|
Darkman Fanpage posted:what we need now in this unfettered capitalist state is more unfettered capitalism!!! double down bitches!!!! Think of it like this: We both support incrementalism just with different starting points. I think the US is good and want to improve it. You guys think the same except with the Soviet Union as the starting point. Also I don't necesarily think revolution is delusional, just, say, the North Korea support that seems to come along with it for you guys. The mental gymnastics needed to get you there could literally take you anywhere.
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 18:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 20:36 |
|
|
ChickenOfTomorrow posted:corby boy folds under pressure, witness his lack of opposition to brexit and the snoopers charter. He doesn't put up much opposition to Brexit because he doesn't oppose Brexit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 19:12
|
|
|
Bryter posted:He doesn't put up much opposition to Brexit because he doesn't oppose Brexit. that'd do it then
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 19:42
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:Think of it like this: We both support incrementalism just with different starting points. I think the US is good and want to improve it. You guys think the same except with the Soviet Union as the starting point. p much everyone you are talking to (and I agree with this take) thinks that capitalism is inherently unsustainable and immoral, and so a class-based system can't be improved on any more than a race-based system could be but also I guess Ima weirdo since I don't think the Soviet Union is a good starting point for many, many reasons also lol at "North Korea support," I didn't see literally any of that here, even with the supposedly damning quotes. whatever keeps your delusions of moral superiority intact I guess
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
Aeolius posted:As far as I can see, all anyone is asking you to consider is: I read the first link. Certainly, "the form of democracy is less important than its content." But I've yet to see a defense of Cuban democracy that demonstrates any worthwhile content. I'm willing to grant that Cuba can be considered a democracy in a unusual sense of the word that is largely unrelated to its typical English meaning. If this is even approximately the true meaning of democracy that Lenin wrote about, again, hard pass. The threats against Cuba explain the actions of the regime, but almost six decades in, in tyool 2016, they do not serve as a convincing excuse for the current state of political expression in Cuba. The United States managed to have contested elections in 1862: it cannot possibly be that difficult, especially in the absence of a propertied class.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
The problem here is that you can't accept any form of democracy other than liberal democracy, and no matter how much this is explained to you, you'll always revert back to the starting point of liberal democracy or nothing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
Well, heck, if you've asserted it without any evidence, it must be true.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
Tacky-rear end Rococco posted:Well, heck, if you've asserted it without any evidence, it must be true. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3760900&userid=167369
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3760900&userid=167369 I like how you and HE justify your consistent refusal to ever actually, y'know, make a case, by attacking everyone who might disagree with the case you refuse to make. I bet tens of millions of Americans are gonna flock to your banners any day now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
Sheng-ji Yang posted:http://playdosgamesonline.com/hidden-agenda.html I loved that game but had forgotten about it. Thanks for the link! Now I can play (and hideously fail) again!.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 22:47
|
|
|
Tacky-rear end Rococco posted:I like how you and HE justify your consistent refusal to ever actually, y'know, make a case, by attacking everyone who might disagree with the case you refuse to make. I bet tens of millions of Americans are gonna flock to your banners any day now. Bruh, you've said over and over again why Cuba doesn't fit your own personal criteria for democracy, but that's the point. Your personal definitions don't matter. The world doesn't revolve around you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 22:48
|
|
|
yeah, I like comparing cuts of jeans and steak recipes, but I'll cut to the chase: what does Tacky-rear end Rococco want? what do you want to see? I mean, you're going to have a sit-down with the PSL, so it sounds like you've got a few things in mind
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
im the liberal with no interest in dismantling capitalism or establishing a dictatorship of the proletariat but that is inexplicably hanging around the marx thread trying to get leftists to denounce socialism around the world
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 22:55
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Bruh, you've said over and over again why Cuba doesn't fit your own personal criteria for democracy, but that's the point. Your personal definitions don't matter. The world doesn't revolve around you. No one here has even put forward a consistent definition of socialist democracy, or explained why it's worthwhile, or how it's superior to liberal democracy. If my personal understanding is wrong, so be it, but lol if you think "Cuba is democracy because it is defined as a democracy" is convincing to literally anyone who isn't already convinced. It's pathetic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 22:57
|
|
|
jarofpiss posted:im the liberal with no interest in dismantling capitalism or establishing a dictatorship of the proletariat but that is inexplicably hanging around the marx thread trying to get leftists to denounce socialism around the world How dare liberals intrude on a gathering of people salivating at the idea of murdering them for having slightly more money.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 23:18
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:How dare liberals intrude on a gathering of people salivating at the idea of murdering them for having slightly more money. i used to have money until i lost it all betting on a liberal winning the presidency
