r/atrioc

https://preview.redd.it/q2ndlwju4fkh1.png?width=697&format=png&auto=webp&s=30c68c6b726b229dcba55f522d4eaee0c70bf132

They need to restrict student accounts

First of all I want to say that I do love this pod and I do think that the boys are doing their best, but at the same time there were some MAJOR oversights in the most recent episode which need to be corrected

To recount the very basic narrative Aiden told: he said that Sudan is ethnically diverse w/ conflict and that the Darfur region is mostly non Arab (true) and that the SAF committed a lot of warcrimes there (also true)

HOWEVER he made the assumption that RSF vs SAF is an ethnic conflict and that the RSF was somehow pissed off and that their massacres of entire cities was just them "getting revenge" for crimes the SAF war crimes committed in Darfur

This is not only wrong but insulting because the RSF were actually the main ones committing the Darfur Genocide

For some background, to oversimplify there are two major groups in Darfur: the nomadic Arabs and the agricultural Africans. The problems started in the 70s and 80s when there was giant droughts in the traditional Arab lands in Northern Darfur, so they moved South where the agricultural Africans already were. Due to resource competition and racist ideologies of Arab supremacy, they formed a militia called the Janjaweed and started ethnically cleansing the African population there. The Janjaweed is what would later turn into the RSF

The SAF to be clear were no angels in this. They very much did help aid and abet the ethnic cleansing in Darfur, but the Janjaweed/RSF were very much the main drivers.

As a very rough parallel, think about the West Bank. The RSF are the extremist settlers doing the actual violence, while the SAF is more the equivalent of the IDF soldiers who stand by and help the settlers

The reason the RSF were so brutal in El Fasher wasn't because "they were angry at the SAF for what they did back then". No, because El Fasher is in Darfur primarily inhabited by the same African groups that got genocided last time. The they were that brutal is because fundamentally, the RSF has the same ideology they did back then, and they still want to ethnically cleanse Darfur of non Arab groups

That is why so many non-Arabs actually see the SAF as the lesser of two evils - though many of them have their own separate groups focusing mostly on self defense

A new chapter...

Big A makes it pretty clear that the humanitarian outcomes of socialist economics have been terrible, and he uses empirical evidence for it. Maduro's reign saw 1 in 5 Venezuelans leave, Cuba's current president openly admits it was a mistake to not pursue market reforms earlier, not one Eastern European nation reverted back to socialism, no Chinese leader post Deng tried to go back to Maoism...etc.

Atrioc makes his affinity for markets open, because they work. Lemonade Stand recently ran a story of how South Africa has descended (under a socialist admin mind you) into roving bands of vigilantes terrorizing immigrants in a hope that it would improve their economic condition, as if 30% unemployment could be the fault of anything other than state policy, socialist policy.

In the UK, the last Labour Party government prior to New Labour had to get an IMF bailout, why is returning to that condition ideal?

Is he the first living modern oracle?!?

That might sound condescending but I truly think his reasoning is great and better than most communists I interact with and observe.

I enjoyed the segment where he talked specifically through his thoughts on the capitalist system and I actually agreed with quite a lot of it. I think the crux of our disagreement is his ideas concerning bureaucracy and degeneracy.

He made the argument that you need a balance of powers between capital, the state, and labor. As a communist I believe that the existing state is the composition of bourgeois intellectuals who manage the capitalist system, and the ideal would instead be a state composed of the proletariat represented by organic intellectuals (only representation with far more safeguards against bureaucracy than is seen in current states and the USSR) where capital is cut out of the picture (abolition of property).

I think groups will always trend toward degeneracy but, like Atrioc, that it can be mitigated, only I think with revolutionary vigor in the masses and safeguards against bureaucracy (worker soviets that aren't subordinated to the party, for instance). Revolution won't always succeed but there is nothing better to do under the boot of the current system.

I don't really know why I'm posting this. It's kind of an appreciation post I guess. This is probably the most gleeful I've been trying to start a discussion related to communism since I became one.

And to leave with a final point: Mamdani is a democratic socialist (as defined by Engels in the Principles of Communism); he will leave New York just as capitalist as it was before. Is that really all we want from him? Work will still suck. You will still have nothing to do other than work. A majority of people on Earth will still live miserable lives in the peripheral. This is the main reason I'm not content putting 'effort' (the kind described by Atrioc in the video) into the current system, I'd rather put effort into a system following revolution.

https://preview.redd.it/e8dkyqeeu2kh1.png?width=1593&format=png&auto=webp&s=be527f54ef6574c994cac9b897598d292e178312

The amount of mass psychosis happening from it is insane especially on tiktok.