|
Atrocious Joe posted:this dead, gay forum is not a great cross section of US society And even here, with the exception of this thread (maybe others exist, I only read here and the movie forum and that's mostly for SMG) the farthest left people go is Bernard "Bernie" Sanders. I really don't get the reputation SA has on the rest of the internet for being this infamous hive of left-wing thought.
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 08:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 13:50 |
|
|
Prince Myshkin posted:And even here, with the exception of this thread (maybe others exist, I only read here and the movie forum and that's mostly for SMG) the farthest left people go is Bernard "Bernie" Sanders. I really don't get the reputation SA has on the rest of the internet for being this infamous hive of left-wing thought. There aren't exactly many thriving Marxist message boards.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 08:04
|
|
|
I mean, I don't think the Bernie-ing is necessarily saying that's as far left as people go. I've knocked doors for Bernie but I absolutely know he's no where near what we need to do in the end, which is the end of capitalism
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 08:05
|
|
|
Prince Myshkin posted:And even here, with the exception of this thread (maybe others exist, I only read here and the movie forum and that's mostly for SMG) the farthest left people go is Bernard "Bernie" Sanders. I really don't get the reputation SA has on the rest of the internet for being this infamous hive of left-wing thought. You can start more threads, they’re free
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 08:11
|
|
|
SSJ_naruto_2003 posted:I mean, I don't think the Bernie-ing is necessarily saying that's as far left as people go. I've knocked doors for Bernie but I absolutely know he's no where near what we need to do in the end, which is the end of capitalism And when Bernie gets mulched by the system, it is Biden time?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 08:13
|
|
|
"bernie is the compromise candidate" is a pretty common take in c-spam but it is exciting to see people rallying behind the idea of socialism, even if their idea of what that means isn't terribly radical
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 08:13
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:"bernie is the compromise candidate" is a pretty common take in c-spam The issue is there isn't a plan B.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 08:13
|
|
|
Centrist Committee posted:You can start more threads, they’re free Only really have time to lurk and occasionally reply.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 08:14
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:The issue is there isn't a plan B. while this is true, in a proper revolution there would be no plan b because we'd all be dead if it didn't work i mean the democrats will be pretty dead in the water of they run biden. this is, at the least, a political realignment. the major problem with creating a plan b is not being able to see the future.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 08:18
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:And when Bernie gets mulched by the system, it is Biden time? What? No lmao. It's Gloria La Riva or sit home and don't vote. Voting is not the end of the political process. It's barely a beginning. Right now I'm working on organizing people to shut down the local concentration camp. It's a 'short term' jail that took a contract with ICE. Since it's short term, there is no area for outdoors recreation. Some of the people in the ICE immigrant wing have been inside for over a year, I think the most is two? So they've not seen the sun in 2 years lmao Anyways a lot of the people I'm organizing with are Bernie fans but this is helping them become more left and more radical
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 08:19
|
|
|
socialism, for earners
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 08:20
|
|
|
Also I guess this avatar doesn't fit anymore. Got it in 2016 thread but I'm starting my candidacy for psl soon and am not a dsa member so
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 08:22
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:but it is exciting to see people rallying behind the idea of socialism, even if their idea of what that means isn't terribly radical this seems like a risk more than anything honestly
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 08:49
|
|
|
exmarx posted:this seems like a risk more than anything honestly What's the risk? It's not like any of the million splinter sect communist parties are on the verge of a proletarian uprising.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 08:56
|
|
|
Prince Myshkin posted:And even here, with the exception of this thread (maybe others exist, I only read here and the movie forum and that's mostly for SMG) the farthest left people go is Bernard "Bernie" Sanders. I really don't get the reputation SA has on the rest of the internet for being this infamous hive of left-wing thought. Lol at equating supporting bernie with how far left a person is He's a compromise to 90% of bernie supporting cspammers
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 09:04
