|
holy poo poo they did it again exactly 100 years later? insANely cool
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 16:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 20:04 |
|
|
lollontee posted:accelerationism is cool i guess yeah this is basically what home ex is saying, too me
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 16:06
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:There's literally a better historical record for communist revolutions in repressive weak bourgeois regimes or semifeudal agrarian countries than anything else. the world has moved on substantially since the late 1800s/early 1900s MAD wasn't a thing. the global reach of armies with airlift and airpower wasn't a thing. every single country major country that could industrialize, has industrialized, and the nature of industry itself has shifted from the production line -> automated labor. and now we're getting fun new stuff like drones and automated surveillance. you can't simply take old tactics, and slap them onto the context today, because everyone's moved on and for our purposes, the thing that totally invalidates HomeEx's logic is the fact that Syria isn't really an independent country, but a client of Russia, and they're as likely to tolerate a revolution there as they are in Russia itself, i.e. not at all Every major power is shifting towards a more introverted, nationalistic framework, and the world of the short term future is not one of revolutions, but of proxy wars and conflicts between 'blocs' of countries, each exploiting every single situation they can for nothing but their own petty self interest but this won't ever reach the levels it did in WW1, because MAD, so the possibility of a collapse of each respective center is basically nil. rudatron fucked around with this message at 17:40 on Dec 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 17:38
|
|
|
rudatron posted:the fact that Syria isn't really an independent country, but a client of Russia This is not true.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:There's literally a better historical record for communist revolutions in repressive weak bourgeois regimes or semifeudal agrarian countries than anything else. Okay, so why does it matter whether or not those countries are western-aligned or "anti-imperialist?" Nicholas II, Chiang Kai-Shek, and Fulgencio Bautista all played ball with the West and the latter two were essentially proxies. The democratic socialist revolutions in South and Central America all occurred under right-wing regimes supported by the U.S. Ironically, I can't think of a single case in which non-alignment with the West helped trigger a communist insurgency.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
all the democratic socialist revolutions in Latin America also failed. you really do have to read Lenin to understand why a national bourgeoisie isn't the same thing as the global, imperialistic bourgeoisie. an "alignment" with the West also isn't the same thing as being fully incorporated into the Western-led global empire of capital. a national bourgeoisie which invests itself into the domestic economy will be much weaker than a global one which can draw upon international resources to guarantee its rule. it's a massive power differential, and it should be obvious which one is easier to overthrow.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
relevant to this discussion: https://apnews.com/7f9e63cb14a54dfa9148b6430d89e873
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:You're so angry all the time Mad. Red. Nude Welcome to the LF thread! We'll give you the whole keyboard, but you'll only need the Capslock!
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:all the democratic socialist revolutions in Latin America also failed. you really do have to read Lenin to understand why a national bourgeoisie isn't the same thing as the global, imperialistic bourgeoisie. an "alignment" with the West also isn't the same thing as being fully incorporated into the Western-led global empire of capital. a national bourgeoisie which invests itself into the domestic economy will be much weaker than a global one which can draw upon international resources to guarantee its rule. it's a massive power differential, and it should be obvious which one is easier to overthrow. Please define and delineate "alignment" vis-à-vis "fully incorporated." Ever hear of the Platt Amendment? Short of being an outright official colony, Cuba was about as incorporated into informal U.S. empire and occupation as one could get I also don't see how Lenin's points about national burgeoisie hold up any more today than Luxemburg's theses on the self-determination of nations As far as I can recall, Daniel Ortega is still in charge of Nicaragua, and Central America is relatively more democratic than it used to be. The "pink tide" in South America was also a reaction to decades of U.S. imperialism Yossarian-22 fucked around with this message at 21:08 on Dec 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:all the democratic socialist revolutions in Latin America also failed. actually, the pink tide is world wide and here to stay
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:10
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:relevant to this discussion: https://apnews.com/7f9e63cb14a54dfa9148b6430d89e873 weak national bourgeoisie, which just allowed assad to maintain power, paves way for communist revolution in syria with paid contractors
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:10
