Socialism |OT| The Dawn of a Red Era

BuddyDharma

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,202
Damn I am a lot of shit at once.

Classical Marxism 100%
Anarcha-feminism 100%
Individualist feminism 100%
Queer anarchism 100%
Fourierism 100%
Marxist feminism 100%

Dunno how I can be a Marxist and anarchist at the same time. And apparently I'm feminist as fuck. Had to look up Fourierism. Is utopian socialism just communism where fewer people die in the process?
 

samoyed

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,710
https://thenextrecession.wordpress.com/2019/04/27/progressive-capitalism-an-oxymoron/

How are we to return to the golden age of progressive capitalism? On Democracy Now, the online broadcaster, Stiglitz was asked in an interview: “should it be progressive capitalism or workers power?” He replied, “the market is going to have to play an important role. So, that’s why I wanted to use the word “capitalism.” But I wanted to signal that the form of capitalism that we’ve seen over the last 40 years has not been working for most people. And that’s why I talk about people. We have to have progressive capitalism. We have to tame capitalism and redirect capitalism so it serves our society. You know, people are not supposed to serve the economy; the economy is supposed to serve our people”. When he was asked “Hasn’t capitalism always done that (ie serve the rich and the monopolies rather than the poor and workers)?”, he responded “Not to the extent that it has.”

Stiglitz’s views are either pure naivety or clever sophistry –or maybe both. Does he really think that there was a period when capitalism benefited both workers and corporations; rich and poor? The ‘golden age’ after 1945 up to the late 1960s was the exception in advanced capitalist economies and then only for those economies, not for Latin America, Asia, the Middle East and Africa. For the greater part of the globe, those decades were ones of dire poverty and a battle against imperialist exploitation.
 

JaeCryo

Member
Nov 6, 2017
3,626
100% Anarcho-communism
100% Anarcho-syndicalism
100% Classical Marxism
100% Anarcha-feminism
100% Green syndicalism
100% Insurrectionary anarchism
100% Communalism
100% Marxist Feminism
100% Neozapatismo

What have I become?
 
Oct 30, 2017
546
I feel like my brain is melting

I've spent the last few months endlessly arguing with left-wingers to be cautious about using telesur as the sole source for information on the Venezuela situation because it was founded by Chavez, based in Caracas and mainly funded by the Venezuelan government, and now people are accusing me of being a tankie and thinking RT is unbiased

I'm dying inside
 

samoyed

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,710
It is difficult to navigate, yeah.

The only things I'm 99% sure of is

1) Maduro is a shit and has to go
2) Venezuelan citizens are suffering
3) Guaido is probably backed by neoliberal interests including Leopold
 

Deffers

Member
Mar 4, 2018
1,032
I feel like my brain is melting

I've spent the last few months endlessly arguing with left-wingers to be cautious about using telesur as the sole source for information on the Venezuela situation because it was founded by Chavez, based in Caracas and mainly funded by the Venezuelan government, and now people are accusing me of being a tankie and thinking RT is unbiased

I'm dying inside
I get that dying inside feeling too, especially from conversations on this forum. Apparently now not supporting Maduro is the tankie take, though? That's new to me. Jesus Christ. It's worse than I thought.

It is difficult to navigate, yeah.

The only things I'm 99% sure of is

1) Maduro is a shit and has to go
2) Venezuelan citizens are suffering
3) Guaido is probably backed by neoliberal interests including Leopold
3 is likely the case. Frankly, nobody's denying that. Venezuelan people for the most part are aware of this. It's like House said in the thread for the coup. "First Maduro, then Guaido" is a valid position.

I wish more people would realize that US-backed coups were typically taking place in countries that didn't have any major problems with their governments, as opposed to places that already have paramilitary death squads around and literally have had 10% of their population spilling out into neighboring countries, creating a massive refugee crisis. Acknowledging this fundamental difference is important so that people understand why Venezuelans are willing to risk it with Guaido. It doesn't make you a white bougie to think "Hey, maybe I can get back to dismantling the existing relationships between capital and the workers once I'm no longer drinking sewer water and have food again." In an odd way, thinking that there's no difference between Venezuela and all the rest is validating propaganda of those Latin American countries as all being hell-holes that needed to be fixed (just not by US imperialism), rather than functional societies that didn't need any intervention. All the buck wild takes we're getting make sense if you're a person who thinks "absolute hell" is the default state of being in Latin America.

