authcom historical revisionism 

I feel like when authcoms call Kim Jong Un "capitalist" to denounce him as a dictator, that's just deflection. They'll say shit like "these dictators are actually all capitalist" which is disingenuous, am I expected to believe that Kim Jong Un, Stalin, and Mao are fucking free-market liberals or something (see image)?? They may take a step back and say "oh, well they're State-Capitalist which is just as bad", but I think ultimately they are missing the point.

I think they're trying to say that these dictators are illegitimate because they are controlling and coercive statists, but simply refuse to use anarchist vocabulary to legitimize a wider critique of the state. You label them as capitalists after the fact when they were revealed as dictators and bought their anticapitalist rhetoric in the meanwhile while the anarchists weren't fooled from the start. So let me help y'all out: the one thing all dictators have in common, is that they are statists. And calling fucking Mao a capitalist is just petty historical revisionism.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Smol server part of the infrastructure. Registration is approval-based, and will probably only accept people I know elsewhere or with good motivation.