Distorted Soul Of Perdition☭

@workercouncil_p @refurbifernsibe Yes, any attempt to group is an abstraction, but every abstract can be reduced to something concrete. I think people use the international proletariat wrong. They confuse the class-in-itself for the class-for-itself. No class-for-itself really exists, right now.

@refurbifernsibe Any attempt to group people is an abstraction.

This statement means actually nothing.

This video is just so dumb ! I don't even know where to begin ! First of all ! The Russian Empire banned Ukrainian. The Valuev Circular of 1863 and the Ems Ukaz of 1876 criminalized Ukrainian publishing and schooling outright. The Bolsheviks inherited that ban and tore it up. The USSR did not find a thriving Ukrainian culture and destroy it. It found a language the tsars had outlawed and put it into the schools, the courts, and the press. From 1923, Moscow ordered the construction of national languages. By 1929, roughly 80 percent of primary schools in Soviet Ukraine taught in Ukrainian. Most newspapers were Ukrainian. Officials learned the language or lost their posts. The 1928 Kharkiv orthography standardized it. Terry Martin's standard academic history titles the whole system the "Affirmative Action Empire," the first state in history to manufacture minority national consciousness on purpose. Yiddish was an official state language of the Byelorussian SSR, printed on the republic's coat of arms. Soviet Ukraine ran Yiddish courts, Yiddish village soviets, and entire Jewish national districts. State money funded Yiddish theatre, Yiddish publishing, and a Yiddish academic institute in Kyiv. No other government on earth did any of it. Not Poland. Not Britain. Not the United States. The USSR gave alphabets to languages that had never been written. Chukchi, Nenets, Evenki, Kabardian, Abkhaz. Central Asian literacy climbed from single digits to near universal, in native languages. You do not kill a language by inventing its alphabet. Ukraine exists in its present borders because the USSR built the Ukrainian SSR as a national republic: its own territory, capital, academy of sciences, UN seat in 1945, and a constitutional right of secession. That clause was the legal instrument actually used to walk out in 1991.

@FreeWayCS @jamieparis666 @iamjourjean Yes, stable bilingualism existing is literally part of Terry Martin's core arguement. The 30s in fact did not brutally crush this exact plan and you would know that had you read. The only clown shit is coming from you.

@SoulofPerdition @jamieparis666 @iamjourjean Lmao you think Terry Martin says the USSR saved languages forever? The book literally describes how Stalin brutally crushed this exact plan in the 1930s. "Historically grounded" but you ignore the 50 years of forced Russian language that followed. Absolute clown shitt.

This is a purely Nazi discourse but what else is new

@FreeWayCS @jamieparis666 @iamjourjean Except they didn't kill the languages. They in fact revived nearly dead ones. You can't even debunk that argument because it's historically grounded. Historian Terry Martin proves it was the most expansive, and first affirmative action plan.

@SoulofPerdition @jamieparis666 @iamjourjean Wow, justifying forced Russification because of "supply chains" is a new level of copium. 💀 So shooting native writers and forcing them to speak Russian is okay because of "industrialization"? British Empire used the exact same excuse to kill languages in India and Ireland.

@FreeWayCS @jamieparis666 @iamjourjean Now you are just bad faith and actually stupid.

@SoulofPerdition @jamieparis666 @iamjourjean Also calling mass executions an "affirmative action plan" is crazy copium.

@FreeWayCS @jamieparis666 @iamjourjean But they didn't do full russification. The literacy programs carried on. That's the point.

@SoulofPerdition @jamieparis666 @iamjourjean "Some reversal"? Lmao, Stalin literally EXECUTED the people who made those alphabets! You cannot say USSR revived a language when they shot the writers, banned the books, and forced Russification for next 50 years. It contradicts completely.

@FreeWayCS @jamieparis666 @iamjourjean Also the purges didn't do full russification. The 30s still carried on the massive literary programs. Mandating Russian during industrialization where the economy was dependent on large supply chains also makes sense.

