Socialism |OT| The Dawn of a Red Era

samoyed

Member
Oct 26, 2017
7,225
The 2nd amendment would not look out of place in revolutionary socialist ideology (it being the product of revolutionaries who had an ingrained distrust of the state).

Modern gun use is far from how it was envisioned in the constitution though.
 
OP
OP
sphagnum

sphagnum

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,010
Revolutionary socialists aren't in favor of the Second Amendment. They're in favor of arming the proletariat specifically. The bourgeoisie would not have the right to weapons under the dictatorship of the proletariat, I suspect.

Or to put it another way, I've seen it said: "I support gun control, if by that you mean giving communists control of the guns."
 
Oct 25, 2017
469
Revolutionary socialists aren't in favor of the Second Amendment. They're in favor of arming the proletariat specifically. The bourgeoisie would not have the right to weapons under the dictatorship of the proletariat, I suspect.

Or to put it another way, I've seen it said: "I support gun control, if by that you mean giving communists control of the guns."
would...would there be a bourgeoisie in a dictatorship of the proletariat?
 
OP
OP
sphagnum

sphagnum

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,010
would...would there be a bourgeoisie in a dictatorship of the proletariat?
It's possible, sure. If the proletariat seizes power, that doesn't mean that everything immediately changes.

I don't think the USSR properly achieved DoP status due to their elections not being free/fair, but let's say for a moment hypothetically that they were. Bourgeois elements still existed. The NEPmen were growing in the 20s. The government controlled the "commanding heights" but still allowed private ventures until Stalin's five year plans. The DoP isn't synonymous with socialism - its a state structure trying to complete the revolutionary transfer of power and control.
 

samoyed

Member
Oct 26, 2017
7,225
Revolutionary socialists aren't in favor of the Second Amendment. They're in favor of arming the proletariat specifically. The bourgeoisie would not have the right to weapons under the dictatorship of the proletariat, I suspect.

Or to put it another way, I've seen it said: "I support gun control, if by that you mean giving communists control of the guns."
Given Jefferson's ideal of the free, self sufficient, yeoman farmer I think he considered himself as part of the proletariat and/or representing the proletariat.

And not, you know, a slave-owning landlord.

A lot of the ideation back then had to do with a dream of self-determinism, of a man living off of his own labor on his own land without a coercive aristocracy, and this might've passed for a primitive socialism. At least that's how I understand it. In so far the state was necessary to maintain property rights, the 2nd would've empowered civilians to seize the mandate of governance whenever they felt like it the state overstepped its bounds.

(Narrator: They never did)
 
Last edited:

Eylos

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,863
the revolutionaries are divided in this regard at least over here, i will quote an argument i heard " weapons are expensive (here) and who will have access to them will not be the proleteariat, but rich people that will use guns to kill most of the times poor people, until the country is ready for a revolution it would be stupid to defend weapons, you are just giving weapons to the bourgeoise."

edit: btw i dont like to use the term revolutionary like that, every socialist is revolutionary.
 
Last edited:

Scottt

Member
Oct 25, 2017
857
Reading "Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia" right now, it's a very artistic book, and it struggles to land itself at a lot of points. But it's a great read still and highlights how the culture Western Democracies have fostered is just this bloated behemoth of consumerism and capitalist hellishness that endures because people are terrified of being labeled and ostracized.
Yes! That's been a formative book for me as well.
 
OP
OP
sphagnum

sphagnum

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,010
I was reading some Hobsbawm at Barnes and Nobel yesterday. Got too depressed and read some goofy pseudo-historical conspiracy theory stuff about Denisovans instead.
 

Iloelemen

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,323
I missed the whole Omar commenting on the system that outputs horrible foreign policy from presidents.

While I'm glad that a lot commended her on that, I was expecting better reactions from other progressives.

Anyhoo, what are your thoughts on MMT?
 

Deffers

Member
Mar 4, 2018
1,059
Whenever I get too deep into "we're all going to die" territory I read some zany LaRouche shit about the queen of England and feel a little better.
I have a rotation of pseudoscience and cults I read about for similar reasons. Yunno, at first, the reptilians things sounds so fucking crazy-- but it's like a mile wide and an inch deep, there's no there there. LaRouche goes into the foreverspace with his conspiracy, he's pretty good.

Recently I read Peter Reich's A Book of Dreams, a story about Wilhelm Reich's son. It's a story with increasing layers as you read more and more about Wilhelm Reich from sources that aren't his son. It goes from being a sad reflection on a wild visionary that spawned a Kate Bush song to a fascinating story about reflection, cults, and how government overreach can make martyrs out of some people who really don't need the help.
 

samoyed

Member
Oct 26, 2017
7,225
Anyhoo, what are your thoughts on MMT?
For what it’s worth I support the GND entirely and if we need to use some voodoo economics to justify the spending in the event that the military industrial complex is too strong to fight against (for people who think we should reshuffle spending instead of adding to the deficit which is a fine option) we absolutely should. As the bailouts showed, our economy can take injections of one or two trillion without breaking stuff and I’d rather see those trillions in the hands of workers than bankers.

