There is a spectrum haunting C-SPAM. I, on the contrary,

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Goldmine > The Goodmine > There is a spectrum haunting C-SPAM. I, on the contrary,

«‹›1217 »

SSJ_naruto_2003: Oct 12, 2012

people who barely post take the time to tell you how much they hate you lol.

# ? Mar 21, 2021 11:46

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 9, 2024 20:17

pieuvre armement: Feb 27, 2018; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS

Baykin posted:

it seriously amazes me that you just keep on trucking even though seemingly the entirety of the forums hate your dumb rear end. i truly do not understand how you dont just quit and make the forums better by you no longer having buttons.

# ? Mar 21, 2021 12:49

Kurnugia: Sep 2, 2014; by Nyc_Tattoo

Baykin posted:

it seriously amazes me that you just keep on trucking even though seemingly the entirety of the forums hate your dumb rear end. i truly do not understand how you dont just quit and make the forums better by you no longer having buttons.

# ? Mar 21, 2021 13:56

Kurnugia: Sep 2, 2014; by Nyc_Tattoo

SSJ_naruto_2003 posted:

people who barely post take the time to tell you how much they hate you lol.

when your a correct opinion haver, it is your duty to tell the mods to go gently caress themselves

# ? Mar 21, 2021 13:58

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

Ferrinus posted:

i'm with namesake regarding the USSR's mode of production - just because a surplus is generated, appropriated, and reinvested doesn't mean capitalism is going on and that whoever or whatever is deciding where the surplus goes is equivalent to one big capitalist.

Yossarian-22 posted:

I think both the state socialist country and socialist coop have the same problem of living within capitalism, thus you still have the appropriation of surplus, wage labor, and commodity exchange. The problem with capitalism isn't "capitalists" but global capital itself. This means islands of socialism are doomed to adopt more and more of a capitalist mode of production unless they can threaten global capital itself and not just the interests of a particular country's bourgeoisie

The problem is people make this into an aha thing and a moral issue and try to figure out how to do socialism "right" without taking seriously the insane struggle necessary to overthrow a global system

quote:

The decisive fact about Communist countries is that they are collectivist regimes in which capitalist enterprise is for all practical purposes non-existent. What there is of it is kept to minimal levels and is positively prevented from growing. It is possible, in these countries, to accumulate a fair amount of money by saving on large salaries, and also to own some property, for instance a house and even a �second residence�. But it is not possible to make private wealth grow by way of capitalist enterprise.

Just as the possibility of such enterprise decisively shapes state action in the �Third World�, so does its absence shape equally decisively the character and role of the state in collectivist societies. For it means that those who control state power in these societies are subject to �structural constraints� of a most formidable kind, in so far as they cannot direct that power to private capitalist purposes. They may seek and achieve private enrichment, though the scale on which this occurs is fairly limited. And they may well act to the advantage of some classes or groups rather than to that of others�some categories of workers rather than others, or workers as against peasants, or managers as against either, and so on. But this is a very far cry indeed from the possibilities offered by the existence of a capitalist
context, and imposes an altogether different �rationality� upon those who control collectivist societies, and who are in this sense controlled by the collectivism over which they preside.

It was precisely the fear that the U.S.S.R. under Stalin was moving towards the restoration of capitalism, with the dynamic implications which this would have had, which led the Trotskyist Opposition to warn, from the twenties onwards, of the dangers of a Russian �Thermidor�: and had a capitalist sector been restored in the Soviet Union, by way of a return of a major part of the public sector to private enterprise, the chances are indeed that a �Thermidor�, in one form or other, would have occurred, and fundamentally reshaped the �rationality� of the Soviet state.

But in fact, no such restoration occurred. On the contrary, every part of private economic activity was ruthlessly stamped out, most notably by forced collectivization of the countryside. The experience of other Communist countries has in many respects been different from that of the U.S.S.R. But as I have already noted, they are all predominantly and solidly collectivist in their mode of economic organization; and this leaves open the question of the nature and role of the state in this kind of system.

Left critics of Soviet-type regimes have pointed to the very considerable inequalities of power and reward which are to be found in them, and which are sanctioned, maintained, defended, and fostered by an exceedingly powerful state; and they have consequently argued that this state was the instrument of a �new class�, �bureaucratic stratum�, �state bourgeoisie�, whose principal purpose, like that of any other �ruling class�, was to maintain and enlarge its power and privileges.

There has over the years been much controversy among Marxist critics of these regimes over whether their rulers did constitute a class or not. The point is obviously of some importance, in so far as the answer to it may provide an initial clue to the degree of cohesion, solidarity, community of purpose, and social basis of these rulers.