I still haven't gotten in touch with most of my family. I hope they're doing alright.
 

samoyed

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,710
It's like House said in the thread for the coup. "First Maduro, then Guaido" is a valid position.
Yeah I think this is the most reasonable stance to take now. Any absolutist "never Guaido" just ignores the human suffering going on under Maduro. A neoliberal hell is preferable to a failed state mass starvation hell.

Hope your family is safe.
 

anthro

Member
Oct 28, 2017
221
I feel like my brain is melting

I've spent the last few months endlessly arguing with left-wingers to be cautious about using telesur as the sole source for information on the Venezuela situation because it was founded by Chavez, based in Caracas and mainly funded by the Venezuelan government, and now people are accusing me of being a tankie and thinking RT is unbiased

I'm dying inside
Needless to say (but I'll do it anyway!), it is emotionally charged because it is both a topic of world significance and something people are personally involved in. So you have individuals throughout the internet who are taking very personal stances, like "I have family who had to flee across the border, this needs to end no matter what!" talking with people who are just kind of musing on the situation with no real attachment. Under most other circumstances I think people would want to avoid too much discourse on the topic with the personally involved person because they wouldn't want to exacerbate whatever their trauma may be, but in the impersonal world of online we're very driven to either tell somebody why they're wrong or otherwise express our opinions bigly because when else do we get to do that? Maybe not much in normal daily life.

But I'm not interested in discussing the topic much for that reason. People can get very upset, and as far as how it effects me it is very inconsequential right now, though the event itself is a big deal for tens of millions or even hundreds of millions of people. I don't want to see an invasion or a civil war, but I have no control over that unfortunately.
 
Oct 27, 2017
2,592
Needless to say (but I'll do it anyway!), it is emotionally charged because it is both a topic of world significance and something people are personally involved in. So you have individuals throughout the internet who are taking very personal stances, like "I have family who had to flee across the border, this needs to end no matter what!" talking with people who are just kind of musing on the situation with no real attachment. Under most other circumstances I think people would want to avoid too much discourse on the topic with the personally involved person because they wouldn't want to exacerbate whatever their trauma may be, but in the impersonal world of online we're very driven to either tell somebody why they're wrong or otherwise express our opinions bigly because when else do we get to do that? Maybe not much in normal daily life.

But I'm not interested in discussing the topic much for that reason. People can get very upset, and as far as how it effects me it is very inconsequential right now, though the event itself is a big deal for tens of millions or even hundreds of millions of people. I don't want to see an invasion or a civil war, but I have no control over that unfortunately.
This is a good take. I also feel like reading emotionally charged threads like that one tends to make me more emotional and it makes me more likely to want to respond. It's probably best to just step away from them. Nobody is going to help Venezuela by posting lol
 

samoyed

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,710
In fairness to DSA this comic seems to have nothing to do with them. It's made by some dude who turned into an AOC fanboy.
 

Eylos

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,444
i have some problems with that, people will not get the critique of "socialist lifestyle" that i know its your critique, they will get the obvious that all socialists are spoiled people that they aren't part of the working class, they are hypocrites.
and that comic without any context has the intention of making socialism looks bad
 

SaveWeyard

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,540
i have some problems with that, people will not get the critique of "socialist lifestyle" that i know its your critique, they will get the obvious that all socialists are spoiled people that they aren't part of the working class, they are hypocrites.
and that comic without any context has the intention of making socialism looks bad
Socialism worn like a badge, socialism as an identity, is bad.
 
Oct 29, 2017
4,516
I'm on the fence of whether or not I consider it a major problem or whether it is one at all. "Socialism" is just a name for relations of production. It could be called anything but the fundamental expression is the same single thing and it would exist regardless of what it is called.

"Socialism" as a lifestyle or political ideology is literally meaningless. The word is used to mean any and everything. Currently it is adopted by people who simply think the very low bar of "not being a fascist" makes you a Socialist.

Socialism is the politics of the working class. The person in that comic making the shirt. Not the person wearing it and sloganeering, not the DSA, not AOC, not any of the Feds on /r/socialism, not any of the weirdo's trying to rehabilitate Stalin's homophobia on /r/chapotraphouse...

