|
Homework Explainer posted:any particular book or article? love 2 read poo poo about early 20th century communism and get sad well for starters i hosed up lol the name's gossweiler but Aufsätze zum Faschismus is his major work on the nazis. i've got a dutch version here and i know it exists in french and german idk about english tho
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 21:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 08:42 |
|
|
Atrocious Joe posted:I like social democracy but you can't keep capital restrained without strong communist parties/countries to offer an alternative. yeah it was kind of a coincidence given shipping innovations, the 70s oil shock, stagflation, and the 80's oil glut that eventually killed the ussr and impacted its global outreach tremendously. neoliberalism exploded after communism lost much of its global apeal of course, but the foundations were always there
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
also why get sad about early 20th century communism when you got the october revolution and socialist mongolia???Al! posted:personally, i think whether far right wing parties are able to seize a modicum of power in a social democracy probably has to do way more with the constitution of that country than the inherent moral weakness of the concept of a modern social democracy, but im really not up to speed with my european democratic constitutions atm define social democracy. what is the political situation of whatever you're trying to define? the far right will also not give a gently caress about constitutions. all the things the nazis did were unconstitutional under the then existing constitution, franco changed the constitution to benefit him, as did pinochet & the gremialistas. one of the consequences of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie is that the seperation of powers de facto no longer exists.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 21:41
|
|
|
like you have to realise the fact that constitutions exist is a really big victory of the revolutionary bourgeoisie at the time over absolutist monarchies, but that the rights coming from them are always a subject of class struggle
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:thats kind of a chicken and egg argument though. constitutions which codify liberal democracies and property rights give rise to governments' evolutions into social democracies and the like, no? the unsustainability follows generally from the economic system galvanized in the country's founding. social democracy just keeps the wheels turning longer. I see, youre talking about political policy, im talking about basic electoral mechanisms which allow fascist ideologues widespread access to the franchise. For example the us was designed in part to perpetuate slavery in a post-enlightenment period where even certain segments of the ruling class were calling for its abolition. Ideally, for some of the framers, there would have never been any parties at all. in 2016 the lack of third party elements means that despite running a campaign on a white nationalist platform, actually associating yourself with the white nationalists in your coalition is a bad idea electorally, and those white nationalists are kept under the thumb of the party platform (or become fringe elements without representation in government as third parties). You can talk all day about how bad republicans are, but at the end of the day theyre still mostly free market liberal capitalists, not fascists. I think we are kind of getting at the same thing, i just wouldnt be able to be satisfied with "see this example from history, and also right wing parties have surged in power in recent years in some social democracies" without more knowledge of how the individual constitutions of those social democracies are structured.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
belgend posted:also why get sad about early 20th century communism when you got the october revolution and socialist mongolia??? oh sure, i was speaking generally when i should have been more specific
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
Ormi posted:yeah it was kind of a coincidence given shipping innovations, the 70s oil shock, stagflation, and the 80's oil glut that eventually killed the ussr and impacted its global outreach tremendously. neoliberalism exploded after communism lost much of its global apeal of course, but the foundations were always there I guess I was more speaking to attitudes than outcomes. In the US specifically the political camp that wanted to destroy the limited welfare state and engage in limited (lol) nuclear war with the USSR saw those goals as perfectly complementary. That they actually succeeded is because of wider geopolitical trends. Kennedy and Johnson were very aggressive against communism, but paired it with the idea that US workers will benefit from those wars. Ties between the AFL-CIO and US intelligence were built under that regime, and used to subvert communism in other countries. Under Reagan proactively building ties with unions was off the agenda, even to subvert elements to their left.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
Al! posted:I see, youre talking about political policy, im talking about basic electoral mechanisms which allow fascist ideologues widespread access to the franchise. For example the us was designed in part to perpetuate slavery in a post-enlightenment period where even certain segments of the ruling class were calling for its abolition. Ideally, for some of the framers, there would have never been any parties at all. in 2016 the lack of third party elements means that despite running a campaign on a white nationalist platform, actually associating yourself with the white nationalists in your coalition is a bad idea electorally, and those white nationalists are kept under the thumb of the party platform (or become fringe elements without representation in government as third parties). You can talk all day about how bad republicans are, but at the end of the day theyre still mostly free market liberal capitalists, not fascists. You mean there's a difference?  There's also the possibility that white nationalists will simply take over one of the two major parties, and use its limited electoral victories to leverage its way into real power like Hitler did. The biggest difference between then and now, isn't liberal vs. social democracy, or parliamentarianism, but the fact that everyone had organized paramilitary wings which could be used to leverage "extra-electoral" outcomes. After the police sided with the Nazis and helped them defeat the communists on the streets, the Sturmabteilung were used to intimidate people at the polls. Mussolini used the blackshirts to march on Rome, and the king made him Prime Minister for it. These were organizations comprised of lean and fit war veterans, while today's fascists avoid combat altogether and - if they ever commit violence, usually do so as part of a criminal enterprise. The majority also aren't fit for any kind of physical confrontation to begin with. Whenever poo poo starts to go down, they hide behind the police and play the victims. There is the presence of a decline narrative which can be used to press converts, but the slow decline of liberal capitalism and the demographic decline of whites just isn't as animating as German & Italian irredentism. The rise of white nationalism in Europe is being driven primarily by Islamophobia, but if they can't outright secure an electoral victory then they're SOL without paramilitaries.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 23:04