However, and as should have been expected, no conclusive answer to the question has ever been returned, or can be. There are Marxists who have said that, because �the bureaucracy� could not own capitalist property and therefore pass it on to their descendants, they did not form a class; and there are other Marxists who have argued that capitalist property was not the only criterion to be used, and that the privileges which accrued to the people concerned, and from which their descendants could derive advantages of a substantial kind, did mean that �the bureaucracy� constituted a class.

The word matters less than the substance which it designates; and it is scarcely a matter of serious doubt that those who occupy leading positions in Soviet-type systems do enjoy advantages which are denied to the mass of the population. These advantages may be greater in some of these systems than in others; and greater efforts are made in some cases than in others to reduce such advantages and to de-institutionalize them, at least to some degree. But they clearly continue to form part of Communist life, though they are not of course peculiar to it, and are in fact significantly lower, in material terms, than in other systems. �Bureaucrats� in collectivist systems are better off than those over whom they rule, and the higher the position a �bureaucrat� occupies, the better off he is likely to be: but with the probable exception of those at the very top, the pickings would seem to be comparatively modest. Office is an avenue to material well-being; but not to great wealth.

This is by no means accidental. It is primarily the result of the absence of opportunities for capitalist enterprise. No doubt there are other factors which account for this aspect of political life in Communist countries, but here is the primary constraint.

# ? Mar 21, 2021 14:16

Rated PG-34: Jul 1, 2004

Baykin posted:

it seriously amazes me that you just keep on trucking even though seemingly the entirety of the forums hate your dumb rear end. i truly do not understand how you dont just quit and make the forums better by you no longer having buttons.

# ? Mar 21, 2021 14:17

THS: Sep 15, 2017

Flavius Aetass posted:

lol that's a great second post itt

gently caress you dude. whatever you get out of moderating this forum is gross

# ? Mar 21, 2021 14:51

Red and Black: Sep 5, 2011

Flavius Aetass posted:

china has been using the largely made up threat of uyghur radicalization to justify repression for decades. saying that maybe it all started because of Bad Muslims coming back from syria is a terrible post, I don't care who the poster is related to

broke: actions by a minority of religious zealots doesn't justify collective punishment of the whole
woke: actually, religious extremism doesn't exist

# ? Mar 21, 2021 15:47

GalacticAcid: Apr 8, 2013; NEW YORK VALUES

- long theoretical tracts on the precise character of the Chinese political economy

- frenzied refrains of �mods gay�

the LF thread dialectic

# ? Mar 21, 2021 16:08

ram dass in hell: Dec 29, 2019

GalacticAcid posted:

- long theoretical tracts on the precise character of the Chinese political economy

- frenzied refrains of “mods gay”

the LF thread dialectic

the dialectic has evolved to mods want to gently caress babies op. It's called materialism.

# ? Mar 21, 2021 16:12

dead gay comedy forums: Oct 21, 2011

GalacticAcid posted:

- frenzied refrains of �mods gay�

nah

# ? Mar 21, 2021 16:15

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

GalacticAcid posted:

- long theoretical tracts on the precise character of the Chinese political economy

Marx ...

GalacticAcid posted:

- frenzied refrains of �mods gay�

... and Bakunin

# ? Mar 21, 2021 16:18

Raskolnikov38: Mar 3, 2007; We were somewhere around Manila when the drugs began to take hold

Flavius Aetass posted:

lol that's a great second post itt

if you're going to cling to your buttons this hard learn to chill the gently caress out and take an insult

or just go call fluffdaddy fat and save us the time

# ? Mar 21, 2021 16:28

AnimeIsTrash: Jun 30, 2018

Baykin posted:

it seriously amazes me that you just keep on trucking even though seemingly the entirety of the forums hate your dumb rear end. i truly do not understand how you dont just quit and make the forums better by you no longer having buttons.

# ? Mar 21, 2021 16:33

Atrocious Joe: Sep 2, 2011

Flavius Aetass posted:

china has been using the largely made up threat of uyghur radicalization to justify repression for decades. saying that maybe it all started because of Bad Muslims coming back from syria is a terrible post, I don't care who the poster is related to

You are erasing the brave actions of Uyghur patriots fighting for the liberation of their co-religionists in Syria, since the conditions for armed struggle don't exist in their homeland at the moment.