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:The issue is there isn't a plan B. There's always 'been' a plan b though very few in America are willing to entertain massive risks causing upheaval. it's a real docile population unfortunately e; that's the reason i a dirty foreigner have the bust gangtag, the reality is bernie could be a good first step to making organizing stronger in the US, not to mention fixing the imperialist policies of the us a little which is very impactful for my neighborhood. Is humanity saved if he wins, hell no, that's not gonna happen until capitalism falls, but it's something dex_sda fucked around with this message at 09:16 on Mar 6, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 09:09
|
|
|
dex_sda posted:Lol at equating supporting bernie with how far left a person is You've got many of those people talking about an AOC run in 2024, and she is in several policy respects worse than him. Not being able to get past seeing politics in terms of presidential election cycles seems to affect everybody no matter what radicalism they declaim.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 10:33
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:while this is true, in a proper revolution there would be no plan b because we'd all be dead if it didn't work However, real revolution isn't a single moment but composed of lots of little moments over a period of years that can go terribly right but still terribly wrong later if not immediately, and plan Bs are the difference between preserving forces from inevitable defeats and wasting them wholesale. Glorious revolutionary insurrections have such a high chance to eventually end in a massacre that what victories are gained pretty much must be utilized to enable a plan B of escaping as a coherent fighting force once the overwhelming government response arrives, or better yet, immediately utilizing that fighting force to engage in offensives and keep the initiative. Otherwise the government response will not only nullify the gains from the victory, but destroy what made the initial victory possible in the first place. Like, the single biggest issue in historical insurrections is that they mount passive defenses of their homes so that even disorganized governments can rather easily amass enough of a force to take them out one by one.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 10:36
|
|
|
exmarx posted:this seems like a risk more than anything honestly Considering how far right America generally is, it seems a positive step that politicians are being elected nationally who are openly "socialist" (even if most are just social democrats rather than actual socialists). Seems a mite optimistic to go from the bastion of libertarianism and individualism straight to ripe for a revolutionary communism.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 11:22
|
|
|
Prince Myshkin posted:You've got many of those people talking about an AOC run in 2024, and she is in several policy respects worse than him. Not being able to get past seeing politics in terms of presidential election cycles seems to affect everybody no matter what radicalism they declaim. Yea that loving sucks but if Bernie doesn't win I hope this is a radicalising event for some
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 11:31
|
|
|
I'm reading this history of the Gorbachev-era Soviet Union and it's pissing me off because it reads like a lot of the economic troubles that are popularly associated with the USSR and with socialism/communism in general was the product of "economic reforms" passed under the broader program of perestroika. When the government gave firms greater autonomy to select their "output mix" for the purposes of hitting their production targets, this resulted in firms stopping production of cheap and less-profitable goods. At first this only caused reductions in the production and subsequent availability of things like children's toys and baby food, but then it late 1989 and onwards it started causing frequent shortages for things like soap, salt, women's dresses, boots, and eventually even basic foodstuffs. It's where we start getting the images of long queues for bread and empty shop shelves. And then the government responds to this by implementing rationing, which is yet another stereotype about the Soviet Union, but more importantly they decide that that's how you combat the crisis instead of reversing the economic policy and having firms produce consumer goods against more stringent quotas and categories like they did before. Another policy that they implemented was giving firms greater autonomy in being able to set prices, which resulted in price increases such as toothpaste going from 35 kopeks to 80, or women's dresses going from 181 to 285 rubles, from 1980 to 1988. There was also the problem of giving firms greater autonomy in setting salaries, which then drove up inflation in response (since, again, firms now had a freer hand in setting prices, in this case against certain sections of the population having higher salaries), and all of this combined to create both a black market in goods as well as forcing the government to shell out millions more in subsidies, and yet reported rates of poverty still increased in the years immediately following the implementation of Gorbachev's reforms. I'm starting to think that this "market socialism" thing is kinda poo poo?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 12:32
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I'm reading this history of the Gorbachev-era Soviet Union and it's pissing me off because it reads like a lot of the economic troubles that are popularly associated with the USSR and with socialism/communism in general was the product of "economic reforms" passed under the broader program of perestroika. Yes, this is 100 percent true. Even during the Brezhnev era you weren't getting those kinds of shortages, and the age cohort of people who grew up during perestroika means the vast majority of anti-communist grifters now telling their tales of woe about only having sandpaper instead of toilet tissue were living in a very specific moment outside the norm for almost all the country's peacetime history.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 13:04