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:all the democratic socialist revolutions in Latin America also failed. you really do have to read Lenin to understand why a national bourgeoisie isn't the same thing as the global, imperialistic bourgeoisie. an "alignment" with the West also isn't the same thing as being fully incorporated into the Western-led global empire of capital. a national bourgeoisie which invests itself into the domestic economy will be much weaker than a global one which can draw upon international resources to guarantee its rule. it's a massive power differential, and it should be obvious which one is easier to overthrow. the interests of the super rich are in no way guaranteed to align with western states interests or american imperialism. all that is guaranteed is that global capital will seek to exploit imperialist power games for profit, but that relationship is conditional, not one of subservience to capital. Russian oligarchs with putins blessing and backed by russian diplomatic efforts have been buying up caspian nations infrastructure for decades now, but those opportunities only existed in the first place because geopolitically control of caspian peninsula is critical to russia's interesters. and i don't need to tell you what happens to those same oligarchs if they piss putin off, always replaced by new kleptocrats more loyal to the hierarchy. in every country, the status of the national bourgeoisie is uniquely different. there is no global, imperialistic bourgeoisie as such for us to fight. we can observe broad trends in economic data, but beyond that this whole idea that the capitalistic classes protects their interest with conscious, unified effort in conflicts between states is incorrect. capitalists are just as well equipped and likely to exploit other capitalists as they are weak states.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
lollontee posted:there is no global, imperialistic bourgeoisie as such for us to fight. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5X8qDDMC-o Yossarian-22 posted:Please define and delineate "alignment" vis-à-vis "fully incorporated." Ever hear of the Platt Amendment? Short of being an outright official colony, Cuba was about as incorporated into informal U.S. empire and occupation as one could get The Sandinistas were out of power for over a decade before they were voted back in. Electoral politics will never realize socialism when any marginal gains can be immediately rolled back by one bad election. Just look at how Brazilian reactionaries are wiping out workers' rights following their successful coup. Honduras still has one of the highest murder rates in the world because the Obama-backed coup government there exploits the drug war as a cover for them to found private charter cities. Russia is the most clear example of a national bourgeoisie existing in contradiction to the global bourgeoisie, because of their geopolitical opposition to American hegemony. It's incredible that there are still posters who interpret this as therefore Russian Bourgeoisie = good and must be defended. It's not. It's a geopolitical analysis of the Russian bourgeoisie's relation to global capitalism, and how it makes their position relatively weak in the face of a real communist opposition.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 22:03
|
|
|
lol this is some galaxy brain poo poo
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
authentic negativity taht articulates a qualitatively different view of social organization can never emerge from a totall ymanaged system like the one we see prevailing internationally, therefore, any group that functions outside of the context of international hegemonic neoliberaism is the rpecondtion to the extemporaneous emergence of genuine revolutionary consciousness, rather than the parameterized reformism of the contemporary "left". anyway, thats why russia is good, even though it's really, really, bad. i like bears
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 22:30
|
|
|
the powerful and turgid communist opposition in russia is going to overthrow putin and trhe oligarch very soon. watch this space
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 22:30
|
|
|
why are tankies always so loving long winded
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 22:38
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:The Sandinistas were out of power for over a decade before they were voted back in. Electoral politics will never realize socialism when any marginal gains can be immediately rolled back by one bad election. Just look at how Brazilian reactionaries are wiping out workers' rights following their successful coup. Honduras still has one of the highest murder rates in the world because the Obama-backed coup government there exploits the drug war as a cover for them to found private charter cities. this idea that russia, powered by putin and his oligarchs, will defeat western imperialism and then be overthrown in a communist revolution seems... suspect
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
it's a solid brown plan. and the beauty is that we don't even have to do anything.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
dunno what thread to put this in so i put it here https://twitter.com/i/moments/940666310886920192
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:this idea that russia, powered by putin and his oligarchs, will defeat western imperialism and then be overthrown in a communist revolution seems... suspect 
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
if anything american unipolar imperialism seems like it'd Accelerate The Contradictions Of Capitalism quicker but that doesn't justify based lion assad memes
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 22:53
|
|
|
Sheng-Ji Yang posted:if anything american unipolar imperialism seems like it'd Accelerate The Contradictions Of Capitalism quicker but that doesn't justify based lion assad memes yeah that's what i've been thinking during this conversation... then shoudln't we support american imperialism? cause it will bring about america's downfall faster??