# ? Mar 21, 2021 16:42

Centrist Committee: Aug 6, 2019

Flavius Aetass posted:

justify repression

lol from genocide to this

just take the L ya fuckin dork

# ? Mar 21, 2021 16:54

F Stop Fitzgerald: Dec 12, 2010

ban flavius for kunming attack-denialism

# ? Mar 21, 2021 16:56

dead gay comedy forums: Oct 21, 2011

gradenko_2000 posted:

more from "Marxism and Politics"

great bit btw

# ? Mar 21, 2021 16:58

Kurnugia: Sep 2, 2014; by Nyc_Tattoo

from the perspective of leftist criticism of the USSR and Maoist China, the argument seems to be that the appropriation of surplus value from existing industries to fund investment in new industries and other crap in the state budget is non-marxist and exploitative, but im having a hard time understanding how new investment capital is supposed to be accrued without such capital being in some way sourced from the surplus value of actual workers.

i mean, im sure theres anarchists arguing that any central organization not based on strict voluntarism is tyranny, but how exactly is central planning supposed to work if individual communes get to decide whether they contribute to the state budget, ie everyone gets to decide their own tax rate, without the state hierarchy having some sort of power to demand things from the communes. bakunin and kropotkin both had some excellent ideas about free association, self-determination and federalism as the foundation of a new kind of society, but they didnt really provide (afaik and understand) any practical tools to resolve conflicts between and within such societies. in cases where those involved refuse arbitration, or decide to freely dissociate themselves after receiving investment from a federal source of capital without returning the favour, what exactly is a federal authority, centrally planned or not, supposed to do?

i just dont understand what the point of the argument, that the appropriation of surplus regardless of purpose is always exploitation, is supposed to be. except that central planning is bad and we must abolish the state, but thats that

# ? Mar 21, 2021 17:25

indigi: Jul 20, 2004; ^{how can we not talk about family

when family's all that we got?}

Kurnugia posted:

from the perspective of leftist criticism of the USSR and Maoist China, the argument seems to be that the appropriation of surplus value from existing industries to fund investment in new industries and other crap in the state budget is non-marxist and exploitative, but im having a hard time understanding how new investment capital is supposed to be accrued without such capital being in some way sourced from the surplus value of actual workers.

I think this is the main issue. the way that China sources it from the workers occasionally/sometimes/rarely involves crushing strikes and perpetuating immiseration, and it would be better if they didn�t do that and allowed the workers to have little a their surplus value as a treat

# ? Mar 21, 2021 17:35

dead gay comedy forums: Oct 21, 2011

Kurnugia posted:

but they didnt really provide (afaik and understand) any practical tools to resolve conflicts between and within such societies. in cases where those involved refuse arbitration, or decide to freely dissociate themselves after receiving investment from a federal source of capital without returning the favour, what exactly is a federal authority, centrally planned or not, supposed to do?

i just dont understand what the point of the argument, that the appropriation of surplus regardless of purpose is always exploitation, is supposed to be. except that central planning is bad and we must abolish the state, but thats that

that's the major pebble on the shoe of anarchist analysis, imho

it comes back to Aristotle: the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. The complexity that comes with a bunch of communes working together necessarily require a social infrastructure that transposes their individual organization. Should a commune, within the right of full voluntarism, simply decide to not provide their share for any reason, how does the rest reply? If they vote and organize to compel the non-abiding commune with the argument that the commune benefitted from the collective labor and capital provided until now, are they not effectively making a state action of repression?

# ? Mar 21, 2021 17:44

THS: Sep 15, 2017

anarchism is fuckin stupid and for babies

# ? Mar 21, 2021 17:49

F Stop Fitzgerald: Dec 12, 2010

p much every anarchist solution requires/assumes people are operating on some higher tier of humanist enlightenment

# ? Mar 21, 2021 17:58

AnimeIsTrash: Jun 30, 2018

The only western anarchists that seem cool are those folks from greece who beat up the anarcho capitalist in that classic copy pasta.

# ? Mar 21, 2021 18:05

Victory Position: Mar 16, 2004

ram dass in hell posted:

the dialectic has evolved to mods want to gently caress babies op. It's called materialism.

anarchism is for babies though...

wait a second :stare:

# ? Mar 21, 2021 18:16

Dreddout: Oct 1, 2015; You must stay drunk on writing so reality cannot destroy you.

Kurnugia posted:

from the perspective of leftist criticism of the USSR and Maoist China, the argument seems to be that the appropriation of surplus value from existing industries to fund investment in new industries and other crap in the state budget is non-marxist and exploitative, but im having a hard time understanding how new investment capital is supposed to be accrued without such capital being in some way sourced from the surplus value of actual workersquot

I think it's possible to believe the economy had elements of exploitation and capitalism while at the same time acknowledging that these elements are regrettably necessary for now.

# ? Mar 21, 2021 18:20

Greg Legg: Oct 6, 2004

Flavius Aetass posted:

china has been using the largely made up threat of uyghur radicalization to justify repression for decades. saying that maybe it all started because of Bad Muslims coming back from syria is a terrible post, I don't care who the poster is related to

With all due respect, the last time you tried to argue this in this thread you were unable back it up and the people disagreeing with you got banned. You don't have to post here.

