this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2025
1 points (100.0% liked)

GenZedong

4962 readers
43 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:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
GrainEater@lemmygrad.ml
Elara@lemmygrad.ml
ComradePupIvy@lemmygrad.ml
American_Communist22@lemmygrad.ml
1
Badempanada's reaction to Charlie Kirk's death (lemmygrad.ml)
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by King_Simp@lemmygrad.ml to c/genzedong@lemmygrad.ml
13 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

[Caution, leftist infighting/snide remarks below]

spoilerI'm confused, doesn't worsening material conditions count as political utility in his eyes?

Edit:I normally wouldn't have an issue, since it's actually pretty sane, but I literally thought to myself today "it would be funny if BE said Kirk's death was a bad thing because adventurism will make things worse." I was joking. I'm starting to hypothosize that economists [both accelerationist and reformists] are actually simps for the status quo

top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] lydialmao22@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Man BE is on a streak of bad takes lately its kinda sad.

I dont understand this position. Does anyone really think the far right just, wasnt going to do anything before? Like they were waiting for something like this to happen? As if Trump wasnt already deploying the national guard in major cities? Like come on, the ruling class does not act out of petty revenge, and by this logic there is no actual action communists can take because anything can serve to provoke the far right.

And werent people saying this same thing about Trumps failed assassination last year? And nothing happened

Too many Americans are scared of things changing and want to just put the blame on whatever. They want to cling to the idea that the path we are on could somehow be avoided if X Y or Z didnt happen. If this event somehow changes what you think the future holds then you havent been paying attention.

[–] 201dberg@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

It's funny because the dudes a hardcore accelerationist when he talks about the west burning but then when things accelerate and he isn't the one making all the comments he gets stuck up his own ass about it. At this point his ideology isn't communism, it's his own ego. He HAS to be contrarian to let us all know how dumb we are and how smart he is.

[–] sleeplessone@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 months ago

At this point his ideology isn’t communism, it’s his own ego.

He more or less confirmed that explicitly.

[–] wuphysics87@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It's not that they weren't going to do anything before. It's that this lets them say "You see? I told you the left is out of control! They attacked us for no reason". It solidifies the position. It gives them stronger grounds to do what they planned to regardless.

[–] lydialmao22@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This is a completely unmaterialist take. This has absolutely 0 material effect on the situation. Stronger grounds to do what they wanted in the eyes of whom? Libs who werent gonna do shit either way? Conservative who were gonna eat up whatever they say regardless? Genuinely what is materially affected? This is a position based on the vibes of what sounds like should be true, not a realistic material analysis of the situation

[–] wuphysics87@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Unmaterialist?

[–] lydialmao22@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 2 months ago

Yep, its based on a vibe or the idea of 'solidifying their position' when there is absolutely no material gain the right has from this, if anything they lost one of their main propagandists (which granted is only an issue for them in the short term, if even that). Their position is not 'solidified' and their grounds are not 'stronger,' the resources at their disposal, the propaganda they wield, and the industry they command is the same regardless if this guy is dead or alive. Hell Trump, Vance, Shapiro, everyone on the far right could die tonight and it would not significantly strengthen or weaken their long term political power, it would only cause short term confusion

Your position is solely based on vibes of what sounds like should be correct. This is something people implicitly accept as true without any critical thinking. It feels correct, its what everyone else is saying, and it aligns with how historical development is traditionally understood so it checks off the bias box as well. But make no mistake, this is an idealist view of the world. You absolutely cannot strengthen material power and material goals through ideals alone. Rhetoric does not create material power.

But lets just say that yes, youre correct. That his death really will somehow strengthen the far right overnight (as if they didnt already have the backing of the bourgeoisie with little challenge) and werent already deploying the national guard to major cities. Lets say such a thing not only is possible but even significantly beneficial to the far right as you describe. Would they not just orchestrate a similar event themselves to create the justification anyway? If they really needed it then theyd just do that. Ergo, Kirks death means nothing, because otherwise it wouldve been someone else and the outcome is identical. Because this was the trajectory regardless, and no ideals, rhetoric, sense of petty revenge can change that. No one man can change that by being dead or alive.

Your take is fairly unmaterialist and ignores class struggle in favor of individualism and vibe based idealism

[–] MohammedTheCommunistPalestinian@hexbear.net 1 points 1 month ago

considering how fast kirks death was forgotten ,I would say he was wrong

[–] glimmer_twin@hexbear.net 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I used to agree with almost everything the empanada man had to say, but he’s been slipping lately. “Look long enough into the YouTube drama factory and it looks also into you”, I guess

[–] Soot@hexbear.net 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I fully agree. I remember back when BE used to say he didn't even want to voice his own videos because it would turn him into too much of a publicly involved figure. Today's BE is unrecognisable by comparison where he wants every last dumb though to be a spectacle.

Living proof that Twitter is a cognitohazard

[–] Malkhodr@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

This is the kind of thing is expect from an American leftist content creator, as ot would make sense to police your community into not getting targeted for stupid reasons, or simply for the sake of making your propaganda accessible to as of yet non-aligned people.

Yet it's somewhat strange coming from BE. It's not entirely false, but coming from someone who constantly stabs at the 1st world, it's odd for him to show any concern. It feels more like he's being a contrarian for the sake of it, rather then actually trying to aid any rhetorical struggle.

I won't deny I'm concerned about how the US will crack down on leftists for this. However, I also hold the position that the ruling class already puts all to its disposal for the sake of destroying us, so why would they even need a justification on the first place? Kirk was so clearly a fascist that any "normal" citizen is more likely to empathize with leftists being suppressed over Kirk's own death.

As much as we rag on Americans, it's not exactly correct to think they support Charlie Kirk. Even a slight investigation into him, which can be done in passing during a conversation, reveals him to be a massive peace of shit who had thus coming.

[–] robot_dog_with_gun@hexbear.net 1 points 2 months ago

. Even a slight investigation into him,

liberals won't, and the media has spent the entire time whitewashing his evil so people that only are hearing about him because he got shot are going to have no idea he was an all around piece of shit antivaxxer, transphobe, racist, etc who helped facilitate the january 6th riot

[–] Trioxin@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 2 months ago

As much as we rag on Americans, it’s not exactly correct to think they support Charlie Kirk

Maybe not Kirk himself, but let's not underestimate just how far liberals are willing to go to protect "their own little habitat", as George Carlin called it - "They’re worried that some day in the future they might be personally inconvenienced". Don't forget that while marginalised communities like LGBT people, undocumented immigrants, Muslims and people of colour are under siege from both parties and live in fear every day, straight white cisgender bourgeois liberals are afforded some relative peace and security by the very system that's creating all that suffering. So, when people start fighting back against the system and threaten that peace and security, don't be surprised by just how many liberals will be willing to ally with the fascists to crush them - not for Kirk's sake, but for their own.