|
|
|
Social democracy has given us such achievements as...either losing all its political relevance to conservatism or implementing policies that affect the working class's bottom line when they are in power just as much as conservatives
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 23:18
|
|
|
The other gaping hole in analysis of social democracy is the avoidance of having to deal with the imperialism issue. SD governments in Europe were still waging colonial wars after WW2. The French actively carried out a conspiracy to assassinate Thomas Sankara.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
Fiction posted:Social democracy has given us such achievements as...either losing all its political relevance to conservatism or implementing policies that affect the working class's bottom line when they are in power just as much as conservatives You guys really are experts at framing. "Social democrats are the left wing of fascism," you shout from the rooftops, "none of their so-called 'achievements' have any value. It's gotta be either us or nothing!" Then "nothing" wins the popular vote 93%-2%, with 5% voting for Harambe.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 23:36
|
|
|
Fiction posted:Social democracy has given us such achievements as...either losing all its political relevance to conservatism or implementing policies that affect the working class's bottom line when they are in power just as much as conservatives Hmm yes, lets line up ideologies for what they have achieved - a marxist.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 23:36
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:Hmm yes, lets line up ideologies for what they have achieved - a marxist. it gave American supremacy a run for its money for a little while there. Then it was stamped out of existence at the same time as crushing austerity was instituted for the lower classes by conservatives and liberals.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 00:54
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:Hmm yes, lets line up ideologies for what they have achieved - a marxist. the first and only countries to eradicate homelessness, poverty and unemployment are pretty god damned huge achievements in my book we can acknowledge this while also leveling criticism that isn't Baby's First Anticommunism
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:the first and only countries to eradicate homelessness, poverty and unemployment are pretty god damned huge achievements in my book lol which one was this
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 01:04
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:we can acknowledge this while also leveling criticism that isn't Baby's First Anticommunism What's it to you either way? You've made clear not going to acknowledge the legitimacy of any criticism except perhaps that which comes from your left.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
Right wing criticisms are perfectly valid - A Liberal
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 01:23
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:the first and only countries to eradicate homelessness, poverty and unemployment lol
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 01:23
|
|
|
communism is dumb, socialism is good these are my radical opinions fight me
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 01:26
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Right wing criticisms are perfectly valid - A Liberal HE thinks social democrats are fascists, thus he regards virtually all criticism as invalid. He'll only accept criticism from his left. Sorry if that was unclear.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 01:28
|
|
|
Actually,
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 01:37
|
|
|
Jack of Hearts posted:HE thinks social democrats are fascists, thus he regards virtually all criticism as invalid. He'll only accept criticism from his left. Sorry if that was unclear. Maybe SDs should have thought about that before siding with the Freikorps. 1919 never forget.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 01:48
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Maybe SDs should have thought about that before siding with the Freikorps. 1919 never forget. The Kerensky government sided with the left over the right during the july days and look where it got them The freikorp and interwar military/paramilitary groups on the right mostly just wanted their own state-within-a-state, the bolsheviks/spartacus wanted to take over the whole government and probably shoot everyone who was in the previous one. There's a reason why Ebert survived where as Kerensky's government didn't. Ebert was absolutely right to shoot karl liebknecht before liebknecht shot ebert Typo fucked around with this message at 02:06 on Sep 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 01:59
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:The other gaping hole in analysis of social democracy is the avoidance of having to deal with the imperialism issue. SD governments in Europe were still waging colonial wars after WW2. The French actively carried out a conspiracy to assassinate Thomas Sankara. So did Communist governments wanna talk about the Soviets in central Asia or mass deportation of the Chechens or the PRC in Tibet?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 02:00
|
|
|
Fiction posted:Social democracy has given us such achievements as...either losing all its political relevance to conservatism or implementing policies that affect the working class's bottom line when they are in power just as much as conservatives Social democracy effectively shifted the center of the political spectrum in most first world countries to the left from where it was in the early 1900s, even the tea party don't want Paul Ryan to abolish medicare or SS int he right-most first world country
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 02:03
|
|
|
Typo posted:The Kerensky government sided with the left over the right during the july days and look where it got them Kerensky's government didn't survive because they refused to end the catastrophic war with Germany, not because the perfidious Bolshevik can never be trusted. Typo posted:So did Communist governments wanna talk about the Soviets in central Asia or mass deportation of the Chechens or the PRC in Tibet?  who will think about the poor landlords!? Mass deportations of the Chechen and Ingush was pretty bad, but they shouldn't have sided with the dang Nazis. That's also an internal affair of the Soviet Union, and not really comparable to imperialism. If the white nationalists get their way in Europe, you could get a whole new wave of mass deportations all carried out by "social democracies."
