Finished watching new Contrapoints video, and I have some thoughts about it, and I would like to hear your thoughts on it as well.
>inb4 Im not watching 3 hour radlib videoOk, feel free to post in any other thread on this site then.
>inb4 this belongs in /isg/I want to talk about the actual contend of the video, not internet drama.
First half of is ok-ish, informative for normies I guess but I dont think anyone here is going to hear anything they werent already aware of. The video gets more interesting from part 4: Ritual onward, where it tries to explore psychological roots of conspiratorial mindset. Particularly how it ties to certain victimhood mentality, and dealing with emotions of shame, guilt, humiliation. Reminded me of this article from time of first Trump campaign/presidency, in some newspaper, Washington Post or whatever, describing life of one Trump supporter, how he went from a normal person to mentally ill gun-nut after a medical situation forced him to quit his job, and had to rely on state and his wife for income, which made him retreat to a semi-fantasy world in an effort to make himself feel useful, like he is not a burden to everyone around.
Anyway, there are three objections I have with ideas put forward in the video.
First, I hate when libs make defend Stalin, because I have very little sympathy towards him, I consider him a conservative (or reactionary, whatever word you prefer) compared to many of the bolsheviks he purged, was a chief culprit in insulating communist party from democratic process and turning it into a clique of bureaucrats, but I cannot think of anything that would warrant accusation of nationalism. "Socialism in one country" came to being under circumstances of there literally being one socialist country under siege by rest of the world's Great Powers, like what else do you want people to do, give up? Furthermore, Soviet Union was not a nation, but a supranational state. Stalin pursued neither majority-Russian chauvinism, nor was advocate of national independence, nor believer in some sort of Soviet supremacism over other countries (political control of Moscow over other governments, sure, but that is not supremacism), so in what sense of the word was he a nationalist?
Second, while yeah, understanding marxism in depth is too intellectual for average schmuck, you dont need that to be a communist. Concep
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.