Why would the Commissar of Military and Naval affairs under Lenin, who was instrumental in founding the red army and oversaw the purging of Mahknovists and other anarchist elements in the early USSR be less authoritarian than Stalin?
WittyProfileName2
joined 4 years ago
OK, that's as good an answer as any.
Salvador Allende got couped three years after his election. Are there any ways you can think to prevent a foreign power from undermining future hypothetical socialist governments that wouldn't be authoritarian?
The fact that you think Trotsky would've been less authoritarian than Stalin betrays that you don't know shit about him yourself.
Not a socialist, but I am genuinely curious.
Is there any socialist revolution that you wouldn't class a fascist?
I've only read a couple of the books, I should probably get 'round to reading the rest one day.
I still think Doom 3 putting the torch as a separate tool from all the weapons was good game design, I will forever be salty that they changed that for BFG edition because of the nerds that complained about it.
Half-life as a series had the advantage of being an early adopter to a lot of stuff that is now dated. At the time of release it was revolutionary, but by comparison now it probably feels a little mediocre.
Plus it was one of the few games of the time that really understood how to use a good soundtrack to improve the vibe of the game and I still go back and listen to the OST sometimes.
In a way, it feels like this is a version of Geralt that never went to Blaviken and thus never saw what the end result of following the Witcher code would lead to him doing.
I'm having a lot of fun playing a shadow monk with a 3 level dip into rogue for that sweet extra bonus action from thief. Just cleared a duel with an important plot boss in, like, two turns because I'm whirlwind of fists.
It's so weird, because the games had to give Geralt amnesia so he forgot his character development in the books, just so they could have him be a cynical centrist and then lightly push his character back on to the path of becoming the character he was before the games.
Like, the depending on what side quests you do, Geralt is on the path to stop being such a centrist but he never returns to being who he was before (maybe he does in the DLCs, I never played them).
The sidequest chain with Triss where you help her smuggle a bunch of people out of Redania before the next wave of pogroms happen, is an example of Geralt helping people despite it not being of any benefit to him. But he only does it because Triss is dragging him into it.
But I think it’s important to recognise that the Saudis aim is to restore order in a neighbourhood country, to prevent Iranian influence from growing and to suppress violent Islamic fundamentalism.
"Restoring order is when you bomb hospitals and exacerbate famines and the more people that die, the more order it is."
The Saudis are committing genocide in Yemen. No ifs, no buts. To claim they have a good reason to be out there doing it is genocide apologia.
Because I wanted to know, why do you think Trotsky was less authoritarian than Stalin?