As a tank fetishist, I appreciate the representation.

This phrase is a fascist dog whistle, it’s not general purpose.

Guess we’ll just have to try again in the west

China

Here’s an article to answer your second paragraph. https://www.marxists.org/subject/economy/authors/yaffed/1972/mtccs/index.htm

https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/master/paul_cockshott_cyber_communism.md

I think you aren’t reading into it enough, like look at your analysis here: “this wasn’t even a successful feminist movie as they didn’t change anything in the “Real world”. It was just a feel good celebration of women and solidarity which didn’t actually do anything of consequence. That was the point?”

But consider that in the final scenes of the movie, an old lady shows Barbie a dream sequence of how good life could be if she entirely rejects the current system. Barbie then eagerly does so. The old lady represents Luxemburg, Barbie entering the real world represents revolution, Barbie becoming human represents the reunification with the human species being that is only possible under communism. This is a revolutionary communist movie.

The fact that the Kens win nothing but aesthetic changes by the end of the movie is a representation of the reality of third wave feminism and other types of reformism.

Well at the very end of the movie, Barbie chose to leave the system in it’s entirety. The movie has a revolutionary communist message, it’s saying true empowerment is impossible within the bounds of the system. It’s mocking the “more👏female👏executives” sentiment, just doing so in a way subtle enough the Hollywood financiers didn’t realize it.

Okay so you still failed to refute the argument at all. Do you realize you’re embarrassing yourself? Give me a counterpoint.

Lol, if I link you to an author you don’t recognize will you be able to engage with the argument? Let’s try: https://www.marxists.org/archive/luxemburg/1900/reform-revolution/ch05.htm

I’ve been theoryposting on .world and it’s getting upvotes https://lemmy.world/post/2012172, we love to see it

Reforms are great, but ultimately a doomed bandaid over real problems. Quoth Lenin:

"Reformism is bourgeois deception of the workers, who, despite individual improvements, will always remain wage-slaves, as long as there is the domination of capital.

The liberal bourgeoisie grant reforms with one hand, and with the other always take them back, reduce them to nought, use them to enslave the workers, to divide them into separate groups and perpetuate wage-slavery. For that reason reformism, even when quite sincere, in practice becomes a weapon by means of which the bourgeoisie corrupt and weaken the workers. The experience of all countries shows that the workers who put their trust in the reformists are always fooled.

And conversely, workers who have assimilated Marx’s theory, i.e., realised the inevitability of wage-slavery so long as capitalist rule remains, will not be fooled by any bourgeois reforms. Understanding that where capitalism continued to exist reforms cannot be either enduring or far-reaching, the workers fight for better conditions and use them to intensify the fight against wage-slavery. The reformists try to divide and deceive the workers, to divert them from the class struggle by petty concessions. But the workers, having seen through the falsity of reformism, utilise reforms to develop and broaden their class struggle."

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1913/sep/12b.htm

I would rather have serious papers about unusual topics, not joke papers.

How are y’all planning on dismantling a centralized authoritarian dictarship without establishing a dictatorship of our own? Asking about your “also fuck tankies” header text.