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
marx thought that capitalism would naturally lead to proletarian revolution. and he was wrong. he continues to be wrong, and will forever be wrong. about that thing unless we figure out a way to unite our solitary national struggles in an actual global movement, the future is going to be an absolute, hierarchical world of exploitation and intermittent war between the capitalist states. and it will be a stable one, a solid state society where no one will be able to organize or agitate, a world of absolute alienation. and then there really will be a a boot stamping on a human face, forever. the capitalist system isn't breaking apart, it's crystallizing and growing ever more stable in the ways it exploits the workers. there is absolutely no future for us in this world of imperialist conflict. just as surely as the first world war smashed the second international, so too will it smash our movement if we hitch it to that same wagon. personally, my only hope for revolution is the promise of technological telepathy, unifying our minds through direct neural interfaces and using that to overcome the alienation between each other that prevents us from sacrificing ourselves for each other. I don't see how else we could ever hope to organize a global movement to overthrow a system that is more stable and powerful than ever before.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
lollontee posted:personally, my only hope for revolution is the promise of technological telepathy, unifying our minds through direct neural interfaces and using that to overcome the alienation between each other that prevents us from sacrificing ourselves for each other. I don't see how else we could ever hope to organize a global movement to overthrow a system that is more stable and powerful than ever before. hmmm, so twitter
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:00
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:hmmm, so twitter Worse, End of Evangelion
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:01
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:hmmm, so twitter er, i thought it was self-evident i was talking about in the context of organizing socialist parties. the tech does gently caress all on it's own, just like you said and we all saw during the occupy movement. you do actually need a political ideology and a party. it's just that it's not enough now. the hierarchy is too strong to be overthrown by traditional means of agitation and we need to adapt to that fact. and indeed adapt biologically.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:05
|
|
|
lollontee posted:russia isn't a socialist state and arguably never was rudatron posted:the fact that Syria isn't really an independent country, but a client of Russia
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:28
|
|
|
Jose posted:why are tankies always so loving long winded just because your brain gets tired reading anything longer than a shitpost doesn't make a post long-winded
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:40
|
|
|
lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:41
|
|
|
Mecha Gojira posted:Worse, End of Evangelion I'd say it's debatable which is worse.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
code:quote:Syria has to very quickly increase its revolution potential if it wants to break free from Russian Imperialism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:56
|
|
|
owned again
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:59
|
|
|
ah, it's because, syria, is like a game
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 00:02
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:this idea that russia, powered by putin and his oligarchs, will defeat western imperialism and then be overthrown in a communist revolution seems... suspect Nobody said anything about Russia "defeating" global capitalism, and it's weird how you guys keep reading things that just aren't there. The point is that, because geopolitically speaking the Russian bourgeoisie are cut off from the global capitalist system, whose locus is the United States, they're in a much weaker position to maintain their dictatorship than other states under Washington's security umbrella. Karl Barks posted:yeah that's what i've been thinking during this conversation... then shoudln't we support american imperialism? cause it will bring about america's downfall faster?? The downfall of the United States is not a certainty, and we could just as well end up like in Elysium where we're all covered in dust living off the scraps of minimum wage, begging for jobs that maintain the robotic workforce which is the only remaining productive capital. American imperialism means billions dead from unaddressed climate change.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 00:02
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:The downfall of the United States is not a certainty, and we could just as well end up like in Elysium where we're all covered in dust living off the scraps of minimum wage, begging for jobs that maintain the robotic workforce which is the only remaining productive capital. American imperialism means billions dead from unaddressed climate change. So does every other type of imperialism. Hell, maybe the chinese trillionares will build the drat thing, who the gently caress knows. thinking that we're not going to end up in the same loving hole just because the american empire falls is retarded. if america falls, another empire will take its place. same as happened with the fall of the british empire, and people being fed as grizzle for the mill hardly even noticed that the flag changed. and you think things will somehow be different because this time the imperialists will be speaking a language besides english
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 00:12
|
|
|
lollontee posted:So does every other type of imperialism. Hell, maybe the chinese trillionares will build the drat thing, who the gently caress knows. thinking that we're not going to end up in the same loving hole just because the american empire falls is retarded. if america falls, another empire will take its place. same as happened with the fall of the british empire, and people being fed as grizzle for the mill hardly even noticed that the flag changed. and you think things will somehow be different because this time the imperialists will be speaking a language besides english This is like trying to have a dialogue with a schizophrenic.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 00:15
|
|
|
rude and confusing
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 00:16
|
|
|
It's good that the Russian bourgeoisie is independent of the global bourgeoisie which is dependent on American capital, because it makes them weaker and more vulnerable to a revolution. You read all that and thought it meant "Russia is good because they're not America, and Russia & China should both rule the world because they aren't American."
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 00:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 20:04 |
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:This is like trying to have a dialogue with a schizophrenic. idk, Prester Jane is infinitely more coherent and consistent than lollontee, and can at the very least parse a loving sentence lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 00:21
|
|