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 02:13
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:That's also an internal affair of the Soviet Union, and not really comparable to imperialism. Dang, you had me going all this time!
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Kerensky's government didn't survive because they refused to end the catastrophic war with Germany, not because the perfidious Bolshevik can never be trusted. quote:
lol wow
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:
uhhh
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 02:23
|
|
|
Now tell me why the firebombings and nuclear bombs were good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 03:07
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Mass deportations of the Chechen and Ingush was pretty bad, but they shouldn't have sided with the dang Nazis. That's also an internal affair of the Soviet Union, and not really comparable to imperialism. Funny how Russia occupying all the countries surrounding it suddenly becomes an "internal affair".
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 03:19
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:Funny how Russia occupying all the countries surrounding it suddenly becomes an "internal affair". Shame we're not talking about Russia. The Chechens and Ingush had their own autonomous republic within the USSR. Under Russian rule they had no real form of self-government whatsoever. Being a federated member of a union of states isn't imperialism. There are plenty of other, much more relevant criticisms to lay at the Soviet Union in terms of anti-imperialism than how they treated an integrated member of its own country during the height of World War 2. Was the American Civil War also an example of imperialism? It'd be one thing if these weak efforts at tu quoque had some relevancy, but they just don't. It's apples to oranges.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 03:57
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Now tell me why the firebombings and nuclear bombs were good. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 04:44
|
|
|
Typo posted:So did Communist governments wanna talk about the Soviets in central Asia or mass deportation of the Chechens or the PRC in Tibet? The Tibetan government that the PRC replaced was poo poo awful and everyone at the time knew it. They were running a straight up theocracy in the 20th century. Excerpts from Human Rights in Tibet posted:Likewise, to journalist and writer Israel Epstein, a foreign-born Chinese citizen and member of the Chinese communist party, "the old society" in Tibet "had nothing even remotely resembling human rights." He explains: "High and low, the belief had for centuries been enforced on the Tibetans that everyone's status was predetermined by fate, as a reward for virtues or penalty for faults on one's past incarnations. Hence it was deemed senseless for the rich (even though compassion was abstractly preached) to have qualms about sitting on the necks of the poor, and both criminal and blasphemous for the poor not to patiently bear the yoke. ‘Shangri-La’ the old Tibet was definitely not."[11] Dead Cosmonaut fucked around with this message at 04:56 on Sep 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 04:49
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:The Tibetan government that the PRC replaced was poo poo awful and everyone at the time knew it. They were running a straight up theocracy in the 20th century. This is actually true but it doesn't explain poo poo like why the communist government confiscated the herds of tibetan nomads and force them to settle down in shantytowns after incorporating it into the prc
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 04:53
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:The Tibetan government that the PRC replaced was poo poo awful and everyone at the time knew it. They were running a straight up theocracy in the 20th century. Whoa there, Paul Wolfowitz. I'm not sure "it's OK to invade countries if their governments are lovely" is really a position a modern socialist wants to take.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 05:08
|
|
|
Jack of Hearts posted:Whoa there, Paul Wolfowitz. I'm not sure "it's OK to invade countries if their governments are lovely" is really a position a modern socialist wants to take. I don't miss the government of Sadam Hussein. I don't miss the Tibetan government either.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 05:11
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:I don't miss the government of Sadam Hussein. I don't miss the Tibetan government either. Well, I gotta respect your consistency. You never answered me about how the Soviets were ahead of us in optimization, by the way. I'm not looking to score points, if you have sources on that I'd like to read them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 05:19
|
|
|
Jack of Hearts posted:Well, I gotta respect your consistency. You never answered me about how the Soviets were ahead of us in optimization, by the way. I'm not looking to score points, if you have sources on that I'd like to read them. http://crookedtimber.org/2012/05/30/in-soviet-union-optimization-problem-solves-you/ Basically modern stock portfolio algorithms are based on theory the Soviet Union developed to optimize output of their factories and manufactured goods since they couldn't just let the free market sort it out. The Soviets pioneered early non-analytical algorithms and their engineers would later come over to the US to further them (for example, Nemirovski et al built the first optimization solver for MATLAB).
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 05:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 08:42 |
|
|
social democracy used to mean marxist reclaim the name
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 05:57
|
|
