its like when kids where told to get under their desks if a NUCLEAR BOMB went of near by, i think its just there to say they are doing something.

this has nothing to do with protecting working people, right wing infighting is not my problem. its curious how defensive u are of religion in this context like if nazis and libertarians fight u would bat an eye but when these 2 particular right wing ideologies fight its a huge deal for u, maybe u have some stuff to think about.

My misplaced violence? i have never attacked anyone nor do i want to, im just very justifiably afraid of the violence of religion, it has never been atheists that been behind religious related violence it has always been religion and its followers.

if they care about burning a holy book they are reactionary. if it was about race or immigration status i would care but people fighting over religion is not my problem.

and yeah thats quite charitable because it can just as easily be interpreted as defending religion from even being able to be criticized under the guise of preventing right wing infighting.

hatred isnt some random quirk of some religious institutions it is literally written into most holy books. there is nothing about soda that makes it inherently lead to death squads but the bible states quite clearly the supposed virtues of slavery and murdering infidels and the oppression of women and plenty more, most other religions dont fair any better under any examination. if u wanna talk about a magical fantasy world where religion is devoid of the horrible institutions that have upheld it and been upheld by it for thousands of years go ahead but it has nothing to do with the actual reality of religion as it has always does and seemingly will continue to exits so leave me out of those fantasies.

And yeah i will certainly argue that when right wingers fight we should stay out of it im certainly not going to argue for defending neither side in an argument where both sides worship a god that want me fucking dead for being a non believer cuz if someone looks at that fucked up shit and say yeah thats my stuff, thats where my morality comes from, that what i want to follow it can only mean that they agree.

And to be clear some of the problems with religion like the abuse of children (in the form of indoctrination specifically) goes all the way down and it carried out by just about every member of these cults and have little to with the institutions.

using that quote to defend religion is like defending the state by quoting the “Paris Commune” if that supports any view its mine.

it is not the dominating factor in most capitalists societies right now and its terrible enough as is.

i feel like u are deliberately ignoring what im saying so i dont see much of a point in saying anything else

u posted a meme to a meme community if it wasnt a joke then what was it are u lost or something. or are u trying to back peddle cuz u got called out on a shitty thing u did. are u seriously saying u just randomly decided to draw someone we all hate as a negative stereotype just by chance and not because u were trying to make fun of them because u think less of people who look like that, like come on man atleast own up to what u are doing. and again it has nothing to do with the particular asshole u are trying to depict and everything to do with what u think that depiction means.

i was just pointing out that u have made the same “joke” more than once since u stated so confidently that u hadn’t. it had nothing to do with my point that ur “joke” is shit and tasteless. The problem isnt that u only direct ur “joke” to this asshole rather that u think what u did is a joke and is appropriate.

https://lemmygrad.ml/post/744356

i feel its not really about whether his behavior indicates that maybe he looks like that but rather the implication that u think its funny, like ur joke is “the gays, am i right” but with fat/visually impaired people just kinda tasteless.

why should we care when reactionaries fight each other.

yeah and in plenty of those societies religion WAS the hierarchy. how could we ever even eliminated class society while also preserving organizations and ideologies to which hierarchy is inherent.

people who practice polygamy or drink a lot of sugar dont have a systematic problem with child rape, nor have they gonna around justifying genocides nor do they have organizations dedicated to marginalizing others nor do said organizations dedicated themselves to indoctrinating more people into their fucked up cult, nor is indoctrinating children before they even have the ability to think critically a crucial, essential, and ubiquitous part of their creed.

are u seriously trying to compare drinking sugary drinks and sexual freedom (mostly from the backwards cults u are defending) to some of the most dangerous and destructive ideologies and organizations ever to ravage earth?

did u happen to forget that religion has exists as it does today and in even more oppressive forms for thousands before capitalism came around? the idea that capitalism is making something that has been bad long before capitalism even exists bad is straight up a historical.

there are a lot of muslims in India certain areas are majority muslim and religion has caused tension with their majority muslim neighbors, i imagine they cant afford to be careless about things like this.

cuz every 10nth game goes great and you do great and it makes u feel really good. and u keep playing cuz maybe the next game is gonna be good too

I get what u are trying to say but its kinda hard to acknowledged your point when u say shit like the ““infamous” order 227” clearly there is a lot more western propaganda to unpack on your side, because there was nothing wrong with telling generals to stop retreating when conditions werent just right especially when u consider that at that point in time the nazi hoards controlled more territory than the USSR, no it was not an order to kill deserters there werent many to begin with since people knew what giving up to the nazis meant it was an order for generals to stop spreading fear and fucking around and while it included a provision for death as a punishment it was only ever used a handful of times and again against high ranking officers not common soldiers.

There were actual bad things done by the USSR’s government while Stalin was in power some of them he could have been personally responsible for, like the exile of the Crimean tartars or the fact that relief efforts for the famine in Ukraine were carried out in secrete (and therefore were less effective) seemingly to save face. There is no need to invent reasons for critique. Rest assured we are all well aware of his flaws after all we had to read plenty of his history to debunk the made up flaws u fell for, we dont blindly like him, his flaws and mistakes (the real ones) just dont outweigh the good he did if u disagree thats fine its a line and its gotta be drawn somewhere, as long u know the facts its not wrong to draw that line such that his more bad than good. Either way im not gonna go tell a lib about how amazing Stalin was (tho i will certainly correct any misinformation) nor is anyone here trying to replicate the bad parts of the USSR during his time in power, we just think he did more good than bad and theres a lot of hate for him out there so someones gotta love him.

As other have pointed out those numbers are way off but also i think its worth pointing out that Stalin didnt invent gulags (or political purges) it was a long standing system by then fuck Lenin was sent to one before the revolution, he and many other people in positions of power in the early USSR just used the tools they knew and were available.I think there are a lot of situations where socialists in the past have done things that are wrong but only in the sense of they should have been better rather than merely the same as capitalist and thats just a fucked way of thinking because they WERE better in so many other places. Also no one is saying Stalin was literally flawless but compared to what he is accused of he might as well be.

i mean if we only disagree on whether a hypothetical communists society in the future could actually abolish authority altogether, then whatever i welcome them they are still wrong but i dont mind. But generally anarchist on the anglosphere internet means radlib who buys into all the western propaganda about socialist countries but still want to be leftists and these types can fuck off, to somewhere where they can read a book.