|
I'm in the tank..... for socialism! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDX7Ul9Kx7A Edit: Actually considering what I've just said and linked: not a tankie, although my intro to socialism is Trot so... namesake fucked around with this message at 00:26 on Nov 15, 2016 |
# ¿ Nov 15, 2016 00:18 |
|
|
# ¿ May 20, 2024 07:51 |
|
Atrocious Joe posted:Can someone redo this image with various left wing parties' associated publications? Does anyone have a link to the review from another publication in the 90s where the reviewer points out that the Economist is only popular because it's got the reputation of an old established British institution with great institutional knowledge but in reality it's written by dorks in their 20s who studied business at university and look things up on wikipedia? I usually summarise it as 'People in X read it for its perspective on Y because their articles on X are terrible and people in Y read it for its perspective on X because their articles on Y are terrible, etc, etc'.
|
# ¿ Dec 14, 2016 21:52 |
|
Ruzihm posted:My understanding is that communism is a particular subset of socialism where there is no money, class, or state. Which means that communism is only a hypothetical situation at this time. Well no, the initial post which kicked this off (before the low effort troll) said it: The goal of socialism is communism. Socialism is the creation of proletarian democracy where workers control the means of production as well as state power and use the state against the bourgeoisie. As more socialist states emerge and the bourgeois class disappears entirely then the state (I. E. A weapon of class power against other classes, not an overarching democratic organisational structure) disappears and so communism develops from the organised peace and abundance.
|
# ¿ Dec 16, 2016 20:26 |
|
Breadallelogram posted:there are not Eating the sauce.
|
# ¿ Dec 26, 2016 18:32 |
|
Baloogan posted:this is why u fail Untrue. We fail for lots of reasons.
|
# ¿ Dec 29, 2016 16:39 |
|
The creation of precise timekeeping has definitely enabled the worst excesses of alienation in the workplace though.
|
# ¿ Jan 1, 2017 15:10 |
|
John Berger died yesterday which sucks because he was good and wrote stuff like this.
|
# ¿ Jan 3, 2017 21:56 |
|
GunnerJ posted:Isn't democratic centralism just the principle behind a caucus, or am I missing something. Depends on the internal culture; it can be an agreement to act in accordance with party policy and accept the results of all party decisions no matter what you argued for before the vote (so you go out and argue the line in public, vote the way the party decided to vote, etc) rather than just taking a step back and letting the winners get on with it, however with insular lovely groups with bad internal democracy it's a bludgeon to use against anyone who starts to make waves by doing or theorising something that the entrenched party leaders and staff don't want to happen.
|
# ¿ Jan 5, 2017 23:05 |
|
jarofpiss posted:what's the one where the revolution comes when the space aliens (who being a technologically advanced society and therefore naturally communists because they're more advanced) come visit? Posadism. The Peoples Bomb!
|
# ¿ Jan 6, 2017 00:09 |
|
Aeolius posted:true. in fairness, though, they also tend to make the "USSR was state capitalist" argument, which is basically the socialist version of "that's crony capitalism" Not really. Crony capitalism is obviously capitalism with capitalists acting according to the principles of capitalism and capturing the state to advance their own interests which is somehow bad sportsmanship or something according to liberals who criticise it but still like capitalism. State capitalism argues that the workers weren't actually in control, the party was and the party became estranged from the workers, meaning it wasn't socialism.
|
# ¿ Jan 6, 2017 19:34 |
|
Aeolius posted:Perhaps it would have been clearer to specify "the way libertarians use..." etc. I stand by classifying it as a "no true Scotsman" dodge, though. Well then was the USSR socialist from start to finish then, or did it stop being socialist at some point before it stopped being the USSR? Obviously in a general argumentative sense Trots use state capitalism or deformed workers state or something to talk about how awesome and socialist the revolution was and then when all the inexcusably bad stuff happened it wasn't socialist anymore but if we're trying to analyse forms then we have to say 'X is Y and not Z' or we just turn everything into a blur. If I'm chatting with a bunch of people who I believe actually know theory then I might talk about the USSR potentially being a kind of authoritarian socialism, actually existing socialism, etc and giving an in depth review of its merits and failures while theorycrafting but talking to people generally then anything that comes across as 'I want to redo the USSR without any changes' is not particularly a winning argument when discussing what a socialist state will be, and if you can't say that the USSR is socialism then what was it?
|
# ¿ Jan 6, 2017 21:03 |
|
splifyphus posted:(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) This is Tsarist repression of the worst kind! Read my secret newspaper to find out the truth! Since the USSR has collapsed, so it can be judged from start to finish (with some awareness of all the political and economic factors at the time) then why can't we classify it as something? Seems one of the easiest times to judge something.
|
# ¿ Jan 8, 2017 18:13 |
|
Fados posted:nice to see another marx bro that shares the view that contigency generates retroactively it's own necessity, that was a great post man, marxism needs these ideas! Which one is he?