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 23:37
|
|
|
jarofpiss posted:i used to have money until i lost it all betting on a liberal winning the presidency Thank you for doing your part in defeating capitalism.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
Tacky-rear end Rococco posted:No one here has even put forward a consistent definition of socialist democracy, or explained why it's worthwhile, or how it's superior to liberal democracy. If my personal understanding is wrong, so be it, but lol if you think "Cuba is democracy because it is defined as a democracy" is convincing to literally anyone who isn't already convinced. It's pathetic. You still think "liberal democracy" is a real thing when the United States is a country that was founded by people for whom democracy was a bad word. Even today any civics professor is going to agree with what I said earlier: the United States is not a democracy. What I mean is that you don't know what "democracy" is and that's why you're floundering. In ancient Athens, the "demos" was a tiny class of landed men, all of whom were accorded the right to vote. Was that a democracy? It's where they invented the word, after all. Here's a different way to look at it: When did the USA become a democracy, if you think the USA is a democracy? Was it on or before August 18, 1920? January 1, 1863? You identified the elections of 1862 as a democratic moment in American history but... Were those places just more democratic than their neighbors and ancestors? In that case Castro's Cuba was pretty loving democratic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
DOCTOR ZIMBARDO posted:You still think "liberal democracy" is a real thing when the United States is a country that was founded by people for whom democracy was a bad word. Even today any civics professor is going to agree with what I said earlier: the United States is not a democracy. What I mean is that you don't know what "democracy" is and that's why you're floundering. by Cuba Is A Democracy rules, a lovely democracy is still a democracy aren't semantics fun
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:How dare liberals intrude on a gathering of people salivating at the idea of murdering them for having slightly more money. nothing wrong with murdering the rich.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:02
|
|
|
I mean "only choose between socialism or slightly different socialism" would probably be better for everyone but you can't exactly call it democratic
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:04
|
|
|
Yinlock posted:I mean "only choose between capitalism or slightly different capitalism" would probably be better for everyone but you can't exactly call it democratic okay i updated your post to reflect the current reality, which is also called democracy now
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:12
|
|
|
DOCTOR ZIMBARDO posted:You still think "liberal democracy" is a real thing when the United States is a country that was founded by people for whom democracy was a bad word. Even today any civics professor is going to agree with what I said earlier: the United States is not a democracy. lol what is this The United States is a democratic republic. The fact one of the authors of the Federalist Papers decided to shorten "representative republic" to "republic" and "Athenian-style direct democracy" to "democracy" and argue for the former over the latter does not come close to negating this. What it demonstrates is your extremely shallow understanding of political organization. (Athens was itself a republic, by definition of the term.) Nor does the fact that America was founded as an explicitly oligarchic republic. I live in a part of the country where citizens take part in direct democracy on a regular basis, and indeed, for better or for worse, where the electorate effectively serves as the actual legislature. But no, I agree, American democracy is a lie, and furthermore: nothing is true, everything is permitted.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:14
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:okay i updated your post to reflect the current reality, which is also called democracy now good point but uh the second half makes this update awkward karl barks loves capitalism, confirmed
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:14
|
|
|
We already have a system where both of your choices are capitalism. If you're the ones who pull the levers of the republic, you do not need a totalitarian ideology or practice to suppress forms of political action that threaten you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
Yinlock posted:good point but uh the second half makes this update awkward nooooo
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
DOCTOR ZIMBARDO posted:In ancient Athens, the "demos" was a tiny class of landed men, all of whom were accorded the right to vote. Was that a democracy? It's where they invented the word, after all. Also holy poo poo stop talking if you don't know anything on the topic. Your understanding of Athenian democracy doesn't even rise to Wikipedia levels. Your characterization of the "demos" is emphatically untrue.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
Tacky-rear end Rococco posted:Your understanding of Athenian democracy doesn't even rise to Wikipedia levels. lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:22
|
|
|
Tacky-rear end Rococco posted:Also holy poo poo stop talking if you don't know anything on the topic. Your understanding of Athenian democracy doesn't even rise to Wikipedia levels. Your characterization of the "demos" is emphatically untrue. the voting class in athens was tiny, what are you talking about
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
Tacky-rear end Rococco posted:Also holy poo poo stop talking if you don't know anything on the topic. Your understanding of Athenian democracy doesn't even rise to Wikipedia levels. Your characterization of the "demos" is emphatically untrue. this needs to be the mouseover text for either d&d or c-spam
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:25
|
|
|
Darkman Fanpage posted:nothing wrong with murdering the rich. there have been posters clamoring for purging the middle class
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:26
|
|
|
There is no such thing for the middle class. Either you labor for a wage or you use your wealth gained from rent to get more rent and wealth.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:26
|
|
|
