• Sprinklebump@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    God I hate that term.

    Yeah the racist Republicans in the US use whataboutism all the time to skirt around actual critiques. They really hate it when you call them out on it

    Did anarchist attack and kill communists during that time period? Yes. Does that make thier critiques about soviet authoritarianism invalid or make emma Goldman letters false. No. It just means there is nuance in history.

    I dont categorically support emma goldman. And Im not surprised they said some racist things. Thats why I am able to separate the good things they did while critizing the bad.

    You should try it!

    It is a known fact that the USSR consolidated power within russia after the october revolution. They killed and jailed anarchists and many other opossing groups.

    And when lenin died and stalin took over, he did it too. This is what large goverments must do to maintain power.

    The fact that you can’t admit that means you a defintiately a tankie.

    By merely mentioning an informal fallacy I have torn your argument asunder! You are the one who has proven nothing.

    You sound like a jackass when you write this way. imo.

    • robinn2 [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      You sound like a jackass when you write this way. imo.

      Thx.

      You didn’t address the connection between the racism in the anarchist critique of Bolshevism and fascism, which I linked a full explanation of. I already discredited Goldman by showing that the “martyr” she was praising was involved in an organization that was actively bombing communist institutions (she didn’t mention this, and pointing this out is not whataboutism but again, a basic call for consistency). You didn’t address this. And “authoritarianism” will never be a real concept; it’s just the ignorance of authority to which the accused movement is responding. No movement or world-historical system maintains itself without authority. I already mentioned the circumstances the Bolsheviks were under, why can’t you dispense with this idea? You know that if they let up authority for a second the white guards and imperialists would decapitate every revolutionary in sight, because revolutions are not a peaceful affair. A bombing is not slight, assassinations of revolutionaries (by SRs) could break apart the worker’s power. Anr I never said anarchist critiques of “Soviet authoritarianism” were discredited by their own use of authority (this is not authoritarian for some reason). I specifically critiqued anarchism in general as well as pointing out terrorism, which proves I never thought the latter refuted anarchist theory. Everyone recognizes that governments must use authority to maintain power, but this is exactly why the blanket opposition to authority is counterrevolutionary (it condemns the DOTB and DOTP on the same grounds and is neither revolutionary nor nuanced).