this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2026
20 points (100.0% liked)
GenZedong
5274 readers
61 users here now
This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.
See this GitHub page for a collection of sources about socialism, imperialism, and other relevant topics.
This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.
We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.
Rules:
- No bigotry, anti-communism, pro-imperialism or ultra-leftism (anti-AES)
- We support indigenous liberation as the primary contradiction in settler colonies like the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Israel
- If you post an archived link (excluding archive.org), include the URL of the original article as well
- Unless it's an obvious shitpost, include relevant sources
- For articles behind paywalls, try to include the text in the post
- Mark all posts containing NSFW images as NSFW (including things like Nazi imagery)
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Rationality does not have to presuppose correct predictions (ie account for all variables + outside metaphysical observer who believes such an accounting will lead to a particular determined path). Was the Soviet Union not socialist under Stalin because it failed enough to consider a Kruschev taking over? Was Stalin not rational?
Edited to add: this is not to mean that leaders do not have agency but what actions they are allowed to do in powered and enabled by the system that awarded them that power. As marxists we can consider all bourgoisie leaders as "stupid" but that framing is a double edged sword because they were still intelligent enough to be more powerful than us.
There isn't a universal definition of rationality. How do you expect someone to account for the totality of information? That seems like a high bar.
We can't; we can be rational without that. And they can be rational from their perspective.
If a driver does not understand how his engine works but finds the throttle no longer working he may then push the car from behind out of the petrol pump station in an effort to move the car forward. We could in turn say the low fuel light was blinking and the driver was stupid for not filling up his car with petrol instead. That does not mean the driver did not act rationally because he did not account for the reality of the warning light.
(Yeah that was a stretched analogy. I'm sticking with it)
Edited to add: to clarify - I'm adopting an Hegelian (-esque? Or at least an attempted marxist twist of it) defintion of rationality and very specifically the US ruling class actions are rational and borne of a material reality, not separate from it.