|
I'm not assuming goodwill, but the fact is that American power is constrained in ways chinese power is not, and China itself relies heavily on xenophobia to deflect over domestic concerns, much more than any other country including the US. Every single great power today is either a capitalist oligarchy or a capitalist democracy, the instant a socialist country emerges with a reasonable chance of success, is the instant all these powers will mysteriously find common cause and appear on that socialist countries doorstep, and that's true whether or not you have a hegemony opposing you or not. That's the hard reality.
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 14:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 06:51 |
|
|
rudatron posted:I'm not assuming goodwill, but the fact is that American power is constrained in ways chinese power is not, and China itself relies heavily on xenophobia to deflect over domestic concerns, much more than any other country including the US. are you saying it's american protectionism that's keeping cuba and venezuela out from under russian or chinese oppression?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 14:08
|
|
|
im a simple and not well read man but im willing to learn so maybe my impression is wrong
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 14:08
|
|
|
rudatron posted:I'm not assuming goodwill, but the fact is that American power is constrained in ways chinese power is not, and China itself relies heavily on xenophobia to deflect over domestic concerns, much more than any other country including the US. All the more reason why the United States should be that country.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 14:24
|
|
|
Exactly, in fact that's basically your only win condition, as things stand now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 14:39
|
|
|
To say that a revolution in the USA is nessesary before any other countries of the world can really liberate themselves seems like a bizzare reversal of the third worldist argument, that only revolution in the core has any long term prospects. And yet no successful historical revolutions have occured in the core: Russia, China, Cuba, Korea, Vietnam, Laos etc were all peripheral countries (or semi-peripheral in the case of russia 1917). And yes, many revolutions have been defeated by the imperialist countries, but there are plenty of examples of revolutions that were not defeated by imperialist countries despite their best military efforts: Russia, China, Vietnam. Yes it would be nice if there was a revolution in the USA, would make things very easy but there is so much evidence pointing towards the reactionary nature of a large proportion of the US population that it seems unlikely in the current circumstances, and in the near future, while it is more likley in other, peripheral, countries. - If there was a revolution in, say, india in the next 10 years, would people in the core just repeat the "impossiblility of socialism in one country"?, And yet the taking our a country such as india or any other out of imperialist exploitation would weaken the imperialist system as a whole and actually make revolution more probable in the core countries and other peripheral countries due the the reduction in the ability to extract super-profits.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 15:28
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:i know this is hard to think of in a post cold war world, but, regional power is what nations are before they become super powers. regional superpower doesnt even make sense. either you can project influence or force across the world at will, or you can't. i was using the term ironically
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 15:29
|
|
|
Dunno if you realize this but China and Russia only happened because of two little things called WW1 and WW2. What's the probability of such a conflict occurring again? Effectively zero. The other countries had the material support of either the Soviet Russia or Mao's China. They couldn't have survived without them. But now, both China and Russia are capitalist oligarchies. Socialist strategy must adapt to these new circumstances, not simply follow reflexively the patterns of the past.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 15:34
|
|
|
You haven't been talking about strategy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 15:42
|
|
|
Weeping Wound posted:the homework explainer is a godsend to us, but the last person I'd send to talk to the volunteer firefighters I work with the idea of me talking dense theory to a bunch of extremely new york guys is funny but gimme a little credit
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 15:45
|
|
|
hang on, gotta tweet dialectical materialism @nycguidovoice
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 15:47
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:You haven't been talking about strategy. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 15:53
|
|
|
I definitely meant, last page, that supporting socialism is likely to lead to a backlash from the employers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 16:14
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Dunno if you realize this but China and Russia only happened because of two little things called WW1 and WW2. What's the probability of such a conflict occurring again? Effectively zero. How can you claim that inter-imperialist wars will never occur again while simultaniously claiming that Russia and China are imperialist countries in waiting held back by US imperialist control of the world?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Dunno if you realize this but China and Russia only happened because of two little things called WW1 and WW2. What's the probability of such a conflict occurring again? Effectively zero. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 16:30