|
# ¿ Jan 8, 2017 18:26 |
|
Aeolius posted:if by "workers owning the means of production" you mean something like distributism (you ol' chestertonian, you), then no, the USSR wasn't that. but that's definitely not the sort of socialism Marx was advocating. the point is collective ownership with broad planning to eliminate the "anarchy of production" that inheres in capitalism But merging economic and political control, while the goal of socialism, doesn't guarantee that a system with merged economic and political control IS socialism. Or if does, then 'socialism' is far too broad for me to support without qualifiers. You need that inclusive democracy to ensure that that merged control is used for the needs of the proletariat AND that it's operating in a manner which demonstrates it's superiority over a class based system.
|
# ¿ Jan 11, 2017 19:48 |
|
Baloogan posted:please please plseaes small words i am not smart If the cops also worked for your boss, it's really REALLY important that you get to pick your boss.
|
# ¿ Jan 11, 2017 20:39 |
|
Hmm, is this as stupid as the collapse of the ISN in the UK over the racist chair? Actually it's less, because it's a forum on a website rather than a political organisation.
|
# ¿ Jan 13, 2017 18:55 |
|
Prav posted:aka the "we had a vote about this Bob, give it a rest already" clause That's its benign version but frankly it seems pointless and Bolshie LARPing compared to just saying by being part of a group you're agreeing to abide by its decisions. So there's a vote to do something and everyone works towards it, good. But what about if it's an absolute loving disaster and the best thing is to try and do damage limitation by pulling back? DC basically means people start throwing a voting result at you rather than arguing on the actual merits of continuing, which is just leveraging bureaucracy at someone rather than discussing it properly with a comrade.
|
# ¿ Jan 23, 2017 20:04 |
|
Prav posted:imagine this: the guy who won't agree is fishmech. Yes but eventually, like the traveler who visited the fishermen with the cultural norm of never refusing a request for help and asked for the best of their catch each time, murder is a solution.
|
# ¿ Jan 23, 2017 22:40 |
|
Friendly Humour posted:Just started listening to the thing, but goddamn is the labour theory of value more retarded than I rememberd. Hope it's not gonna be on the test. What's your most serious criticism of it? How do you think things really work?
|
# ¿ Jan 26, 2017 19:41 |
|
Fiction posted:it's literally You've missed the important part of how it calculates work done. Just like that then the materials used are really exploited because they don't get paid at all!
|
# ¿ Jan 26, 2017 19:59 |
|
^^Think you might need some anime for a post like that, Peel.Friendly Humour posted:Value does not exist independent of human perception and is indeed subject to it. Value cannot be assigned to an object as a property of the object. It doesn't matter how much work is put into an object, what it was bought for, or whatever materials were used in its production. The value of an object is simply what another is willing to pay for it, full stop. Keep listening, at no point is value said to be a physical property of the object. It's a reflection of input costs needed for production to continue, mixed with a markets valuation of the finished item, compared with all the other things that could be bought. It's a completely human-orientated calculation. Hell in the little discussion we had about the USSR being state capitalism one of the major points against it being capitalist was the lack of labour markets meaning that the LTV wasn't in effect.
|
# ¿ Jan 26, 2017 20:18 |
|
Friendly Humour posted:Neither did I say that I thought labour value was a physical property of the object. It's still assigned as a property of the object itself, not as a property of the person viewing the object. No but value in an LTV doesn't rely on an individual, it relies on the market and production, groups of people interacting. In this society of differing production methods and different desires there becomes a value for the commodity as there becomes an averagely efficient level of labour needed to make it. You can say it's in the object or in the society but it's the same thing. quote:A person trying to determine how much he wants to pay for the object in question doesn't factor in any of the things that I've so far heard of. You seem to be a marginalist: you think people use their budgets in a utility maximising way and shop accordingly. Why does a seller care for the money of the buyer, and how much do they know how to charge?
|
# ¿ Jan 26, 2017 21:08 |
|
Friendly Humour posted:Nigga pls, marginalism is so idiotic I don't even know where to begin with. It treats people as logical computers and it's really really stupid and its application by neoliberal asswipes has never ever had anything but utterly destructive results. My only point about evaluation being inseparable from human perception is that nothing trumps it. An object can definately be extremely costly to produce in terms of labour time and investments and large amount of exploitation, but if nobody wants to buy at the price asked, that value is completely meaningless. I'm just saying that the price of an object and profitability seems completely disconnected from its labour value. I'm saying that objects aren't valuable as themselves, only as objects of desire. I don't think any of this actually contradicts LTV though, because yes anyone can value anything how they like but a society doesn't function according to each of their subjective valuations. You're right that just working on something doesn't necessarily add value to it: society judges the product based on actual demand and that judgement values it, I think either Das Capital or Harveys reader on it explains that versions of the LTV had always said raw labour = value and so had never really worked properly and it was Marx who said that for work to produce value it has to be work which produces a need for society (hence the term socially necessary labour time to produce something being what adds value). Also I'm honoured that mine was the response that you picked
|
# ¿ Jan 26, 2017 22:20 |
|
You can't just quote that and not link it as well.