|
|
|
That's assuming those people aren't just straight up lying or reporting family hearsay, of course. I can't remember who it is but there's someone who goes around telling their sad USSR stories despite having left the country as a literal infant.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 13:09
|
|
|
SSJ_naruto_2003 posted:It's not like any of the million splinter sect communist parties are on the verge of a proletarian uprising. SSJ_naruto_2003 posted:I'm starting my candidacy for psl soon 
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 13:48
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I'm reading this history of the Gorbachev-era Soviet Union and it's pissing me off because it reads like a lot of the economic troubles that are popularly associated with the USSR and with socialism/communism in general was the product of "economic reforms" passed under the broader program of perestroika. Yeah shortages in the USSR AFAIK were principally caused by instances of economic blockade, natural disasters, war, that 70's resource price crisis that suddenly messed with their importing capacity, and dumb management of market logic that manifested in different ways in different periods. And the perestroika era liberalization was probably the single biggest instance of dumb management of market logic. Stalin already writes of instances that were something in the vein of the government deciding to buy bread at the same price as the grain that it took to produce it, with the obvious conclusion that no one smart is going to freely decide to make bread to sell then. But the Stalin period was also when they learned to do austerity and the kind of economic calculation where you can guarantee there's enough stuff to buy with the money that's handed out, as opposed to the uncontrollable inflation and unreliable supply of the 20's. And apparently the Gorbachev era too then. Didn't Gorbachev come from a place of real troubles though in a certain sense? Like, as far as I understand, the USSR could never get its labor policy in check so that workers wouldn't just work to fill targets on paper while trying to get the best possible deal by finding the easiest ways to get that done. Growing the economy was far from as easy as raising targets and producing more production facilities in a plan. Although that is probably way overblown too, there was considerably more waste and pollution for the same amount of useful output than in the west but not like a ridiculous, totally dysfunctional amount.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 13:55
|
|
|
No good splinter sect except my splinter sect
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 13:57
|
|
|
Atrocious Joe posted:this dead, gay forum is not a great cross section of US society yeah, the society is even further to the right. bernie's fiscal policies are spot on with far right parties in my country, and the society won't vote for him because they think he's an unelectable radical commie. of course, he's way to the left of most in idpol, which is great, but lmao that right wingers poisoned the ~but that's socialism~ well so much a tepid socdem grandpa can run as a socialist. honestly, it's probably good. when the window manages to shift back to the left a bit red scare won't be a thing anymore since everyone to the left of reagan is a socialist now Truga fucked around with this message at 14:03 on Mar 6, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 13:59
|
|
|
Prince Myshkin posted:You've got many of those people talking about an AOC run in 2024, and she is in several policy respects worse than him. Not being able to get past seeing politics in terms of presidential election cycles seems to affect everybody no matter what radicalism they declaim. At the risk of showing my rear end on this. Fwiw I feel like the presidential obsession fever is starting to break because Sanders might not clinch it and people realize if they wanna prove that they weren't all talk then they can't just give up. And even though it probably annoys this poo poo out of you guys having "advanced socialist posters" or w/e that are around to educate people when these failures happen is important.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 15:14
|
|
|
GalacticAcid posted:Who Works for the Workers?, Gabriel Winant, Fall 2016 This is a really good article thanks
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 16:16
|
|
|
uncop posted:Didn't Gorbachev come from a place of real troubles though in a certain sense? Like, as far as I understand, the USSR could never get its labor policy in check so that workers wouldn't just work to fill targets on paper while trying to get the best possible deal by finding the easiest ways to get that done. Growing the economy was far from as easy as raising targets and producing more production facilities in a plan. Although that is probably way overblown too, there was considerably more waste and pollution for the same amount of useful output than in the west but not like a ridiculous, totally dysfunctional amount. This is the part I don’t really understand. I understand that Gorbachev did dumb stuff and that he’s generally perceived as a grifter or counter revolutionary or whatever, but the idea that he intentionally sabotaged the Soviet Union with market reform doesn’t make sense. He had an institutional investment in maintaining his own authority and position. It seems more plausible that he was responding to legitimate problems in an unproductive or ill-advised fashion, but what those problems were and what he should’ve done instead is unclear to me. The same basic principle would seem to apply to Deng too, no? As in, Communist China generally turning away from the Soviets and liberalizing to some extent in the 70s and 80s seems like it was not a great play but also seems to have been in response to legitimate issues, including not so great treatment by the Soviet Union. My understanding of these topics is limited and I apologize if I am dumb.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 16:43
