thefreepenguinalt

So, I just came across this picture from the GDR showing what the Volkspolizei called "negative-decadent youth". This was a major blunder on the part of the GDR, as it attributed any and all youth subculture to reactionary influence. Communist youth groups in socialist countries can and should incorporate pre-existing subcultures instead of trying to replace them. So, yes, I am arguing that a Komsomol Furry Club should exist "But the furry fandom has bourgeois elements!" Yes, that is currently the case, but you can stamp these bourgeois element out without redefining what the furry fandom is. In fact, I'd argue it is these bourgeois elements, such as squabbles over intellectual property, that are holding the furry fandom back. The problem here is that communist youth groups, both past and present, have always been headed by people 1+ generation removed from the current trends. While the FDJ had an age cap at I think 35, there are still 15 years between a 30-year-old leader and a 15-year-old standard member. China's gotta be one of the worst offenders with this. The current first sec of the CYLC, Ah Dong, is in his 60s.

EU: rescues a kitten

America: The Democrats rescue a kitten (from a Democrat paper) The Republicans rescue a kitten (from a Republican paper)

China: China rescues a kitten, but at what cost?

Russia: Russia kidnaps a Ukrainian kitten and brings it to a facility in Russia (forgets to mention this facility is a vet)

DPRK: North Korean propaganda shows Kim Jong Un rescuing a kitten. Whether that is factual or not is still up for debate.

I have griped about your changes to themes and I will continue to gripe like a curmudgeon about them. You took away the sharp corners that are the reason why I am using i386 theme. Plz give them back!

Self-explanatory

Like if I look at places like Weibo it doesn't seem like the pre-corpo net at all.

cross-posted from: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/10588462

How did countries like Mongolia, Angola, and Mozambique stop being proletarian states without counterrevolution?

If you actually read Kollontaj, you see she is explicitly against the capitalist distortion of intimacy that turns people into soulless numbers, body parts, and sex acts. She is decidedly not against soulful sexuality, or what she calls "winged Eros" or even having a low barrier for sexuality. A comrade of mine criticized the last part as "just hookup culture with a new name," and instead argued Kollontaj was against having a low barrier to sexuality in general, which is a misrepresentation of what hookup culture actually is. Hookup culture is not just having a low barrier for sexuality, but explicitly about selfish gains and turning intimacy into a soulless transaction. They also stated that forms of intimacy are not transhistorical, which is true, but do you know what is transhistorical? The fact that Homo sapiens tends to have a chemical-fueled desire for sexuality. This is not a matter of society, this is a matter of biology. While Kollontaj does in fact write that someone having multiple partners is inherently soulless, you have to remember this was written in 1920s Russia, where no major examples of soulful multi-person relationships existed at the time and was mainly either rich nobles having many mistresses or prostituted women with many clients.
And I'm not gonna discuss this with them any further cuz they've been condescending and Marxister-than-thou about it

If you know me on Discord, you'd have known for a while that I'm aroallo, but I feel like this is my official Coming Out:tm: for Lemmygrad.
The way I found out I was aroallo is kinda too sensitive for a public forum, but I'd be happy to DM with 18+ users on here!
If you have any (SFW) questions, feel free to ask!

I've been discussing this text with a comrade over Discord, and I would like to share some excerpts from the text do discuss with others:

“Wingless Eros” contradicts the interests of the working class. In the first place it inevitably involves excesses and therefore physical exhaustion, which lower the resources of labour energy available to society.

On the one hand the healthy sexual instinct has been turned by monstrous social and economic relations, particularly those of capitalism, into unhealthy carnality. The sexual act has become an aim in itself - just another way of obtaining pleasure, through lust sharpened with excesses and through distorted, harmful titillations of the flesh.

2a) If intercourse with a woman does not prompt the expected excitement, the man will turn to every kind of perversion.

We are talking here of the duality of love, of the complexities of “winged Eros”; this should not be confused with sexual relations “with out Eros,” where one man goes with many women or one woman with a number of men.

Kollontaj says some things I agree with and other things I disagree with. Like I 100% agree with her take on how the idea of "exclusivity" is rooted in the idea of class society and your partner being property. Where I don't agree with Kollontaj is the idea that casual intimacy is somehow reactionary. This idea is not exclusive to Kollontaj and there is definitely a lot of literature out there, especially in the 20s and 30s about how the existence of casual intimacy is somehow an attack on committed relationships, which I disagree is the case. I believe that socialist society will have a wide range of relationships with varying levels of commitment, with none being deemed as morally superior than the other, given they are all built on a non-negotiable foundation of consent.

I just had a Ukrainian-Canadian tell me Russian is not Slavic but Finnic/Turkic/aSiAtiC hOrDes. There's a difference between opposing Putin and denying linguistic reality. Sorry, but linguistics doesn't care about your feelings about Putin.

Hey, Haui
You've blocked me, so I doubt you're gonna read this
Anyways, I'm sorry for attacking you like this, it's just that I'm often hypervigilant about newcomers in leftist spaces who come off as patsoc-adjacent because patsocs often wreck leftist spaces and I didn't want Lemmygrad to follow the same path. I hope you understand and will try to be better rather than merely be reactionist in the future.
~TFP