There's a good Lenin quote out there about this but I can't seem to find it right now.
 

Eylos

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,444
I'm on the fence of whether or not I consider it a major problem or whether it is one at all. "Socialism" is just a name for relations of production. It could be called anything but the fundamental expression is the same single thing and it would exist regardless of what it is called.

"Socialism" as a lifestyle or political ideology is literally meaningless. The word is used to mean any and everything. Currently it is adopted by people who simply think the very low bar of "not being a fascist" makes you a Socialist.

Socialism is the politics of the working class. The person in that comic making the shirt. Not the person wearing it and sloganeering, not the DSA, not AOC, not any of the Feds on /r/socialism, not any of the weirdo's trying to rehabilitate Stalin's homophobia on /r/chapotraphouse...

There's a good Lenin quote out there about this but I can't seem to find it right now.
the working class must have knowledge and believe in socialism otherwise their dream is only to be part of the bourgeoise.

"When education is not liberating, the dream of the oppressed is to become the oppressor" - Paulo Freire

the proletariat needs the identity of socialism, if identity = to believe, and not only clothes and symbology (that i think it can have a purpose if well used), but i agree with your critique about lifestyle communism.
 
Oct 29, 2017
4,516
Identity is subjective and irrelevant. No one "identifies" as working class. Either you are or you aren't.

The working class doesn't need anyone to tell them what their condition in life is. They know it, and they know their needs and goals. The "job" of educating the working class about the working class is a fool's errand.
 

Eylos

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,444
Identity is subjective and irrelevant. No one "identifies" as working class. Either you are or you aren't.

The working class doesn't need anyone to tell them what their condition in life is. They know it, and they know their needs and goals. The "job" of educating the working class about the working class is a fool's errand.
yeah i know you disagree with the concept of class conscious, i think thats why we see the problem different.
 

samoyed

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,710
Well, I've met people that think that they're too good to be working class, despite being part of it.
This describes a lot of conservative American voters.

There's socialism as economic theory and socialism as ideology and socialism as identity. I think they're all "valid" conceptualizations of socialism but I'm also a staunch linguistic descriptionist.
 

BuddyDharma

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,202
I don't know how one can believe that the working class would not be conscious of itself.
People in the working class alienated from fellow workers through racism and other forms of bigotry that serve bourgeois interests? Or so alienated from their work itself that, despite the incessant nagging that something is wrong, believe that their stolen labor is fair?

Or be like me, who's self-conscious in all the wrong ways! :D
 
Oct 29, 2017
4,516
These issues circle back to the overall problem of there simply being no actual choice available. Inter-class fighting absolutely services the bourgeois interest but within a zero sum game that is existence in capitalism that competition will manifest in a multitude of different ways. If the white worker and the black worker join together under Capitalism then the victims and scapegoats of racist capitalist relations will simply be substituted for something else.

I don't think the majority of the working class believe that their over worked and underpaid life is "fair". I believe that propaganda will put display those who have a financial or social gain in saying so. But even then, when you have no way to grow artistically, educationally or through your labor then replacing those stagnant trivialities with social ladders seems to be a natural occurrence. Lord knows the NEETs who make up Leftism on the internet have taken up that cause celebre in stride.

And, ultimately, when people put the false choice of Capitalism vs Capitalism but Called Socialism, what difference is it in the end to the working class? Pay for your shitty healthcare out of pocket or have the government tax you for it? Pro Open Lax Borders Big Capital versus... Pro Open Lax Borders Democrats. The largest fight between "choice" in the past 80 years was the choice of Capitalism as practiced in the West or the abject failure that is "Socialism" of the East. If the working class associates Socialism with the catastrophic social experiment that was Soviet Socialism and if this is the largest motivator for the working class to feel that their labor under Capitalism is the "fair" way, then don't blame them. Blame the "Socialists" who so royally fucked everything up that they set back the movement by decades.

The working class knows they're get fucked over. I promise you.
 

M-M

Member
Oct 27, 2017
118
I prefer to think of Class Consciousness as less of an understanding that you or your class is getting fucked over, and more as the idea that you need to collectively negotiate with other members of your class in order to *stop* getting fucked over.