|
|
|
Baloogan I take it back! The prolix is getting out of control! Please come fix this! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 16:31
|
|
|
G.C. Furr III posted:How can you claim that inter-imperialist wars will never occur again while simultaniously claiming that Russia and China are imperialist countries in waiting held back by US imperialist control of the world? so the instant a non-nuclear power goes socialist, such that it's a legitimate threat to every capitalist country, *poof* off it disappears
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 16:48
|
|
|
DOCTOR ZIMBARDO posted:I went to a DSA happy hour a few weeks ago and it went OK. gonna try to go to some more events coming up but there's so much poo poo going on right now I'm involved in DSA in NYC, and trying to build out a group in one of the outer boroughs. I'm curious what your, and other thread posters', thoughts on the group are. I'm also curious about how they relate to other leftist groups, but that may be more contentious.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 16:52
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Dunno if you realize this but China and Russia only happened because of two little things called WW1 and WW2. What's the probability of such a conflict occurring again? Effectively zero. Both China and Russia were always state capitalist oligarchies supporting other oligarchies imho Russia initially had working class control in the major cities which almost spread to Western Europe though. One benefit of today's world is that a revolution would occur in a country that has industry and surely globalization=more global revolution
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
rudatron posted:i...haven't...? It's impossible to actually tell what your point is. American hegemony only ends 1 of 2 ways: either by a socialist revolution, or by the catastrophic failure of the American state. Nobody afaik has made any kind of accelerationist argument, and you're not arguing against the first outcome, so what's your dang point?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
rudatron posted:why are those points in conflict? Wars between nuclear powers won't happen, total exhaustion is impossible, but perpetual proxy wars are guaranteed and each side is going to jockey for its sphere of influence there's no reason to assume that war between nuclear powers won't happen
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
Yossarian-22 posted:Both China and Russia were always state capitalist oligarchies supporting other oligarchies imho That is a bold statement that seems to have no basis in what actually happened in the USSR or China
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 17:12
|
|
|
How could it happen? Wars between nuclear powers are just far too risky, there's no incentive for one of them to not just throw nukes around when it loses, and both sides know that. the only way it's happening is if they ever get strategic defense systems to work, and i'm betting on that happening 'never' because as the attacker you just have too many degrees of freedom, whatever they do you can countermeasure itPener Kropoopkin posted:It's impossible to actually tell what your point is.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 17:16
|
|
|
G.C. Furr III posted:there's no reason to assume that war between nuclear powers won't happen I agree. But there is no reason to consider the political consequences of WW3 because humanity is already hosed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
rudatron posted:I mean the model of imperalist exploitation is that you take resources from the periphery to support your core manufacturing base just quoting this because I missed it, and its wrong. imperialism is the political and military effort by the major capitalist countries countries to siphon and extort surplus-value from foriegn lands and imperialism quite hapily exports its "core manurfacturing base" away from the country itself Done throughdomination of trade, monopoly and capital export, where capital export is central to international capitalism edit: this is what Grossman had to say on imperialism, and basically why I keep banging on about it grossman posted:Imperialism is characterised both by stagnation and by aggressiveness. These tendencies have to be explained in their unity; if monopolisation causes stagnation, then how can we explain the aggressive character of imperialism? In fact both phenomena are ultimately rooted in the tendency towards breakdown, in imperfect valorisation due to overaccumulation. The growth of monopoly is a means of enhancing profitability by raising prices and, in this sense, it is only a surface appearance whose inner structure is insufficient valorisation linked to capital accumulation. https://www.marxists.org/archive/grossman/1929/breakdown/ch02.htm G.C. Furr III fucked around with this message at 18:14 on Jan 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
unbutthurtable posted:I'm involved in DSA in NYC, and trying to build out a group in one of the outer boroughs. I'm curious what your, and other thread posters', thoughts on the group are. I'm also curious about how they relate to other leftist groups, but that may be more contentious. I like dsa in theory because they help normalize discussions about socialism but I wish they were clearer about where they stand on social democracy (capitalism + welfare state)
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 18:05
|
|
|
Ruzihm posted:I like dsa in theory because they help normalize discussions about socialism but I wish they were clearer about where they stand on social democracy (capitalism + welfare state) yes, I too wonder if the democratic socialists of america are for social democracy
