You must log in or register to comment.
Lemmy.ml is still focused on FOSS and Privacy, Lemmygrad.ml is focused on Marxism-Leninism. As such, there are plenty of non-MLs on Lemmy.ml, including Anarchist communities, while this is banned on Lemmygrad.ml.
Very different instances, I wouldn’t call Lemmygrad.ml “mask off” Lemmy.ml.
I have an account on lemmygrad and when I created it, I was asked about my politics. They formally accepted every left ideology but when you say anything remotely anti-authoritarian, you get downvoted into oblivion
Not doubting you, but what do you mean by “anti-authouritarian?” Presumably you’ve read Engels’ On Authority so you know what they are operating under the pretense of, I can see anti-Marxist takes getting removed or downvoted. It is Lemmygrad after all, not Lemmy EZLN or Lemmy Catalonia.
I didn’t mean to disagree with you. Just add that they are formally open to other leftist viewpoints but not effectively.
And yes, you will get alot of strawmans like Engels’ On Authority. If you want an analysis of the text, this video debunks it quite well
Are you an anti-Engels Marxist? I’m sorry, I think I actually agree with downvoting you, lol. That’s silly.
No, I’m not a Marxist. I agree with him in some points and agree with some libertarian Marxists but at the end, they say alot of stuff Bakunin, Kropotkin, Goldman, … said long before
So… why are you surprised that you get downvoted for being an Anarchist in a Marxist-Leninist space?
I’m not surprised. If anything, I was surprised to be accepted into it at the first place. Sometimes I’m surprised by the low level of education some people have. You mentioned Catalonia. Some people don’t seem to know nor want to know anything about the Spanish civil war or the anything. I sometimes try to argue with people from different ideologies because I think it’s an opportunity for all to grow and sharpen their position but I’m not surprised to be downvoted. In no comment of this thread did I express surprise
I think for many is shock and surprise is that anything even remotely “ml” is even allowed. Like something illegal is being allowed in plain sight.
To be fair, Communism is illegal in the US.
No, it’s not.
“Communist Party” and “Communism” are not equivalent concepts
Who makes that distinction? Plus, the idea of destroying the state, Capitalism, class divides, and money definitely is legally opposed.
Who makes that distinction?
… literally anyone who thinks about it? The US Communist Party is one party, there are plenty of other parties that identify as communist. You don’t have to be called “The Communist Party” to be communist.
New Afrikan Black Panther Party
Party for Socialism and Liberation
Communist parties aren’t popular at all, but they’re far from banned. There are multiple such parties.
Laws are interpreted and wielded by those in power. The Democrats are already called Communists, what happens if a genuine Socialist party takes some amount of power?
Who makes that distinction?
Anyone versed in basic political theory.
An ideology and a political organization are obviously different. Just like republicanism and The Republican Party, democracy and The Democratic Party, socialism and The Socialist Party, etc.
destroying the state
That’s technically sedition, so, yes, illegal.
Capitalism
Nowhere in U.S. jurisprudence is “capitalism” (verbatim) explicitly protected as an economic system. The 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause prevents the state from taking someone’s life, liberty, or property without a proper justification under the laws of the land. The Constitution protects individuals from the government. Freedom to contract is a principle that underpins the basis for a free-market economy.
After the Great Depression, the Court began to treat the freedom to contract as less than absolute, asserting that such freedom may be limited by the State’s interest to protect its citizens. Capitalism is a right guaranteed by the constitution but limited in scope to protect individuals against the dangers of laissez-faire capitalism.
class divides
There are no explicit laws in U.S. jurisprudence (that I know of or have turned up on brief internet searches) that enforce “class divides”.
money
Be it resources, precious metals, or legal tender, money is protected by the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
So we can conclude that the advocacy or practice of communism isn’t itself illegal. Forcing people to practice it or overthrowing the government and dissolving The Bill of Rights in order to force people to practice most certainly is.
In my opinion, that’s a good thing.
Communism isn’t Communalism. Advocating for Communism and attempting to implement Communism at a national level is illegal, as you’ve shown.
Someone better tell these people they all could be arrested at any moment!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_USA
No but seriously it’s an unenforceable junk law that no one has bothered to take the time to repeal that was never even really used in the first place. I mean, the communist party runs candidates for office to this day. Someone finally tried to use it in 1972 to keep a communist candidate off the ballot and a federal district Court promptly ruled it unconstitutional.
https://www.plainsite.org/dockets/1zey0ee5l/arizona-district-court/blawis-v-bolin/
Ah, fair, didn’t see that it got repealed. My original point was more to state that the legal system works against Communism, America is a thoroughly anti-Communist project both within and without.
I’d say more broadly the legal and political system works against any organizations that threaten the status quo, but yes America’s attitudes toward communism have been pretty obvious throughout the twentieth century. I just took issue with the idea that political parties or idealogies are illegal in and of themselves in the US, constitution still manages to protects some things.
At least at face-value, sure. Communism itself is a threat to America.
If you had actually read the Wikipedia article:
In 1973, a federal district court in Arizona decided that the act was unconstitutional, and Arizona could not keep the party off the ballot in the 1972 general election (Blawis v. Bolin). In 1961, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the act did not bar the party from participating in New York’s unemployment insurance system (Communist Party v. Catherwood).
So yes, the law passed during the the McCarthy era … and was afterwards declared unconstitutional.
The Communist Party USA is still around and even have a website.
Ah, fair, didn’t see that it got repealed. My original point was more to state that the legal system works against Communism, America is a thoroughly anti-Communist project both within and without.
