• stasis
    link
    fedilink
    172 years ago

    but is actually a way for the few to oppress the many

    that’s literally what happens under capitalism…

    • Anarcho-Bolshevik
      link
      fedilink
      42 years ago

      Yeah but see, that’s what happens under Judeo‐Bolshevism too. In THEORY there might be less oppression, but in PRACTICE it’s just a cosmetic change (unlike elections in liberal democracies, of course). Basically, commulism = capitalism.

      Source: grandfather is Cuban with PhD in Austrian Economics.

  • Anarcho-Bolshevik
    link
    fedilink
    52 years ago

    Yawn; seen it before:

    Bolshevism preached that there would of course be no classes in its paradise, since only the proletariat would remain after the elimination of the former ruling class. The emptiness of the claim is obvious to any unprejudiced observer, who can see the degrees of slavery among the population. The Jewish ruling class and its lackeys are at the top, then the masses of factory workers in the cities. A deep chasm separates them from the totally impoverished collective farmers. Bolshevism intentionally created these great differences for two reasons:

    1. To lure the masses to the cities to support the Bolshevist armaments program;

    2. To give the workers the impression that they are better off than the farmers and to deceive them into believing that their primitive and miserable life is wonderful in comparison to that of the collective farmers. The workers do not and cannot know that by our standards their existence is wretched, since they are hermetically sealed off from the rest of the world. Beside the workers and the collective farmers, there are two classes without any rights at all: the members of the former intelligentsia and the middle class, who are not of proletarian descent. There are also forced laborers, who are used as cheap and defenseless slaves in the vast uncultivated regions. Millions of them die as the result of bad food, poor accommodations and hard work.

    (I bet that even many ‘moderate’ anticommies will still judge this source as more credible than every single source that I cited for this.)