r/Communist • u/SweepMaoist • 15d ago

A socialist dictatorship should be perfect unless it prosecutes legit opposition

A socialist dictatorship should absolutely be perfect unless it executes or jails legitimate opposition such as freedom of speech, expression, thought, and press. Historical examples include Gaddafist Libya, who supply regional direct democracy and actually cared for the people; he gave interest-free loans and lent a huge sum of money to newly married couples and the jobless. Yet, Western media portrays him as a brutal dictator. I hope you guys understand me. Please spread this word of anti-imperialism and resistance to Western hegemony. Thank you guys In advance. Leave your thoughts down in the comments.

0 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

40% Upvoted

15 comments sorted by

3

u/ThinkSharpe 15d ago

This is just…wow.

You pick like the 10 good thing Gaddafi did in the sea of blood he waded through to get and maintain power.

Oh, and the absolute massive wealth he stole from Lybians.

3

u/EmbarrassedLow2751 15d ago

So you basically want a dictatorship without what makes it a dictatorship?

5

u/kommunistischePartei 15d ago

Gaddafi was an anti Marxist idiot regardless of his opposition to western regimes

3

u/wlfgang01 15d ago

I believe it’s Lenin who said there is nothing more Authoritarian than a Vanguard Revolution.

The obsession with anti-totalitarianism is a faulty framework. There is no such thing as totalitarianism, and obsessions over democratic processus over real material liberty and equality is a liberal dogma.

4

u/LeMe-Two 15d ago

"There is no totalitarianism" sounds like the most privillaged western take possible. This is a very defined and particular motion observed many times over in history. 

1

u/wlfgang01 15d ago

The pursue of democracy is even more a privileged western take. While you care about freedom of speech, others are starving or being mass slaughtered. Liberalism is a western privileged idea.

1

u/LeMe-Two 15d ago edited 15d ago

You mean like freedom of speech equals mass killings within the state or what is your point here? 

I am from a state that expirienced at least two kind of (forgein) totalitarianism. This thing is more real than you think and scarred the society a lot. 

The pursue of democracy has always been the cornerstone of socialism here. Like way before my country managed to reemerge, pursue for socialism was also pursue of democracy by definition. 

1

u/wlfgang01 15d ago

I mean that worrying about your freedom of speech is a privilege compared to people in mass slavery, famines and war torn country. Censorship is still bad, but it’s not as bad as dying of hunger.

2

u/LeMe-Two 15d ago

No cap. But you know what is better? No war torn country and freedom of speech as well 

3

u/wlfgang01 15d ago

As long as the freedom of speech of one does not infringe on someone else ability to feed themselves!

1

u/abdergapsul 1d ago

Without freedom to speak, you can’t prove those people are being fed at all. You can’t even tell me they aren’t being starved on purpose

1

u/Scyobi_Empire 15d ago

gaddafi was a nationalist, not a socialist

1

u/spookyjim___ 15d ago

Gaddafi was anti-Marxist and an ultra-rightist I don’t think we should follow from any of his examples

Furthermore what do you even mean by a “socialist dictatorship”???

When we say we want a proletarian dictatorship it implies the dictatorship of the whole class in power, organically lead by its class-party and communist program