|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2020 20:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 04:29 |
|
|
Mr. Lobe posted:I agree? I'm not arguing with you specifically, if that's what it looks like. More saying that 2000 was way worse than Iowa and if people are having their confidence shaken today they'll drop dead if they read a history book.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2020 22:59
|
|
|
Percelus posted:these people don't deserve the guillotine, it's too merciful for them. draw and quarter the fucks Scaphism: Killing them with the metaphors for profit and excess
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 02:28
|
|
|
I still contend that forcing them to live in the gay socialist utopia in a tiny cell and making them society-wide pariahs for their actions. There is no hell comrades, killing them is the easy way out. In minecraft.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 02:34
|
|
|
T-man posted:I still contend that forcing them to live in the gay socialist utopia in a tiny cell and making them society-wide pariahs for their actions. There is no hell comrades, killing them is the easy way out. You should really look into scaphism, that poo poo can take days or even more than a week. Plus, letting them live won't guarantee they won't be problem that eventually needs to be dealt with. In Roblox
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 02:42
|
|
|
Don't worry guys, America's Smartest Socialist is here with some sage advice. https://twitter.com/sunraysunray/status/1224718056712261632?s=20
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 02:56
|
|
|
The way to enact revolutionary change is to avoid eroding confidence in the American system. Please contribute to my magazine. I will maybe pay you in 2021.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 02:57
|
|
|
Prince Myshkin posted:Don't worry guys, America's Smartest Socialist is here with some sage advice. There's some truth in this. I know a lot of lower class people who're totally demoralized because they believe votes don't matter
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 03:08
|
|
|
The opposite of reality? That's Diametrical Materialism.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 03:08
|
|
|
I was always a fan of the way the Persians killed Crassus (the richest man in rome) They poured molten gold down his throat
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 03:14
|
|
|
Lol
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 03:27
|
|
|
What's up with Paul Cockshott and sex workers? In fact, now that I think about it, what is the general socialist/Marxist stance on sex work while we're still under the current capitalist system?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 05:22
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/pslweb/status/1224751631629266947quote:Although we are not Democrats, we encourage those voting in the upcoming Democratic Party primaries to vote for Bernie Sanders.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 05:27
|
|
|
BrokenGameboy posted:What's up with Paul Cockshott and sex workers? In fact, now that I think about it, what is the general socialist/Marxist stance on sex work while we're still under the current capitalist system? https://twitter.com/getfiscal/status/1144664198619848705?s=21
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 05:30
|
|
|
That's generally been my stance. I got confused though because cockshott has a blog post somewhere about how "Marxists should absolutely not be pro sex work. " And I didn't know if that was just cockshott being cockshott. Edit: for clarification, I'm referring to the initial referenced post. BrokenGameboy fucked around with this message at 05:46 on Feb 5, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 05:38
|
|
|
PAWGs get paid 77 cents on the dollar!
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 05:40
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/communistsusa/status/1224753134486151168
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 05:52
|
|
|
BrokenGameboy posted:What's up with Paul Cockshott and sex workers? In fact, now that I think about it, what is the general socialist/Marxist stance on sex work while we're still under the current capitalist system? CPGB-ML, Cockshott's party, is a famously backward one, he probably just learned it from his peers. Avakian's RCP is nothing compared to it on that front. I think the Marxist stance would be roughly that sex work is work and it's performed under various class relations: off the top of my head I can think of proletarian sex work (employed in some facility), petty-bourgeois sex work (independent or collective service providers), lumpen sex work (basically same as either of the previous ones except it's illegal and within the informal economy) and human trafficking, slavery. Also that sex work has been historically unavoidable in class society because its basic unit is the monogamous family and when cheating exists as a widespread phenomenon, so does the market for various forms of sex work. I think common logic applies: slavers are scum, the state is too when it creates victimless crimes out of phenomena that cannot disappear, landlords and capitalists are undesirable. What's more controversial is the nature of the work itself. See, socialists (as far as I've seen) tend to either treat it as a huge symbol for the oppression of women and start itching to get rid of most of its forms immediately through legislation or be liberal about it and just want to free it into a bunch of regular professions through an extensive decriminalization. I'm on a side that feels it's too abhorrent when people can a living off of other people's sex work, but that trying to limit the practice itself just hurts a bunch of people that shoulnd't be hurt. However, unlike full decrim, it's a self-contradictory position because it's very hard to limit profiting off of sex work without putting the workers themselves into various unintended binds.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 06:18
|
|
|
Oops wrong thread
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 06:24
|
|
|
I'm pretty much with you on this, uncop. In a broad sense I'm pro sex workers and everything. However, gently caress if I know a good system for legalizing it without enabling exploitation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 06:25
|
|
|
BrokenGameboy posted:just cockshott being cockshott. a good rule of thumb: take the computer scientist dweeb seriously when he's talking about economic calculation and other number-crunching problems, but not otherwise
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 06:50
|
|
|
GalacticAcid posted:reminiscing on good posts i stumbled across this endnote in the book A Freedom Budget for all Americans by Le Blanc and Yates  seems like the authors are overstating their case when they say "the entire construct has been effectively demolished" since that 'demolition' devolves into academic quibbling about definitions. posting it anyways for anyone else interested in the trot neocon connection
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 07:23
|
|
|
How come Vietnam never gets crap for being revisionist or Dengist or not actually socialist or authoritarian or whatever it is people have an issue with for the PRC
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 07:31
|
|
|
because are you really going to tell the people that took on 3 super powers with 0 industry and won that they’re wrong
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 07:35
