-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
and so-called leftist and mainstream news coverage where I live call it "populist parties". I'm so sick and tired of mainstream white-washing fascism and their pathetic attempt at being "neutral" because they are afraid to call shit what it is.
Yeah. Makes you just wanna give up.
One of my bugaboos is there insistence to call Nazi scum the Alt Right (though TBF most people do that. And it winds me up something terrible)
I also have a lit novel planned about a guy who's been haunted by the ghost of Karl Marx since he was fourteen. That's a totally different kind of book, though.
The thread in general and that particular conversation you linked to.
Check out Red Plenty. Fiction set during the time Russia struggled to become modern.
Marx senpai and Engels kun kicking The bourgeoise ass
The First person who Said "Will senpai notice me?" is Engels, true story
The First person who Said "Will senpai notice me?" is Engels, true story
There's a Lenin quote about how the bourgeoisie and capitalists will adopt, dilute, and then re-sell you "Socialism". I think that is apt here.
What about Free fanfics?
"Come to work on the latest chapter of Kapital, Marx-chan?" Engels asked in his gravelly, masculine voice. "And I've told you, we're more than mere coworkers — we're comrades! Please, call me Friedrich." A smile spread over the tall communist's face, and Marx's eyes were drawn immediately to his full lips.
"Engels-senpai — no, Friedrich — I-I know I shouldn't say it, but... I don't only want to be more than coworkers! I want to be more than comrades, too!" With this, Marx, whose fingers had been nervously but steadily working at the knot of his tie, flung it to one side and tore open his sensible shirt, sending buttons flying in all directions except at Engels.(...)"
Hahahah im amazed This truly exists
Right now Zizek is sniffing and nodding while reading this thread after playing COD with his son
Hey guys! It's nice seeing a thread like this on here, I am a socialist myself (I guess if pressed for the specifics I'd choose anarcho-communist), it's nice seeing such a large following here because I am mainly a user on VGChartz and there are almost no socialists there and unfortunately the political threads have essentially been taken over by right-wingers.
Morbidly curious to see the political discourse on fucking vgchartz of all places.
http://gamrconnect.************/thread.php?id=234890
http://gamrconnect.************/thread.php?id=234848
http://gamrconnect.************/thread.php?id=234981
http://gamrconnect.************/thread.php?id=235005
http://gamrconnect.************/thread.php?id=235057
Have fun.
Well, I see VGChartz URLs are banned here. Replace the asterisks with the vgchartz(dot)com
Welcome
Open your heart house, we are here for you
I've pulled my hair out trying to tell people that they're not the same thing, but it seems like a losing battle.
Correcting myself he confuses public institutions and state with socialism, its even worse, is this Guy famous in US?
Ugghhh. Fucking Cenk.
He's the founder and anchor of the net based news channel The Young Turks.
Because Capitalism's solution to a bevy of problems is proper advertising.
the moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends towards social democracy
half-kidding but if you aim to achieve socialism through democratic instead of violent means you're a socdem, sorry, them's the rules. I don't see much point in distinguishing between social democrats and democratic socialists because I see them as largely interchangeable.
That picture doesn't show anything about democratic socialism, though? Unless Mr. Mike is a democratic socialist and I didn't know about that.
my point is just that trying to distinguish between socialists and social democrats is wrong and misguided unless you think socialism can only be achieved through violent means. Any party with democratic socialist goals is going to not look all that different from a party with social democratic goals. Both are going to argue for wage hikes and redistribution, nationalization, economic planning, decommodifying necessary goods into public services. People conflate the two because the policy goals of socialist parties and social democratic parties typically look like the same thing.
I was more referencing the discussion earlier that people don't know the difference between social democracy and socialism. I don't think there's a meaningful difference in the electoral/democratic spheres between the two, but if you think socialism can only be achieved through revolution and violence that's fair.
Yes, I do believe that it can only be achieved through violence in revolution. There's a reason why they have a police force, a military, tanks, fighter jets, nuclear weapons, etc. It's because they don't want to give up their clutches peacefully and are willing to use extreme force to keep a hold of their power if that's what it takes.
