|
gradenko_2000 posted:correct. The New Deal was the aberration relative to the capitalism that came before and after it, and yet Social Democrats (or even Democratic Socialists) keep looking to it as a guide towards what we can pursue, rather than as looking at its dismantling as evidence that such a model is not long-term feasible. the USSR was dismantled as well. so that argument can be used against socialism too?
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 18:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 22:20 |
|
|
mila kunis posted:the USSR was dismantled as well. so that argument can be used against socialism too? The USSR wasn't simply a variation on Capitalism.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 18:29
|
|
|
mila kunis posted:the USSR was dismantled as well. so that argument can be used against socialism too? I think it's a good argument against the coexistence of a capitalist and a socialist superpower. If you don't get them, they'll dig your grave.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 18:31
|
|
|
mila kunis posted:the USSR was dismantled as well. so that argument can be used against socialism too? you can go 'the ussa would be a revolution in a nation where racial tension produces caste issues rather than an ex-empire where racial tension produces separatism' or 'regime change and counterrevolution in the ussa are not likely to be a driving foreign policy goal of the prc, nor is it as equipped to exert pressure' or so on much easier than you can go 'america won't do what america just did'
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 18:44
|
|
|
mila kunis posted:the USSR was dismantled as well. so that argument can be used against socialism too? The argument isn't "if a thing gets dismantled it proves it (and any variants of it) can never work", it's "the New Deal was dismantled because it's entire goal was to not shift the relations of who has power in the US, a fundamental feature of the entire program". The New Deal was never supposed to change who had political/economic power in the US, and so hypothesizing about a New New Deal that does do that is already talking about a completely different program that would require a totally different coalition to enact, with totally different policies, etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 19:27
|
|
|
the lesson i would draw from a comparison of the new deal to the ussr is you can never get complacent and start resting on your laurels in the wake of any victory no matter how significant
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 19:54
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:The USSR wasn't simply a variation on Capitalism. Lenin did call it State Capitalism. However, that varies significantly from the "free-market" capitalism of United States and others. Also, China has continued the tradition of State Capitalism and is maintaining wild success.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 20:01
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:Lenin did call it State Capitalism. However, that varies significantly from the "free-market" capitalism of United States and others. Also, China has continued the tradition of State Capitalism and is maintaining wild success. at the very least the ussr was a challenge to western capitalism while the new deal could be better understood as a pressure release valve that kept western capitalism from detonating
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 20:09
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:at the very least the ussr was a challenge to western capitalism while the new deal could be better understood as a pressure release valve that kept western capitalism from detonating  And I wouldn't place the collapse of the USSR on an organizational level, it is perhaps because it had a far wealthier and more powerful foe endeavoring to destroy it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 20:12
|
|
|
this is your reminder that the communist party at the time was effectively running basically every union in the country, and pre-new deal conditions were so loving bad that the tiniest bit of unrest threatened to cascade out of control. the capitalists smelled a revolution on the wind and were loving terrified. we will not get another new deal without these conditions, and we've learned such a thing is ephemeral anyway, so we might as well just skip it
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 21:06
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:this is your reminder that the communist party at the time was effectively running basically every union in the country, and pre-new deal conditions were so loving bad that the tiniest bit of unrest threatened to cascade out of control. the capitalists smelled a revolution on the wind and were loving terrified. we will not get another new deal without these conditions, and we've learned such a thing is ephemeral anyway, so we might as well just skip it
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 21:23
|
|
|
take any concession given but don't let it slow you down and don't chase after them, imo
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 21:44
|
|
|
good news, everyone. joe biden is taking a stand for true communism against the forces of social imperialism, bureaucratic collectivism, and asiatic despotism https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1319732324616077315?s=20
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 22:13
|
|
|
mila kunis posted:the USSR was dismantled as well. so that argument can be used against socialism too? the USSR failed when it stopped at the gates of Warsaw.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 22:28
|
|
|
Torpor posted:the USSR failed when it stopped at the gates of Warsaw. A big part of that was that the Western allies were dumping a ton of weapons on the Poles, including FT-17 tanks which the Soviets really didn't have a response to. The story of the Soviet Union is basically "it failed because it was weaker than the West...who had pretty much every technological and material advantage and it still took them over 70 years." The only way for a force that opposes the West to win is brute economic power. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 23:26 on Oct 23, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 22:35
|
|
|
Sometimes I think Posadas was actually right. Nuclear arms devastating the capitalist power base sure seems like the only way to win sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 22:42
|
|
|
I just received a copy of this in the mail  https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/communist-posters-mary-s-ginsberg/1124670801?ean=9781780237244350+ pages of communist poster art from the 20th century; it provides context and authorship of each piece as well. Pages are good quality and the art is gorgeous Thought the commie thread might be interested       
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 23:02
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:this is your reminder that the communist party at the time was effectively running basically every union in the country, and pre-new deal conditions were so loving bad that the tiniest bit of unrest threatened to cascade out of control. the capitalists smelled a revolution on the wind and were loving terrified. we will not get another new deal without these conditions, and we've learned such a thing is ephemeral anyway, so we might as well just skip it even post new deal right after ww2 there were major rail strikes and that's when the taft-hartley act got put into play 45-46 were wild times where it seemed like the working population of tons of countries were about to cash in on the unrest of the great depression and second world war to demand complete control over postwar economic planning
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 23:04
|
|
|
that nixon is a pro-tier av
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 23:09
|
|
|
communist posters book looks loving awesome. might ask for it for a christmas gift
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 23:14