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:because are you really going to tell the people that took on 3 super powers with 0 industry and won that they’re wrong not after the Ls they've taken, no
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 07:59
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:How come Vietnam never gets crap for being revisionist or Dengist or not actually socialist or authoritarian or whatever it is people have an issue with for the PRC If Vietnam were an economic force on the level of China you'd be seeing a hell of a lot more about that from the corporate press, and then, very coincidentally, the US left would be parroting it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 08:10
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:How come Vietnam never gets crap for being revisionist or Dengist or not actually socialist or authoritarian or whatever it is people have an issue with for the PRC I think the main reason is that Vietnam never raised high expectations in people the same way as the USSR, China and arguably Cuba did. It's considered a bit player sort of doomed to follow in the footsteps of its associates since it doesn't have the geographical basis to be a self-sufficient center of socialism. Much like the DPRK actually, that country is just fetishized because of its closed-off nature and nukes. Furthermore, Vietnam already lost the hopes and attention of the pro-China faction during the Sino-Soviet split and it has given no reason for the (already revisionist) pro-USSR faction not to like it. AFAIK it looks considerably better than post-dengist China in terms of income inequality, unemployment rate, universal healthcare, price-controlled necessities and so on. Thirdly, Vietnam just has no basis to develop any kind of imperialist sector even with its pro-capitalist reforms. Even China can only do that due to its sheer size, its imperialist sector isn't going to outweigh its imperialist-exploited sector any time soon. Socialists of neighboring countries are unlikely to begin loudly condemning Vietnamese capital or Vietnamese military aggression. Now, how many have even heard of Lao People's Democratic Republic? Vietnam would be off the map the same way if it hadn't been the center of a bunch of wars that westerners cared about.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 08:38
|
|
|
reading an old copy of earl browder's "people's front" about building a coalition to stand up to the ultra-reactionary alf landon - black legion - liberty league - wall steet axis in the 1936 elections! the PSL quasi-endorsement of bernie echoes in some ways how the CPUSA did things back then. there are probably some small differences though a lot of what i've read so far is browder blasting norman thomas of the socialist party "first, workers are interested, it is not a matter of indifference to them, as to which of two bourgeois parties shall hold power, when one of them is reactionary, desires to wipe out democratic rights and social legislation, while the other in some degree defends these progressive measures achieved under capitalism." "lenin long ago taught us that such doctrinaire policies are not revolutionary. he taught us when, how, under what conditions, communists could not only vote for but even enter into alliances with bourgeois candidates and parties -- as against a threatening attack of overwhelming reactionary forces."
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 11:23
|
|
|
BrutalistMcDonalds posted:reading an old copy of earl browder's "people's front" about building a coalition to stand up to the ultra-reactionary alf landon - black legion - liberty league - wall steet axis in the 1936 elections! the PSL quasi-endorsement of bernie echoes in some ways how the CPUSA did things back then. there are probably some small differences though There's a big difference on the contextual level: CPUSA in 1936 was following the coordinated Comintern policy of building anti-fascist popular fronts in preparation for the upcoming war in Europe. The aim of defending the USSR determined the form of the popular front: ultimately, it was fine if communists subordinated themselves to progressive forces if that was what beating back reactionary forces for the upcoming years would take. After WW2 the popular front concept persisted as a less coordinated part of USSR's foreign policy, where the point was for communist parties to work for their countries to uphold friendlier relations with the USSR than had been the case before WW2. In the USA of today, there's absolutely nothing left of that context! There's no coordinated international struggle to support by making yourself palatable for progressive liberals to ally with. Supporting Bernie in the leninist fashion appropriate for the times, "like the rope supports a hanged man", means genuinely gambling on him failing spectacularly and getting to publicly thrash his whole ideology for it. The other leninist basis to support him would be if he was truly committed to cracking down on union-busting, the cops, the military, and other institutions that are there to prevent independent power that opposes US bourgeois aims from rising. A person whose aim were to weaken the US state, erode trust in it, and probably exit the position feet first, would genuinely deserve the title of a socialist president. Unfortunately Bernie actually believes that USA holds a moral high ground and isn't a scourge on this earth.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 14:05
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/_jackhy/status/1225053101859790849?s=19
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 19:43
|
|
|
lmfao
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 19:53
|
|
|
Juan Guaidó...welcome to the anti imperialist resistance
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 19:54
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/sunraysunray/status/1225209146330558464?s=20
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 03:36
|
|
|
MOVE ALONG CITIZEN
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 03:56
|
|
|
uncop posted:There's a big difference on the contextual level: CPUSA in 1936 was following the coordinated Comintern policy of building anti-fascist popular fronts in preparation for the upcoming war in Europe. The aim of defending the USSR determined the form of the popular front: ultimately, it was fine if communists subordinated themselves to progressive forces if that was what beating back reactionary forces for the upcoming years would take. After WW2 the popular front concept persisted as a less coordinated part of USSR's foreign policy, where the point was for communist parties to work for their countries to uphold friendlier relations with the USSR than had been the case before WW2. I mean, the PSL line here seems fine. Become a part of the movement, when it inevitably disappoints, you're already there and know the people who wanted more. Anyways, if Bernie gets elected I'll maybe have Healthcare for the first time in nearly a decade so that's be swell
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 04:02
|
|
|
Don’t boo: vote - The Millennial Socialist Thinker
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 04:02
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 04:03
|
|
|
lmao i missed this
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 04:09
|
|
|
Broke: Jacobin mag Woke: Proudhonist mag Bespoke: Ultramontanist mag
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 04:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 04:29 |
|
|
new chapo cringe
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:41
|
|