Tacky-rear end Rococco posted:No one here has even put forward a consistent definition of socialist democracy, or explained why it's worthwhile, or how it's superior to liberal democracy. If my personal understanding is wrong, so be it, but lol if you think "Cuba is democracy because it is defined as a democracy" is convincing to literally anyone who isn't already convinced. It's pathetic. liberal democracy, or bourgeois democracy, is a system by which the working class is allowed to choose which members of the capitalist class will oppress them. political participation is functionally limited to such elections, and the amount of influence workers have on policy is negligible as access isn't given to the vast majority of people. if a member of the working class wants to participate they need capital, which by its very nature is difficult to acquire for workers, for obvious reasons. even if by some miracle a worker gets to a level of government where they might enact any kind of meaningful change, institutional inertia and the deep state — all of which are allayed against the working class and for the capitalist class — will logjam them. now consider socialist democracy. in most cases there is one political party, though in pretty much every socialist country i can think of there are minority parties that function like interest groups for various constituences, like the chondoist party in the dprk or the sept. 3 society in the prc. where that ruling party differs from bourgeois parties is that the party is designed from the ground up to be a party of the workers, accessible to everyone and in practice something between what we picture as a typical political party and a meritocratic organization for social climbing. this is in addition to various mass organizations and unions workers can enter to make their voices heard either at the local level, the workplace level or the national level if the organization is high-profile enough. the tippy top of the party's food chain does often include high ranking bureaucrats and administrators, but that kind of formation doesn't seem particularly unique to socialist countries. governing in the modern era does require a certain level of experience within the machinery of the state (lol trump) and i'm not too bothered by the party structure essentially picking and choosing the right people to move upward in the executive ladder. the american myth is that "anyone" can grow up to be president, something we all have come to understand is a fiction. "anyone can grow up to join the politburo standing committee" might not roll off the tongue as nicely, but it's actually true. liu yunshan, for instance, was born to a family of farmers. the point being, in a single party society rank and file citizens have a lot more opportunities to join the political process at all levels, and the party facilitates that. you can look at the membership of ruling socialist parties by occupation to see this borne out. even in market socialist china, rural peasants and industrial workers combined make up nearly half of all party membership. compare this to the united states. is some guy working the fields in california or on the assembly line in michigan ever going to have that kind of opportunity? will he ever really have a sniff at decision-making or input at any level? theoretically, he's supposed to. but in practice, no. is there democracy in the united states, in the capitalist countries of the west? technically yeah. but democracy for whom? who really feels satisfied about their government at the end of the day? that's a key component of actually existing socialism, and it's something people in the former ussr cite as being a major factor in why they want a return to soviet power: besides the things like free cradle to grave health care and education, housing guarantees and the like, people remember a sense of community, a belief that they were personally involved in something greater than themselves and were active participants in it. east germans remember the stasi, sure. we can confidently say we don't want a return to that bit of actually existing socialism. but they also remember a time when they could ask the government to help them get a house for their families and within a month were given materials and instructions free of charge, and everyone in the neighborhood got together to build a new house for one of their friends. R. Guyovich fucked around with this message at 00:30 on Nov 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
Fiction posted:There is no such thing for the middle class. Either you labor for a wage or you use your wealth gained from rent to get more rent and wealth. There's no difference between a computer engineer and a burger flipper, duly noted.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:There's no difference between a computer engineer and a burger flipper, duly noted. the type of labor is different, as are the wages. but their relationship to production is the same, yes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:29
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:There's no difference between a computer engineer and a burger flipper, duly noted. That's right, both perform labor and create value for their bosses. The computer engineer might be scarcer because of the need for education which means they're given more benefits in order to stay, but neither of them have any say in what the corporation employing them does with its capital.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
Manly Marxist Memes: Your understanding doesn't even rise to Wikipedia
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:31
|
|
|
the burning tower man still has yet to tell me what he would like to accomplish as a member of the PSL!!!
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:31
|
|
|
Middle class are the people who have escaped the proletarian life-defining condition of being beholden to capitalist's every whim due to being under a constant threat of poverty, and the idea that they are maligned for this is just hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 20:36 |
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Middle class are the people who have escaped the proletarian life-defining condition of being beholden to capitalist's every whim due to being under a constant threat of poverty, and the idea that they are maligned for this is just hosed up. the middle class, by and large, are like three missed paychecks away from poverty
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 00:33
|
|