|
are these "chinaworker" folks........trots??
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 02:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 14:33 |
|
|
Enjoy posted:are you really saying cuban assistance to african countries was similar to china's invasion of vietnam So when Cuba does it, its assistance, but when China does it, its an invasion? Yeah, I see where this is going.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 02:40
|
|
|
my bony fealty posted:are these "chinaworker" folks........trots?? https://chinaworker.info/en/trotarh-en/
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 02:46
|
|
|
hahahah its always so obvious
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 02:47
|
|
|
hmmmm today i think i will put forward a revolutionary programme sure to unify the international working class against the capitalists
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 02:51
|
|
|
they have an article on the US that while being generally level-headed also manages to say quote:[The Biden regime] is distancing itself from the Saudi monarchy and its vicious war in Yemen. which, uh
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 02:54
|
|
|
im going to confess something, when I was in high school I read a biography of Trotsky and thought hey this guy was pretty neat and maybe the USSR would have went differently/better if he was in charge and not Stalin? ah the old teenager brain
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 02:55
|
|
|
you certainly caught me, after all ive gone to great pains over the years to hide the fact that im a trotskyist and a member of a trotskyist party
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 03:19
|
|
|
GalacticAcid posted:lol it’s an old joke article i made, i had a bunch of them it took me way too long to realize bjarne anders was a joke on bernie sanders
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 03:20
|
|
|
indigi posted:they have an article on the US that while being generally level-headed also manages to say https://apnews.com/article/biden-end-support-saudi-offenseive-yemen-b68f58493dbfc530b9fcfdb80a13098f that is whats happening. its almost entirely rhetorical and of course the US still supports the saudis and wont do anything really to deescalate the conflict, but that whole article youre referncing is premised on exactly that - that the biden administration is going to deploy the same kind of "spread democracy" rhetoric used by previous administrations to justify foreign wars and interventions in an attempt to justify escalating hostilities, both domestically and internationally, with china.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 03:27
|
|
|
like that article is a good example of the importance of internationalism in practice. it presents a political analysis that describes the problems with the biden administration and how it is seeking to increase hostility with china, specifically to a chinese audience. many individuals in china, especially HK and taiwan have illusions in the us and view capitalism/liberal ideas as a counter to the ccp, you could see that clearly in elements of the HK protests of the past few years especially. the comrades there have to work deliberately to break people from those notions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 03:31
|
|
|
apropos to nothing posted:you certainly caught me, after all ive gone to great pains over the years to hide the fact that im a trotskyist and a member of a trotskyist party https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBOvfN2Y4oo
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 03:39
|
|
|
why do so many of my anti-ccp fellow travelers seem to favor the dominance of western liberal capitalism? they must be confused. perhaps if i explain at length, again,
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 03:44
|
|
|
yeah, very hard to understand why all the jasic workers and the students who supported them would be opposd to the ccp
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 03:48
|
|
|
my bony fealty posted:im going to confess something, when I was in high school I read a biography of Trotsky and thought hey this guy was pretty neat and maybe the USSR would have went differently/better if he was in charge and not Stalin? ah the old teenager brain 
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 03:53
|
|
|
apropos to nothing posted:yeah, very hard to understand why all the jasic workers and the students who supported them would be opposd to the ccp uhh, were they? i'm pretty sure that it was specifically the students who tried to radicalize the jasic workers and the minority of workers who went out on a limb for them who opposed the ccp even briefly, while the majority decided to look the other way
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 03:57
|
|
|
trotsky seems pretty cool, but also I hope china kicks americas butt
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 04:04
|
|
|
I hope China kicks capital’s butt tbh.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 04:10
|
|
|
yeah but americans in particular lol
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 04:15
|
|
|
meme: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mn7nv15rgKA&t=884s
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 04:17
|
|
|
thotsky posted:yeah but americans in particular lol I didn’t freakin to anything to China!!! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 04:30
|
|
|
"I like your Trotsky. I do not like your Trotskyites. Your Trotskyites are so unlike your Trotsky."