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 18:35
|
|
|
Ruzihm posted:I like dsa in theory because they help normalize discussions about socialism but I wish they were clearer about where they stand on social democracy (capitalism + welfare state) To be honest, one of the strengths is that it's a pretty big tent. For a long time, the right has been unified and the left has been fragmented. Having an organization that can mobilize a mass of people with views varying from Working Families Party-type progressives to genuine communists, and connect the dots from fights for social justice alongside BLM, etc to economic justice alongside unions feels like exactly what we need right now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
at least nepal is communist now amirite 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 19:20
|
|
|
unbutthurtable posted:To be honest, one of the strengths is that it's a pretty big tent. For a long time, the right has been unified and the left has been fragmented. Having an organization that can mobilize a mass of people with views varying from Working Families Party-type progressives to genuine communists, and connect the dots from fights for social justice alongside BLM, etc to economic justice alongside unions feels like exactly what we need right now. There's a hugely active group of committed communists, anarchists, etc. working within the DSA. Easily as many or more than regular ol' social democrats. Harringtonism is long past us now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:There's a hugely active group of committed communists, anarchists, etc. working within the DSA. Easily as many or more than regular ol' social democrats. Harringtonism is long past us now. Maybe the BLM<>unions thing made it seem like I was focusing on the progressive side of things, but I didn't mean to. You're absolutely right. My point is that an organization that can accommodate Sanders Democrats and WFPers as well as anarcho-communists is vital.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
I've learned a lot from this thread. My question is, why are Trokstyists (Trotskyites?) bad in the view of some of of the posters her? The reason I'm asking is because when I read the OP of this thread earlier last year, I reached out to both PSL and SAlt, and SAlt was the first to get back to me and who I've been in contact with since. Just wondering. Edit: I mean, I think I get it, but looking for clarification I guess. Greg Legg fucked around with this message at 20:38 on Jan 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
unbutthurtable posted:Maybe the BLM<>unions thing made it seem like I was focusing on the progressive side of things, but I didn't mean to. You're absolutely right. My point is that an organization that can accommodate Sanders Democrats and WFPers as well as anarcho-communists is vital. Oh I agree with you, you were just the last to speak on the topic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:There's a hugely active group of committed communists, anarchists, etc. working within the DSA. Easily as many or more than regular ol' social democrats. Harringtonism is long past us now. that very much depends on which local organization you're talking about. and when they're welcoming loving crabapple with open arms i have a huge amount of suspicion over their motives and mission
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
i enjoy the chapo trap house podcast as well but that doesn't mean the people involved aren't careerists, and that attitude is crazy prevalent in the dsa/jacobin crowd
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 21:19
|
|
|
of course. im not begrudging them success or steady work. but you throw an academic or media job at some of these folks and that's it for whatever activism they were doing. jerry rubin is the most famous example but a lot of '68 radicals ran off at first sign of failure
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 21:22
|
|
|
G.C. Furr III posted:just quoting this because I missed it, and its wrong. imperialism is the political and military effort by the major capitalist countries countries to siphon and extort surplus-value from foriegn lands and imperialism quite hapily exports its "core manurfacturing base" away from the country itself lol no Even Che Guevara himself complained about Soviet imperialism enticing Cuba to revolve its economy around selling sugar to the USSR. The "socialist" state also extracts surplus value from the working class What can you possibly call Soviet intervention in Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan if not imperialism?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 21:29
|
|
|
chapo trap house makes 31,000 per month on Patreon, what more income do they need lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 21:32
|
|
|
Yossarian-22 posted:lol no wot are u talking about m8; I am refering specifically to rudatrons definition of imperialism as the extraction of resources from the periphery to supply a protected core manurfacturing base which is not the marxist conception of imperialism and you start on the whole USSR schtick apropos of my butt I mean what do you think of when marxists say imperialism? G.C. Furr III fucked around with this message at 21:42 on Jan 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 21:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 06:51 |
|
|
Serf posted:chapo trap house makes 31,000 per month on Patreon, what more income do they need lol at a certain point it's not about money it's about clout. they're doing all right in that department but we'll see what happens in the next four years
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 21:51
|
|