Hey, I've been lurking for a while but never posted. I'm not particularly well educated on socialist theory but I want to learn, and y'all seem to know very well what you're talking about so it's a little intimidating.
I have aspirations of creating an independent, self-sufficient commune primarily for autistic and disabled people like myself. I don't want to go fully off the grid, but I do want us to do as much as we can to cut off reliance on capitalist society. When we successfully implement it for ourselves, I'd love to help others in my area set up similar communes and hopefully it will spread. Working out the actual logistics of how it will work is going to take a while, though. We may have to do it piecemeal, bit by bit over time removing ourselves from reliance on the so-called market.
I have aspirations of creating an independent, self-sufficient commune primarily for autistic and disabled people like myself. I don't want to go fully off the grid, but I do want us to do as much as we can to cut off reliance on capitalist society. When we successfully implement it for ourselves, I'd love to help others in my area set up similar communes and hopefully it will spread. Working out the actual logistics of how it will work is going to take a while, though. We may have to do it piecemeal, bit by bit over time removing ourselves from reliance on the so-called market.
The difference is that some social democrats are capitalists, they want a wellfare state, there's some revolutionary social dems, but some are even anti-communists, the picture above is a propaganda of the social democratic party of germany before WW2. They hated the german commies, the commies hated the soc dems.
Honestly, and I'm not too knowledgeable about pre-WW2 German communists, but I think there probably are good reasons to have been wary of Marxist Leninists considering how the soviet union was at the time.
I realize Rosa Luxemburg was murdered by social democrats - which obviously was an injustice.
I think Its a complicated thing
Lenin party and its internal division mensheviks (minority) and bolsheviks (majority) was the social democratic labour party.
I believe that the use of social democrat terminolgy by parties, can be either commies or Just capitalists humanists, today i think the use of It is more to " capitalism humanist" and commies prefer to use socialism, but i have seen some people wanting to use Rosa and social democracy.
So guys, I'm actually doing my history essay on Nazi Germany, and the prompt was asking if they were socialist. I assume you guys know what my answer is!
My answer: Hitler believed in a different definition of socialism, there's nothing in common with marxist socialism that was degenerated for him and not socialism. With the Victory of The soviet Union the soviet definition won and became the usual one.
Nah, I don't even think he believed in a different definition of socialism, that was just rhetoric used to gain support from the working class.
Could be, but he wrote about his socialism in the Mein kampf, he Said he knew The true definition, and who didnt understand is a bunch of fools, and The rest i Said above. There's even a British newspaper If i'm not mistaken where he explained how different It was.
Yeah maybe this was a method of confusion, but for what we know from newspapers and his book he presented himself as he believed in that i think, i haven't studied Hitler that deeply to know If he truly believe in this or not.
Well, Nazi Germany still had private industry and actually privatized certain industries, so I would say that they're fundamentally not socialist:
http://www.ub.edu/graap/nazi.pdf
This Will make clear.
https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2007/sep/17/greatinterviews1
"Why," I asked Hitler, "do you call yourself a National Socialist, since your party programme is the very antithesis of that commonly accredited to socialism?"
"Socialism," he retorted, putting down his cup of tea, pugnaciously, "is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists.
"Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic.
"We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists. We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national. We demand the fulfilment of the just claims of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity. To us state and race are one."
Just like Stalinists, the Nazi's believed that a relatively "unfree" market with heavy state intervention and command constituted "not Capitalism". In the end, Dirigism and it's variants were practiced world over and never called Socialism when implemented by the US, Japan, South Korea, or anyone else.
But you're right in the degree that Stalinism eventually became synonymous with Socialism.
The Fascist's decollectivized and privatized the German economy to great extent.
So, it's essentially Hitler saying that they're socialist "because they said so". The fact that he also says they could have called themselves the Liberal Party shows that they are not basing it on the fundamental aspects of the ideologies, but rather chose the terms based on what he believed would help them gain more support.