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 04:46
|
|
|
see i disagree. i think it's very easy to deduce the modern trotskyist movement from trotsky's own life and writings, for better or for worse
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 04:49
|
|
|
given the choice between Trotskyites and the Democrats, are you really going to vote for the latter?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 04:51
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:see i disagree. i think it's very easy to deduce the modern trotskyist movement from trotsky's own life and writings, for better or for worse There are certainly elements in his writing and his history that lent themselves to the use of anti-Communists, but read his exchanges with Cannon, on the subject of critical support for the CP election campaigns, and it's clear he had an inkling of what "Trotskyism" was becoming, and opposed it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 04:53
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:given the choice between Trotskyites and the Democrats, are you really going to vote for the latter? this presupposes incorrectly that the trotskyites represent some sort of credible alternative to the democrats Pomeroy posted:There are certainly elements in his writing and his history that lent themselves to the use of anti-Communists, but read his exchanges with Cannon, on the subject of critical support for the CP election campaigns, and it's clear he had an inkling of what "Trotskyism" was becoming, and opposed it. i haven't read those, have you got a link? my (ungenerous) guess is that this is a case of a pointy-hatted mickey getting mad at his faithful broom rather than some sort of wayward turn from the master's true teachings, though
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 05:00
|
|
|
my bony fealty posted:im going to confess something, when I was in high school I read a biography of Trotsky and thought hey this guy was pretty neat and maybe the USSR would have went differently/better if he was in charge and not Stalin? ah the old teenager brain tbqf given what he did in the revolution, his experience and success in military matters and his planning ideas regarding war communism, you can bet that the hitler fella wouldn't have made past 1942 at max (trotsky being jewish would've probably made quite a difference in how to regard the fash threat)
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 05:22
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:this presupposes incorrectly that the trotskyites represent some sort of credible alternative to the democrats This article, though from a source I wouldn't trust with my wallet, has some of these discussions: https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/writers/wohlforth/1971/struggle-for-marxism/struggle-for-marxism-US-ch3.htm
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 05:35
|
|
|
dead gay comedy forums posted:tbqf given what he did in the revolution, his experience and success in military matters and his planning ideas regarding war communism, you can bet that the hitler fella wouldn't have made past 1942 at max the ussr understood the nazis to be the principal threat from the outset, and beat them with macro, not micro. trotsky was extremely gung ho about war communism, and groused about lenin abandoning it. then he did an about face and groused about stalin's abandoning the NEP for collectivization. the thing is, without taking those two steps you don't get the productive development or the manpower necessary to start cranking out tanks
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 05:54
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:the ussr understood the nazis to be the principal threat from the outset, and beat them with macro, not micro. trotsky was extremely gung ho about war communism, and groused about lenin abandoning it. then he did an about face and groused about stalin's abandoning the NEP for collectivization. the thing is, without taking those two steps you don't get the productive development or the manpower necessary to start cranking out tanks I was talking about threat assessment and being proactive. in soviet military history (which is thankfully rather spared from REVISIONISM! ANTI-REVISIONISM! noise), Stalin disregarded intelligence from Soviet agents detailing Nazi planning, thought the anti-slavic exterminationist rhetoric wasn't serious at all and disregarded the advice of the red army commanders he allegedly trusted about preparing for war with Germany I think nobody disagrees at all with your point about macro, but to deny the USSR was caught pants down unnecessarily is to deny the entire assessment of the red army about the war but this sort of argument usually tends to get us going endlessly while the two men are dead and the socialism of the present requires a whole different approach rather than talking about joe versus lev lmao
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 06:07
|
|
|
that stalin disregarded soviet intelligence or didn't think nazi exterminationist rhetoric was serious is not borne out by what i've read. there's a reason the ussr tried and failed to preemptively ally with other european countries against the fascists before resorting to the non-aggression pact, and the actual day-of surprise was a signal-to-noise problem where there were "this is it! this is the day! they're attacking right now!" reports had been sounding off regularly for the past year or something like that
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 06:13
|
|
|
