Sphere

I tried to head it off by shaming OP for being an asshat (I was the first Hexbear to reply), but it didn't work and I had to dunk on another dipshit lib for a while afterward. Wasn't too bad though, that lib got owned pretty hard and ran off to .world comms within like 5 hours.

Racism, you complete blockhead. She was a horrendous racist.

Do you want flag-borne diseases? Because this is how you get flag-borne diseases!

You have to cook your flag to medium well to be safe!

Yogthos isn't a Hexbear, and .ml's worldnews comm is not a Hexbear comm. Good try, though!

I could quibble over the circumstances (and, unfortunately, likely outcomes in the near future), or argue about your dig at the USSR, but honestly I'm more inclined to cede the point on this. I don't really have anything against anarchists or anarchism; I was mostly just giving a flippant answer to that other commenter, who was being a smug jerk.

In my ideal postrevolutionary society, there would be special political/economic zones where anarchists could live and try to build a model for the society of the future, sheltered from external threats by the communist state. I don't think anarchists and MLs necessarily need to be at odds.

Ok this sounds absolutely sick I need this

You've been talking down to me this entire time and you claim to have degrees in both economics and political science, and you're now complaining that I'm being elitist for pointing out that you're not actually familiar with my ideology in any depth?

(Which anyone with a decent understanding of Marx would know, and therefore avoid using the word in a description of Marxist goals.)

Marx's utopian conception of a classless society

Tell me you don't understand Marx without telling me you don't understand Marx

Edit: LMFAO YOU CITED ZIQ BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Look, I'm not trying to justify everything the Bolsheviks did during the Russian Civil War. I don't know enough of the history to make a judgment call on most of that stuff. So I'm going to leave the question of morality entirely aside on this one.

But I don't think you can call your revolution successful if, within a few years, some external force is able to show up, wreck everything you were doing, and take over. It's not enough to just temporarily wrest control away and set up your committees and your resource distribution system and declare victory. You have to establish long-term security and stability. If you don't, you haven't had a successful revolution.

No, he's referring to communists there.