# ? Mar 21, 2021 18:36

mawarannahr: May 21, 2019

I�m Turkish and while I can�t tell you what The Uyghur Mind is up to, I guarantee this is what Turkey is trying to facilitate. Free my banned brother and/or sister and gently caress US (mod) interventionism

# ? Mar 21, 2021 18:53

commielingus: Jan 23, 2021; by Athanatos

Flavius Aetass posted:

china has been using the largely made up threat of uyghur radicalization to justify repression for decades.

lol

# ? Mar 21, 2021 18:53

Ferrinus: Jun 19, 2003; i'm finding this quite easy, i guess in part because i'm a fast type but also because i have a coherent mental model of the world

Flavius Aetass posted:

china has been using the largely made up threat of uyghur radicalization to justify repression for decades. saying that maybe it all started because of Bad Muslims coming back from syria is a terrible post, I don't care who the poster is related to

this is kind of like opposing the war in iraq on the grounds that 9/11 never happened

# ? Mar 21, 2021 18:55

Catgirl Al Capone: Dec 15, 2007

trutherism with chinese characteristics

# ? Mar 21, 2021 18:57

Raskolnikov38: Mar 3, 2007; We were somewhere around Manila when the drugs began to take hold

i swear i saw an article in the past couple of months that detailed how the CIA was funding/support separatism in xinjiang during bush

# ? Mar 21, 2021 19:03

commielingus: Jan 23, 2021; by Athanatos

Raskolnikov38 posted:

i swear i saw an article in the past couple of months that detailed how the CIA was funding/support separatism in xinjiang during bush

After gorbechev liberalized the media america and the west immediately took advantage of it by funding nationalist insurrection movements/propaganda throughout the USSR which collapsed it. Xi said they wont repeat that mistake

# ? Mar 21, 2021 19:06

Kurnugia: Sep 2, 2014; by Nyc_Tattoo

Victory Position posted:

anarchism is for babies though...

wait a second

SA moderation team has decided to reform itself as an autonomous collective, and provide us with entirely new vistas on babies and blowjobs

# ? Mar 21, 2021 19:09

3: Aug 26, 2006; The Magic Number; College Slice

F Stop Fitzgerald posted:

ban flavius for kunming attack-denialism

# ? Mar 21, 2021 19:19

Hodgepodge: Jan 29, 2006; Can't post for 231 days!

moderating on this subject appears to be genuinely beyond the capacity of the current mods

then again we're talking about a group of people who are okay with making public statements about what making an infant sick your dick would be like, so frankly society may be better off keeping them distracted with this dumb place

# ? Mar 21, 2021 19:31

Trash Ops: Jun 19, 2012; im having fun, isnt everyone else?

Flavius Aetass posted:

china has been using the largely made up threat of uyghur radicalization to justify repression for decades. saying that maybe it all started because of Bad Muslims coming back from syria is a terrible post, I don't care who the poster is related to

shut the gently caress up pedo

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ? Mar 21, 2021 19:36

Comrade Koba: Jul 2, 2007

Victory Position posted:

anarchism is for babies though...

wait a second

anarkiddie diddlers

# ? Mar 21, 2021 19:49

apropos to nothing: Sep 5, 2003

the CCP has imo used the war on terror to escalate the repression of muslim minorities in xinjiang for decades. they have been jailing political dissidents and labor organizers all over the country during that time as well, especially over the last 5 years. I also believe they are an imperialist power, and recent events in myanmar and the ccp political approach to them are a good example of this imo. however, mods should not be inflicting punishments on people who fall on a different side of a contentious issue, especially in forums that are on paper about debating and discussing. so for example, i think this way and so i state my opinion and reasons for it in an attempt to convince others, rather than punish them for wrong think. its not just china either you also have posters in dnd punished for calling the border camps in the US concentration camps which is a position that sitting US congress people hold publicly but which posters cannot say in threads set aside for that exact discussion to be had. I agree with calling them concentration camps cause they imo are but I would also not want those who insist they are NOT concentration camps to be punished for making points to that effect even if I disagree with them. regardless of whether you agree with that classification or not, dont punish people who disagree with you politically. also unban larry and the others.

# ? Mar 21, 2021 19:58

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 9, 2024 20:17

Greg Legg: Oct 6, 2004

Trash Ops posted:

shut the gently caress up pedo

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Flavius if you didn't post in this thread you wouldn't have to punish people who don't like you. You're making more work for yourself.

# ? Mar 21, 2021 20:11

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Goldmine > The Goodmine > There is a spectrum haunting C-SPAM. I, on the contrary,

«‹›1217 »