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:Sometimes I think Posadas was actually right. Nuclear arms devastating the capitalist power base sure seems like the only way to win sometimes. Considering the type of economic and demographic hit the former Soviet Union took in the 1990s...a limited nuclear war might have been less catastrophic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 23:39
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:The only way for a force that opposes the West to win is brute economic power. finally, Dengism is vindicated
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 23:52
|
|
|
Flavius Aetass posted:that nixon is a pro-tier av 
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 23:55
|
|
|
Ill take a better pic of the Nixon if anyone wants it for an av hold on Edit; Behold, Darth Nixon!  I messed with the contrast a little lol Malkina_ fucked around with this message at 00:16 on Oct 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 23:58
|
|
|
mila kunis posted:the USSR was dismantled as well. so that argument can be used against socialism too? however, going down this path of criticizing the New Deal reveals glaring flaws in reformism
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 02:08
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:this is your reminder that the communist party at the time was effectively running basically every union in the country, and pre-new deal conditions were so loving bad that the tiniest bit of unrest threatened to cascade out of control. the capitalists smelled a revolution on the wind and were loving terrified. we will not get another new deal without these conditions, and we've learned such a thing is ephemeral anyway, so we might as well just skip it i find it quite interesting to go back and research the New Deal post-war era in whatever country you're in - no doubt you'll find it's not this wonderful era of prosperity and equality at all that succs peddle, but actually rampantly anti-communist, racist as all hell, imperialist and culturally stagnant. there's a nostalgia for the New Deal period that succdems thrive off, but a little study and analysis shows that nostalgia to be even more of an added on death sentence to anyone remotely oppressed under settler-colonial capitalism. the ship can't be saved. Hefty Leftist fucked around with this message at 02:21 on Oct 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 02:18
|
|
|
smarxist posted:finally, Dengism is vindicated Contrast the rapid decline of quality of life in the post USSR bloc with the economic boom and subsequent rise of living standards in China id say Deng's NEP 2.0 was a good move given the circumstances
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 02:56
|
|
|
Dreddout posted:Contrast the rapid decline of quality of life in the post USSR bloc with the economic boom and subsequent rise of living standards in China id say Deng's NEP 2.0 was a good move given the circumstances The question is how to get out of it. That said, the material conditions in China have improved to the point that China may very well be to stand against the West mostly on its own. (Btw during the 1970s and 1980s, China was mostly getting by re-engineered equipment/machinery they had obtained from the Soviets during the 1950s.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 03:31
|
|
|
Hefty Leftist posted:i find it quite interesting to go back and research the New Deal post-war era in whatever country you're in - no doubt you'll find it's not this wonderful era of prosperity and equality at all that succs peddle, but actually rampantly anti-communist, racist as all hell, imperialist and culturally stagnant. there's a nostalgia for the New Deal period that succdems thrive off, but a little study and analysis shows that nostalgia to be even more of an added on death sentence to anyone remotely oppressed under settler-colonial capitalism. the ship can't be saved. theres nothing im sadder about than never getting to meet my great grandfather, who according to family lore got pulled over about once a week and questioned for hours because he was a registered communist party member and a union negotiator who bounced all over the state with UFW lol.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 04:18
|
|
|
as i say that I just realized if any of that's true I could probably look him up, the 50s wasnt that long ago. maybe it wasnt ufw. i cant remember if anyone said what union he worked for.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 04:21
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:Lenin did call it State Capitalism. However, that varies significantly from the "free-market" capitalism of United States and others. Also, China has continued the tradition of State Capitalism and is maintaining wild success. State Capitalism = Actually Existing Socialism
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 04:39
|
|
|
I believe Lenin's use of the term "state capitalism" was in reference to the NEP specifically
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 04:44
|
|
|
I think it's fair to say that any early developments in a political system will carry birthmarks of the one prior. Consider the Netherlands & Britain in the 17th century, poo poo they still have remnants of their aristocracy hanging around in government. This is especially true given the fact that historically successful socialist revolutions have occured in semi-feudal regime's. Necessitating a form of capitalism controlled by a communist party
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 04:52
|
|
|
"State Capitalism" is just a phrase thrown around by reactionaries who want to delegitimize socialist nations by setting up a No True Scotsman fallacy in their favor.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 05:20
|
|
|
it's a completely stupid phrase on its face tbh. it's no longer capitalism if the state owns everything, by definition.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 05:30
|
|
|
It's not real socialism unless it comes from the socialism district in Germany.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 06:23
|
|
|
capitalism is when the surplus value generated by production is kept by a small class of people who own the means of production (which they use to reinvest some, buy yachts and cocaine, etc). if the surplus is instead given back to the population via healthcare, education, social spending, infrastructure etc i don't see how thats capitalism. the workers are getting the their surplus back, just indirectly through state planning. you can decide thats not 'true' socialism for whatever reason but i don't see how its capitalism
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 06:29
|
|
|
surplus value, or the difference between the value of labor-power and the value generated by labor, is a fundamental condition of human survival. if you couldn't secure enough food to last you a day in less than a day's worth of labor, you couldn't exist, let alone develop
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 06:51
|
|
|
mila kunis posted:capitalism is when the surplus value generated by production is kept by a small class of people who own the means of production (which they use to reinvest some, buy yachts and cocaine, etc). if the surplus is instead given back to the population via healthcare, education, social spending, infrastructure etc i don't see how thats capitalism. the workers are getting the their surplus back, just indirectly through state planning. you can decide thats not 'true' socialism for whatever reason but i don't see how its capitalism depends on your definition of capital and the laborer's relationship to the means of production really it's about how close to the metal of reproducing your material life you want to get as an individual/family/collective/co-op, and whether your material circumstances permit it (granting that it doesn't exploit or imperil others)
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 07:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 22:20 |
|
|
my personal definition of socialism is any state which killed or imprisoned or otherwise got rid of the landlords, so china is unfortunately a regressed worker's state in this case
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 07:03
|
|