@FreeWayCS @jamieparis666 @iamjourjean You are ignoring history while accusing me of ignoring history. Did the Soviet Union revive nearly dead languages? Yes it factually did. Was there some reversal in the 30s? Yes there was. One doesn't contradict the other. It was the first, most expansive affirmative action plan.

@FreeWayCS @jamieparis666 @iamjourjean No it's not. It's just a fact that the Soviet Union was the first affirmative action empire, that widely revived nearly dead languages. It's literally one of the most successful case studies of doing this.

@SoulofPerdition @jamieparis666 @iamjourjean Its true Siberia is good example the language of people of that land is literally gone and they speak only Russian

@Trierarch81 @sopjap You blocked me so I can't reply to you. But you do realize that almost all multi-ethnic countries that undergo industrialization become multilingual by pure necessity. Managing large supply chains without a lingua franca becomes pretty difficult. Any integrated does this.

@Trierarch81 @sopjap It is a fact that even the 30s national languages got revived. You used an LLM, so let me use an LLM to debunk you. The indiginization policy wasn't even Lenin's, it was primarily Stalin's in the first place.

USSR promoted local languages and culture, supported national cohesiveness. With such naked revisionism masquerading as truth nowadays- all that effort and decades of support down the drain.

@NewPerspectives Dude the Spanish Anarchists literally refused to seize power after the July uprising because of muh authoritarianism and then proceeded to prop up the bourgeoise government of Catalonia. It's a completely valid criticism of Anarchy.

Its kinda crazy how leninists literally project everything they do onto anarchists. Only one of us has recreated the bourgeois state: you guys, every time you ended up creating bourgeois states.

@kaseyl0l @oiwhale @EcoTechBro I do understand. You are kind of not engaging with my argument and trying to cite a physicist from the 50s. Marx was a materialist who applied materialism to nature. In the texts it doesn't even prove that Marx ever applied dialectics to nature. Phase changes are not dialectical.

@SoulofPerdition @oiwhale @EcoTechBro you don't understand anything about what you're talking about and it's one of the simpler concepts x.com/i/status/17750…

A lot of anarchists have Marxist derangement syndrome and it's kinda irritating to deal with imo. More importantly, it makes their arguments poorer because they're afraid of being too materialist, and hence infected by Marxism.

@AqtobeCNO @HellFire80085 Yes, I said it's a meme, and I hate the meme. People are actually taking it seriously now. Like Anarchists will use it as serious analysis.

@SoulofPerdition @HellFire80085 Bro you know it is a meme

I look like this

@kaseyl0l @oiwhale @EcoTechBro Dialectics is a conceptual framework. It can't be applied to physics. As Lukàcs says here: "But he (Engels) does not...mention the most vital interaction, namely the dialectical relation between subject and object in the historical process."

@SoulofPerdition @oiwhale @EcoTechBro complete nonsense, read Stalin for a layman's introduction to this topic

@AqtobeCNO @HellFire80085 Therefore they can't be classified as Capitalists. Yes, I know you could identify the state as a collective Capitalist. But the logic of the factories was pretty different. M-C-M' circuit didn't exist for individual factories and they couldn't face bankruptcy.

@AqtobeCNO @HellFire80085 And they renamed to the RCP (b). Calling the Soviet Union Social Democratic is very sloppy analysis. Social Democracy is Capitalist. The Soviet Union was post capitalist. No capitalist class existed. Bureaucrats owned no capital. They couldn't sell, or inherit capital therefore-

@kaseyl0l @oiwhale @EcoTechBro This is from Stalin not from Marx. My argument is that Diamat is not from Marx, which is demonstrably just true. Marx created Historical Materialism, he didn't apply Dialectics to nature because applying to Dialectics to nature makes no sense. Nature is not dialectical.

@SoulofPerdition @oiwhale @EcoTechBro You can just say stuff I guess

@AqtobeCNO @HellFire80085 Marxism-Leninism is not Social Democracy. Honestly it's a meme that is as dumb as calling the SSPX protestant. It can be easily debunked with just bare minimum understanding of history.

@HellFire80085 Marxism-Leninism is social democracy, which is good thing