Also, conventional thinking at that time was that it didn't make sense for the Nazis to attack right when the UK was on the ropes and Rommel was on the offensive in North Africa. Why suddenly start a 2 front war when one of your enemies was perhaps months from capitulation? Well we saw what happened. Yeah, also, it isn't surprising to see how Trotsky's writing led to Trotskyism specifically that he pushed hard enough against Stalin and the rest of the USSR that any sort of reconciliation was impossible (not that any love was lost on Stalin's part). At a certain point, you enter a no-man's land where everyone is essentially is your enemy and at certain point it is easier to start gravitating to the most powerful force possible. Either way, having looked at his writing, I really don't see how he was going to easily solve the Soviet Union's ills. Centralization in 1923/24 was jumping the gun and collectivization was always going to be an issue because the only way for it to make sense was to squeeze the peasants to lower marketing costs for the state. Trotsky couldn't get around the great depression either and everything that it entailed. If anything, one thing to say about Stalin (I know.. I know..) is by pushing socialism in one country he made making trade agreements and technical deals with the West a bit easier, which is something the Soviets desperately needed. Either way, it was probably going to be a mess.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 06:59
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Either way, it was probably going to be a mess which is imho one of the best answers possible to give about
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 07:06
|
|
|
who are your favorite hegelian marxists? mine is guy debord edit: adorno's hegelian too. he seems like he has important things to say about both marxism and art (especially b/c he's working in the broader german aesthetic tradition, and talking about kant's idea of the autonomy of art and arsthetics, iirc), but he's such a grouch!! i remember him whining about his students going to protests in 68, more or less, and denouncing them as "actionists." there were good points to his critique--about the need for "theory" and planning rather than immediate, unplanned spontaneous action--but he's the caricature of the ivory tower marxist professor, in some ways Finicums Wake fucked around with this message at 07:12 on Mar 31, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 07:07
|
|
|
apropos to nothing posted:the bullshit organization are my chinese comrades. maybe you disagree with them/us but i trust them because ive had discussions with them, read what they put out regularly, etc. which demonstrate that we have the same I hope you don’t trust Vincent Kolo as a Chinese comrade. Is chinaworker still mostly plagiarized from the Guardian and/or quoting NED-adjacent sources exclusively? It’s not good for SA and I wish Kolo had gone off with Saunois. mawarannahr fucked around with this message at 13:17 on Mar 31, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 13:13
|
|
|
plagiarism? if you have proof of plagiarism would like to see it as thats a serious problem.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 14:29
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:the ussr understood the nazis to be the principal threat from the outset, and beat them with macro, not micro. trotsky was extremely gung ho about war communism, and groused about lenin abandoning it. then he did an about face and groused about stalin's abandoning the NEP for collectivization. the thing is, without taking those two steps you don't get the productive development or the manpower necessary to start cranking out tanks I’m almost certain I read that one of the big points of contention between Stalin and Trotsky in the early-mid 20s is that Trotsky wanted to abandon the NEP years before Stalin did and that’s why that “left alliance“ faction thing formed? I’m not nearly as well read on the subject as you so it could have been a bad source (or personal misunderstanding) but I thought Trotsky was pushing for collectivization and Stalin was pissed about it also from what I’ve read I’m not sure how Trotsky (or anyone really) could have done substantially better than Joey just given the international situation the USSR had to deal with but maybe he could have tightened up the margins a bit? idk
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 14:30
|
|
|
indigi posted:I’m almost certain I read that one of the big points of contention between Stalin and Trotsky in the early-mid 20s is that Trotsky wanted to abandon the NEP years before Stalin did and that’s why that “left alliance“ faction thing formed? I’m not nearly as well read on the subject as you so it could have been a bad source (or personal misunderstanding) but I thought Trotsky was pushing for collectivization and Stalin was pissed about it Yeah I was under the impression Trotsky wanted the end of the NEP and full speed collectivisation earlier than it actually happened. Honestly I think a Trotsky-led USSR would have gone pretty much the exact same way with the main difference being that a lot of today's trots would call themselves Stalinists instead and denounce the degenerated worker's state overseen by the bonapartist tyrant Trotsky
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 16:23
|
|
|
trotsky thought the NEP was a betrayal of the revolution from the beginning and wanted to end it immediately, yes. you'll never believe this, but when in the fullness of time the cpsu DID begin to dismantle the NEP and implement collectivization, trotsky was against it, called it tyranny, etc. this is among the things that persuade me that trotsky was not very principled
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 17:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 14:33 |
|
|
I think it was more to do with the manner of how it went given the many considerations at the time from good theoreticians and planners I can't loving find it at all since we had that discussion last time when I quoted Joey himself, but anyway, there was this great text from my econ days that was about how the party had a variety of plans and strategies for a dramatic push into planned economy, many of them rather interesting, taking the electrification of the Union as the major example of what to do or the success of the Commissariat of Health in terms of social policy However the problem it presents is what always circles back the same: no matter the way we want to cut it, whether it is stalinist/trotskyist or whatever the gently caress, the circumstances led to a political breakdown which made those inviable in many different ways, like Lysenkoism leading to the dismissal of seasoned agricultural engineers, making food security a problem, which made the matter of collectivization a far more thornier problem, which made dekulakization far more aggressive as a matter of necessity... so on and on and on
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2021 17:58
|
|