RF's definition of communism is exactly 180-degrees off (as he'd know if he ever spoke to communists).
-
-
... Mole-Rat Stalinism is the only thing that doesn't count as "communist" in RF bizarro-world.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Outsideness @ArmchairPseph
Tad unfair no? Do you consider the Stuart rule as 'communist' ?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @i_contemplate_ @ArmchairPseph
Stuart rule didn't justify itself through Mole-Rat social totalitarianism.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Outsideness @ArmchairPseph
Were the 'enlightened absolutist' kings 'totalitarian' ?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @i_contemplate_ @ArmchairPseph
Frederick II wasn't -- but then he was basically an authoritarian liberal (and thus a 'communist' for RF).
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Outsideness @ArmchairPseph
I think there's a confusion here between the structure of the society/state 'absolutist' vs some use of it.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @i_contemplate_ @ArmchairPseph
The only confusion I'm seeing is the invocation of mole-rat metaphysics to legitimate non-populist government
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Outsideness @ArmchairPseph
Will have to think further but I think RF is hampered more by his style than theory.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
His 'theory' is a Fnargl fable.
-
-
"But you understand that Fnargl doesn't actually exist, right?" "Communist!"
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like - 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.