Isn't Trueanon that conspiracy theorist which Reps love?
this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2026
47 points (89.8% liked)
GenZedong
4998 readers
276 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
The boys down at the dock mocked me for bringing my Soviet themed cat ears and Kim Jong Un body pillow. Smh π‘
Are you saying we need to be SOCIAL in order to build a SOCIAList movement?! π’ oh no not that!!
Oh at first i thought this was about Hasan Piker who also often mentions "be normal". Hasan means it more as "don't wear your cat ears or the i-hate-men shirt when trying to agitate at a lib protest"
I think Hasan has some great takes. This one is shit, wear your car ears and shirt
I said this yesterday and I will say it again. Being "normal" is the 12th form of liberalism
why would himmler be saying this? i don't get it
This is a reaction to a quote from a podcaster. I've paraphrased what the podcaster said and put it in the Nazi's mouth because I think it's funny and descriptive.
The Nazis famously weren't super friendly to people who had trouble being normal, among other things.
Communist auto-phobia strikes again
Edit: I mean, I suffer from it too. Don't want to say it like this isn't something a lot of us suffer from
lol what
This is a reaction to Brace from Trueanon's "just be normal" thing. I think it's gross, ableist, and willfully ignorant of current conditions.
I think you can read it generously, as "think a little about how what you're saying and doing will be perceived by someone who may have their heart in the right place, but is pretty new to all this."
For instance, calling someone a Nazi over something like this is not going to be received very well by most people.
He's a rich petit bourg anarchist who regulalry uses the r slur. I don't think there's a reason for me to read what he says generously.
There's no time for people to be "new at this". Prosletyzing is for evangelical Christians..
I'm comfortable with what I've said. I think it's worth considering why insulting a "leftist" entertainer should be taken personally. He's not a friend to anyone who would be here - he's just milking patreon dollars.
Also, someone who wants union labor rights and free healthcare for Amerikkkans without an end to the genocides is not functionally different from a Nazi.
He's closer ideologically to your or me than probably 95% of the U.S., if not more. Criticism is fine, but when you're starting with a group that small you're not going to get anywhere if you're writing off even someone like him.
Thereβs no time for people to be βnew at thisβ
You're not wrong -- we're really far from having an organized left capable of doing something -- but pointing this out doesn't change how people respond to new ideas.
He's closer ideologically to your or me than probably 95% of the U.S., if not more. Criticism is fine, but when you're starting with a group that small you're not going to get anywhere if you're writing off even someone like him.
I'm not going to tell you you're wrong to feel this way about him, but I increasingly don't think 95% is enough. If someone like Fetterman is 80%, is that acceptable? Where's the line? ( That's mostly a rhetorical question)
Don't think that scumbag fetterman is any where near 80% Communist, not even sure if he's even 80% human to begin with.
I kind of meant that as the point -- like Fetterman is clearly not a comrade, but is more "left" than a lot of people in the U$
Ah didn't get it, sorry for the mishap comrade.
No worries, apologies for not being more clear!
I don't view Fetterman as anywhere near that close to most folks here.
As far as where to draw the line... a really important question I don't have a good answer to. I'm not sure anybody has a good, consistent answer. But I think implicit in the idea of building a mass movement is reaching outside of the circle of people who are basically all on the same page, because that circle is small.
But I think implicit in the idea of building a mass movement is reaching outside of the circle of people who are basically all on the same page, because that circle is small.
If that mass movement is against autistic people, or against acknowledging the Gaza genocide, what is it a mass movement towards? What is acceptable to leave off to attract allies?
I really mean that rhetorically, I'm not trying to debate and be mean or whatever, I'm just trying to make sense of things.
Alright.