|
|
|
Fulfilling quotas on paper only and cutting corners definitely has been a grift in the USSR and to some extent perestroika was a reaction to curb that corruption, however it was done the dumbest way possible (because market liberalism doesn't even bother with the grift to be inefficient)
dex_sda fucked around with this message at 16:48 on Mar 6, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 16:46
|
|
|
Truga posted:honestly, it's probably good. when the window manages to shift back to the left a bit red scare won't be a thing anymore since everyone to the left of reagan is a socialist now oh, yeah, and we're already seeing opinion polls and stuff that reflect that - the idea that the american right has worn the rhetorical value of "socialist" as a criticism down to a nub the majority of democratic primary voters in EVERY STATE had a favorable opinion of socialism, including the states where biden won; the window is already moving left
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 16:58
|
|
|
SSJ_naruto_2003 posted:Also I guess this avatar doesn't fit anymore. Got it in 2016 thread but I'm starting my candidacy for psl soon and am not a dsa member so we need a psl tag for sure
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 17:17
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:The same basic principle would seem to apply to Deng too, no? As in, Communist China generally turning away from the Soviets and liberalizing to some extent in the 70s and 80s seems like it was not a great play but also seems to have been in response to legitimate issues, including not so great treatment by the Soviet Union. China turning away from the USSR had nothing to do with Deng, Deng was if anything a "stay superficially friendly with everyone and keep your cards close to your chest" kind of guy. That's pretty much how he was able to plant the seeds of integrating China into the world market. I believe he was very talented and made great plays, which can be seen in how he rose back to the top and higher than he had ever been from a position of underdog and pariah. But when it comes to him, there was very much a struggle of priorities. Deng represented what I would describe as a pragmatist nationalist wing of the party that would seek to utilize socialist methods when it seemed good for China and capitalist methods when it seemed good for China. (Lots of people sided with the CCP basically because they considered them better nationalists than the nationalists rather than because they personally were strict anticapitalists.) And that is China as in the nation in the abstract rather than its concrete people, that's why he had such an easy time walking back all kinds of stuff that supported the actual people in order to hopefully make them work harder. And also walking back all kinds of international support commitments that made it harder for China to make friends among anticommunist governments. The Sino-Soviet split was produced by what could be called bad politics: the Mao faction attempting to wage a in-your-face struggle within the international communist movement and assemble a broad front of hard communists that would sort of put USSR in its place in an equitable internationalist framework. It backfired when almost everyone sided with the USSR and put China in a position where eventually Mao too ended up shifting toward the kind of pragmatism that sought to thaw relations with the USA and so on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 17:28
|
|
|
Truga posted:yeah, the society is even further to the right. otoh the sanders movement has gotten americans to think in terms of class politics, which hasn't been a political force in this country since second red scare. In this sense his campaign has functionally done more to increase class consciousness than many euro socdem parties who while technically promoting policies to the left of sanders have long become neoliberal old boy's clubs the bernie movement has definitely widened the overton window, whereas euro socdems have fought to shrink it for the past 50 years
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 17:32
|
|
|
yeah this is true
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 17:51
|
|
|
exmarx posted:lol if you didn't go through the report forum archives to figure out who reported you oh poo poo that sounds like fun
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 18:25
|
|
|
CJSwiss posted:There aren't exactly many thriving Marxist message boards. https://mobile.twitter.com/TravisDBartley/status/1235963091566751744
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 18:26
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/shafieikeyvan/status/1235976098820829189
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 18:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 13:50 |
|
|
More men die in revolutions than women and children lol
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2020 18:45
|
|
