or defend capitalism to the end by slipping more and more to the right until they become indistinguishable from fascists.

Forcible suppression of opposition

Democrats kicked the Party for Socialism and Liberation off the ballot in Georgia already, so while we aren’t all the way there, signs of it are showing up

Don’t forget all the times they broke strikes, sent the cop beat up protesters, arrested peoples who spoke against Israel, etc…

Militarisation of society

Not there yet, sure.

Normalizing wars for resources and geopolitical influence, cohering poor peoples to join the army by having military service be the only way to not fall into decades long crippling debt to pay for college, continuing to throw more and more money at the military industrial complex even though they already give it more than the next 10 biggest military spending combined and justifying it with fearmongering about Russia/China/whatever country they don’t like invading them and their allies. They already seem pretty militaristic to me.

beanis

The more hog you post the more communist you are

Thanks ^[1]

“The evil is gonna step on us, but the lesser evil is also gonna step on us but with clean boots, which is totally better!”

This drawing will never cease to be relevant until the fall of the empire

Like what?

“Fighting back in a way that would actually work is rude, only ineffective bullshit is acceptable”

The exact same thing as all the other blue MAGA s who came here before you.

I don’t agree that most of the Dems think what is happening is okay. I think they are just stuck in the old political mindset that doesn’t work anymore.

It’s undemocratic to arrest peoples who want to undermine democracy? That’s naïve and idealistic at best, a functioning democracy should protect itself from movements that threaten it.

LMAO. Ha yes, the Democrats who didn’t use any if the 8 years of Obama + 4 years of Biden to do any of that will definitely do it next time we promise fr fr this time.

You do know the Democrats have the presidency right now, right? If they were ever planing to do that, or any of the things they promised but never did in the last 20 years for that matter, why aren’t they doing it right now when they already have their candidate in power? Why does it always have to be next time? Because they won’t do any of it ever, that’s why.

They are dangling the carrot in front of your nose to make you move forward without ever intending to actually give it to you. Yet you little donkey, instead of realizing what’s going on, you continue to trust them and go in the direction they point to you election after election.

But keep at it, I’m suuure you’re totally gonna beat the Trump led far right by voting for the party who enable them at every oportunity, normalize and expand their policies, deal with the discontent they cause for them, give free money to them and their buddies and much more.

Okay you are clearly refusing to face facts. Whatever the Dems do, the Reps say ‘they should have done more’. You are fixated on the Dems being the ones signing solely because they are in power when the Reps ENTIRE FUCKING PLATFORM is that Israel needs more support.

None of the facts you presented show that the Republicans would do worse.

Of course they’re saying the Dems aren’t supporting Israel enough, the Reps’ whole electoral strategy is to whine about the Democrats and blame them for everything they think is wrong. Just because they say the Democrats support Israel less than them doesn’t make it true.

Again, the Democrat’s actions show clearly that they are unconditionally supporting the genocide with every resource they have.

You aren’t arguing in good faith

I am though.

I go through every argument you made point by point, and explain point by point in detail why they don’t convince me, the problems I have with them, my perspective, so that you can come with better more convincing arguments.

That’s arguing in good faith.

But instead crafting better arguments to counter the points I raised you just keep repeating over and over that the Dems are better without ever demonstrating it. So far you’ve given just 2 sources, of which only the second was relevant to my main point, and no actual argument of your own as far as the subject matter is concerned.

I dare suppose that this is because you don’t actually have any answers to the many points I raised, or if you do you’re certainly not showing it.

and just repeating the same tired ‘Dems did bad stuff tho’ instead of acknowledging that the Reps would absolutely do worse, in their own words, supported by their own actions, happily.

'Course they say they would do worst. Complaining about the Dems posturing as progressive is their all thing. Doesn’t make it true. See first point.

This unwillingness to get beyond past wrongs to see how you’re own myopic actions only make things worse is a running theme with the Anti-Zionists so I guess in a way this is my fault for trying to educate the unwilling.

This is not just past wrongs, this is above all current wrongs, the genocide is going on right now, and the Democrats are supporting it right now.

Again, this point is only valid if you believe that the Democrats are less bad than the Republicans, which I don’t believe and which is what I’ve asked you to provide evidence of, which you didn’t do.

Also, your smug attitude since the beginning certainly isn’t isn’t a sign of good faith on your part.

Don’t listen. Keep sawing away at that nose. You aren’t worth arguing with at this point unless you agree the Reps outright say they want to do more for Israel than the Dems have and admit the only reason they haven’t is solely because they aren’t in power. We’ll just have to wait for the Rep leopards to be voted in and start eating your faces. At which point the metaphorical screams of pain will be little consolation.

I’ve listened, I’ve read the things you linked and responded to the points you tried to make with them.

To me, it’s you who don’t seem worth arguing with or willing to hear a different perspective.

I doubt you even opened any of the many links I gave, or again, if you did, you sure aren’t showing you did.

I mean, look at this line:

You aren’t worth arguing with at this point unless you agree the Reps outright say they want to do more for Israel than the Dems

That’s the whole thing we are arguing about tough. You’re basically saying that I’m not worth arguing with if I don’t already agree with you on the thing we’re arguing about. If that isn’t bad faith, I don’t know what is.

And again with that smug attitude, as well as wishing harm on me for not wanting to support your favorite genocider club to top it all, how very blue MAGA of you.

Weather or not you respond, I’m done here.