|
# ¿ Jan 27, 2017 17:37 |
|
I wonder what was causing the increase in inequality from 1300 until the black death, was there a general movement towards centralising authority under the monarchs at the time, rather than strong aristocrats? Edit: That was the Little Ice Age, so population was static or falling mostly, maybe it really was just consolidation due to untimely deaths? namesake fucked around with this message at 18:30 on Jan 27, 2017 |
# ¿ Jan 27, 2017 18:20 |
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:The latest research in medieval studies indicates that there was considerable growth among the nobility, clergy, and merchant classes, because serfs got bupkis. In a system where everyone is obligated pay dues to their lord, or tithes to the church, then it's easy to accumulate wealth even in primitive conditions of production. Ah so the creation of new ranks created greater exploitation of the serf (rather than splitting the same amount), meaning a more divided ruling class to war among itself as the surplus declined due to the little ice age before being completely undone in western europe by the drop in population from the same and disease.
|
# ¿ Jan 27, 2017 18:39 |
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Because of the primitive conditions of production, Europe was actually overpopulated before the Black Death. And yet the complete opposite happens in Eastern Europe, which is why they still had peasants in Russia in 1917! By what measure was Europe overpopulated though?
|
# ¿ Jan 27, 2017 19:25 |
|
Weeping Wound posted:same, though the homework explainer has nearly the same grasp of material that McCaine has Somewhere in Germany McCaine wakes with a start, "gently caress, did I just get massively burned?"
|
# ¿ Jan 28, 2017 02:19 |
|
The Kurds are a haunting question for me (although probably not a very deep one, otherwise I'd do more research) because they're clearly fighting a war of national liberation (in Syria and Turkey at least) and deserve at least critical support but then they even have the guts to properly advocate for serious communalist foundations of their state while somehow also attracting support from the USA and I don't really know how to square that in a regional or global political sense.
|
# ¿ Feb 4, 2017 23:27 |
|
"Thesis, anti-thesis. I'm the guy with the dialectic." *shoots you with a gun made of materialism*
|
# ¿ Feb 7, 2017 00:35 |
|
SSJ_naruto_2003 posted:How in the gently caress could anyone who writes articles go through the research on Lenin required to write an article, look at Trump, and then say, "these people are are the same" There's your problem. Lord of Pie posted:Can't wait for Trump to get Beria'd out of all pictures of him and Bannon together More like Bannon disappears behind Trumps gigantic photoshopped hands.
|
# ¿ Feb 8, 2017 18:50 |
|
Let's share Soviet Bloc jokes: A commissar is discussing the latest potato harvest with a peasant. "Why the potatoes are so plentiful that if they were to be all piled together then they'd reach the feet of God in the Heavens above!" The peasant exclaimed and was harshly rebuked by the commissar, "Stop your foolish bourgeois behaviour, everyone knows that God is imaginary!" "Ah," the peasant replied, "But so are the potatoes!" ------------------------ A Western journalist has received a rare pass to travel in the USSR soon after the end of the Second World War and is keen to try and speak with the locals. Eventually he strikes up a conversation with a local shopkeeper and, taking a large risk, asks him what he thinks of Comrade Stalin. The man quickly shushes him and leaves the shop, beckoning for the journalist to follow. They travel separately and slowly across town to a quiet street and the shopkeeper walks into an alley. The journalist follows hesitantly and walks up to the man who checks over their shoulders one last time and then leans in close and whispers, "Actually I rather like him."
|
# ¿ Feb 8, 2017 21:30 |
|
Garry Parrish posted:He's the kind of leftist that wants to ride a NPO ticket to the middle class instead of doing something If that were true I doubt he'd have the pro-assad position that he seems to.
|
# ¿ Feb 10, 2017 14:35 |
|
The booger geese.
|
# ¿ Feb 11, 2017 10:25 |
|
So there seems to be quite a lot of recruitment going on for DSA and buckets of cash to ACLU and other liberal groups, how are your actual socialist groups doing? Here in the UK we're pleased to see all the solidarity demos we're holding against Trump but are mostly thinking about how to turn that to domestic issues to get a more sustained and politically leftwing involvement in politics.
|
# ¿ Feb 14, 2017 22:41 |
|
jarofpiss posted:its for aclu donors lol Neither Washington nor Moscow but an ill examined obsession with rationalism and ideologically blinkered concept of truth and fairness.
|
# ¿ Feb 15, 2017 14:47 |
|
A cool drat horse posted:Just wanted to say, that this posts sucks really bad. Sorry that the IST stole all your cadre I guess.
|
# ¿ Feb 15, 2017 20:37 |
|
Just to reiterate: Stalin did bad things but is very good looking as a young man and is funny to troll people with.
|
# ¿ Feb 19, 2017 13:28 |
|
Thug Lessons posted:It's a fake picture released way later with all the pockmarks airbrushed off No one does fake news like Stalin! Also I guess none of you know who Danny Dyer is, so that probably isn't that funny.
|
# ¿ Feb 19, 2017 23:55 |
|
|
# ¿ May 20, 2024 07:51 |
|
Now this thread has been through some difficult times but we've always been a valuable source of support and information for one another, so here's my contribution: Honestly the dog has a real Marx-like face, I think he's down with overthrowing capitalism already. namesake fucked around with this message at 18:26 on Feb 22, 2017 |
# ¿ Feb 22, 2017 18:24 |