**And before you say that you didn't talk about idpol: you may not have mentioned it by name, but you were busy talking about how people will always be separated into groups which can act exclusively in their own interests and nothing else, which was the point of your defence of biological determinism.**

All of this is why I say that I have infinitely more reasons to call myself a Communist than you do, and that you would be better off calling yourself a reactionary syndicalist.

trash

He is saying, "i am a communist because you arnt" (incase you didnt wanted to read all that)

"We are out to destroy gods.
We want to remove the crowns of the ghostly ideas which we shackle ourselves to; we want to destroy any excuses using which any misidentification of struggles as being exclusive struggles can be made and sustained in practical decisions."
"We stomp because it is the key to our freedom"
:D

```He is saying, "i am a communist because you arnt" (incase you didnt wanted to read all that)```

Your following quotations dodge the points that I was making, but okay. Let's fucking rip them to shreds anyway.

```"We are out to destroy gods.
We want to remove the crowns of the ghostly ideas which we shackle ourselves to; we want to destroy any excuses using which any misidentification of struggles as being exclusive struggles can be made and sustained in practical decisions."```

As already explained:

***Only in our minds do we fight 'exclusively as [insert identity here], unconditionally-so'. In reality, we fight as subjects who are having to relate to the world, which just so happens to include an entire social framework. Our relations to each other are indirect in class society; our consciousness of our battles is by default in terms of interests which we think are exclusive. __Regarding this, Communism seeks to remove this false consciousness and contextualise struggles as being part of a larger, universal struggle.__***

How is this equivalent to genocides and crap like that? People are not equivalent with the struggles that they follow and their own conceptions of those struggles. It's rather telling that you seem to be so obsessed with upholding this bourgeois politics.

We don't *want* to kill anyone even for the sake of our principles; we only need to enslave their gods as far as that's concerned. **The problem is that the Communist movement is not yet powerful enough to do this, and this has never been true in history leading up to now.** There are forces who won't listen to us and fight with us because we don't have the means of demonstrating to them that we can fight for them, and so they will fight us to protect their struggles regardless of how accurately they identify themselves as individuals and their struggles too.

**That's the only reason why I say 'we stomp because it is the key to our freedom' (and again, this is not an ultimate and frozen heavenly state of 'freedom' - which is impossible - it is instead a provisional process).**

Ultimately, you would only understand this if you were a Communist, and in fact you'd be able to remind me of some of the most commonly-used terminology and even cite bits and pieces from books in the rich Communist tradition to support all of this.

```>fascism page screenshot```

**The irony of this is that it is you who sides more closely with the Italian Fascists, or more generally, third-positionist movements in general such as Volkism, than with Communism.**

The Communists seek to practice ruthless criticism and they spare nothing from the sheer engineering of the world to suit the needs of all. *The third-positionists, on the other hand, seek to pursue a particular goal - a much narrower one.*

Your comparison of Communism with 'Fascism' amounts to seizing upon the fact that both seek to obtain a hegemony over the means of production and the state, by violent means if necessary.

Of course, according to you, the genuine Communism is not a *true* Communism.

But let's have a look at your article:

```Fascists believe that liberal democracy is obsolete and regard the complete mobilization of society under a totalitarian one-party state as necessary to prepare a nation for armed conflict and to respond effectively to economic difficulties.[8] Such a state is led by a strong leader—such as a dictator and a martial government composed of the members of the governing fascist party—to forge national unity and maintain a stable and orderly society.[8] Fascism rejects assertions that violence is automatically negative in nature and views political violence, war and imperialism as means that can achieve national rejuvenation.[9][10] Fascists advocate a mixed economy, with the principal goal of achieving autarky (national economic self-sufficiency) through protectionist and interventionist economic policies.[11]```

>'mixed economy' as opposed to the dissolution of private property as a legal institution

>national economic self-sufficiency as opposed to internationalism

inb4 muh Stalin said 'socialism in one country'

***The point of third-positionist ('fascist') movements is __class collaborationism__, imbecile.***

People are meant to struggle *as classes* and work together in a set, highly specialised manner.

The efforts of those involved are spent towards a struggle which is conceived of in terms of an identity which embodies an exclusive interest which is what all are either there to struggle for or be shot.

With Communism, this kind of ultra-authoritarian politics can only ever be temporary; the hegemonies that bring forth revolution must abolish themselves in a self-conscious manner with the support of all involved - moreover, the motive for defending revolutions against hostile forces is not because those forces cannot listen, but because they consciously deny that they can listen to those who seem to threaten their ways of life.

**Your politics, on the other hand, presupposes that bourgeois politics will never go away and that there will always be classes.**

...and of course, the response to that prognosis which you posit is that it would be in vain to stop the development of classes because otherwise we would have to conduct mass genocides.

**Your understanding is wrong, here. With any set kind of society, differences will show and classes will develop - __but the point is that society itself must be subjected to conscious change__. In Communism, there will never be any 'normalcy' besides in hindsight when looking at a given frozen instant or even an entire slice of history, past and present (but not necessarily the future).**

Is it any wonder that Marx and Engels say 'Communism is not a state of affairs to be established but the real movement which sublates/abolishes the state of affairs'? (It is not the exact quote, but it is the gist of what they're saying.)

__To return from the discussion of the actual difference between Communism and 'Fascism', you say that they're the same because of how they seek to obtain power, but then *why isn't your politics or ANY OTHER POLITICS the same*?__

Think about it. In order for you to establish your 'city state communism', you will need to fight off counterrevolutionary forces too. You will need to stomp on at least *some* of the gods of others, if not all of them.

The divine spectre that is 'globalism', for example.

You can convince people that your (exclusive) struggle is worth backing and joining, but you can't get any use out of those whose struggles will always come into conflict with yours at a particular moment. Integrating them for the sake of that integration is not in your consciously-held interest, and it is the same with *anyone* who conceives of their struggle as being necessarily exclusive.

You'll never get much use out of those who wish to *destroy* the present biological structures which we use now, for example. Or those who wish to see that class becomes a thing of previous history. You could tactically align with them, but they will always be different to you if you keep your present cause and continue with that struggle.

**What are you gonna do with your enemies if they're armed to the fucking teeth?**

What are you going to do with the likes of George Soros, the bourgeois philanthropist?

And all the Antifa kids who just won't listen to your wisdom? All the *Jews*, all the fucking financier rats?