But [Micheal] Roberts provides a convincing rebuttal to MMT as a long term policy, so while I support its tactical usage now, I do not support making it the Reaganomics of our generation.
My mind hasn't changed since then. If we assume capitalism is irrevocably a failure, even if MMT "doesn't work", if it's enough to get people to sign on board with some left policies we should make use of it. It's not like austerity works either. Whatever it takes to improve the life of workers/working class.
 
OP
OP
sphagnum

sphagnum

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,010
5'3", 125 years old. Anti-Revisionist revisionist.
Cute and cuddly, will rub bald head on you.
I will bury you (in the sheets).
Must love Pepsi and corn.
 

Mekanos

Member
Oct 17, 2018
4,913
that maid thread....
Came here about to link it. OP was so far up his ass that he got banned. Amazing.

Love the people defending him. "He pays her the bare minimum so he gets to dictate her life." I'll repost what I put there:

OP’s refusal to buy her a personal tablet/computer is puzzling. She lives in your house and is financially dependent on you. You realize how denying her autonomy is a bad look, right?

For perspective, my family has had maids come in monthly to my house as long as I’ve lived, and my parents have always tried to do right by them, help them get jobs, buy cars, etc. Don’t treat her like a prisoner. Help her improve her lot in life. I come from an upper middle class background and I was always raised to share my fortunate circumstances with others.
 
Oct 29, 2017
4,826
would...would there be a bourgeoisie in a dictatorship of the proletariat?
It's the transitional state where the bourgeoisie would be, at best, declassed.

weapons are expensive (here)
Weapons are (relatively) pretty cheap. Couple years back I bought an AK for $300

I don't think the USSR properly achieved DoP status due to their elections not being free/fair, but let's say for a moment hypothetically that they were. Bourgeois elements still existed. The NEPmen were growing in the 20s. The government controlled the "commanding heights" but still allowed private ventures until Stalin's five year plans. The DoP isn't synonymous with socialism - its a state structure trying to complete the revolutionary transfer of power and control.
Elections are bourgeois, so yeah, you're right. Lenin never characterize the NEP, or Soviet Russia under his leadership, as Socialist. Small to medium sized businesses still existed under Stalin.

The Dictatorship of the Proletariat is proletarian State power, but not merely the seizing of the bourgeois state and placing it into the hands of the proletariat. That simply changes the class character of the proletariat into something else. The DOP is the expression of the proletarian state in flux, the dismantling of capital relations though they still exist.

The USSR was the latter for a very brief moment of time. Once the Soviet's collapsed and the proletarian class ceased to exist in the USSR so did the DOP, and so was the advent of the NEP and Lenin's State Capitalism.
 

Eylos

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,863
It's the transitional state where the bourgeoisie would be, at best, declassed.



Weapons are (relatively) pretty cheap. Couple years back I bought an AK for $300



Elections are bourgeois, so yeah, you're right. Lenin never characterize the NEP, or Soviet Russia under his leadership, as Socialist. Small to medium sized businesses still existed under Stalin.

The Dictatorship of the Proletariat is proletarian State power, but not merely the seizing of the bourgeois state and placing it into the hands of the proletariat. That simply changes the class character of the proletariat into something else. The DOP is the expression of the proletarian state in flux, the dismantling of capital relations though they still exist.

The USSR was the latter for a very brief moment of time. Once the Soviet's collapsed and the proletarian class ceased to exist in the USSR so did the DOP, and so was the advent of the NEP and Lenin's State Capitalism.
minimum income in dollars is +/- 260,00 over here, add tax, permission, training.
 
Oct 25, 2017
2,405
Anyone have examples of Marxist/Socialist iconography besides the hammer and sickle? I’m trying to get a custom hat made but I worry just using the hammer and sickle will make me look like a tankie, so I just wondered if there were other options.
 

BuddyDharma

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,333
Oct 29, 2017
4,826
Anyone have examples of Marxist/Socialist iconography besides the hammer and sickle? I’m trying to get a custom hat made but I worry just using the hammer and sickle will make me look like a tankie, so I just wondered if there were other options.
stop dont comeback

Oh my God he's armed.
Oh no, I came off of that thing years ago.

Don't know much about early Soviet history, but didn't those two communes last about a month or two at best?
The Soviets in the Russian SFSR didn't last much longer either.
 
Dec 14, 2017
539
Revolutionary socialists aren't in favor of the Second Amendment. They're in favor of arming the proletariat specifically. The bourgeoisie would not have the right to weapons under the dictatorship of the proletariat, I suspect.

Or to put it another way, I've seen it said: "I support gun control, if by that you mean giving communists control of the guns."
The bourgeoisie wouldn't exist under the dictatorship of the proletariat.

Concentrated power, be it in the name of the 'people' or not, is best avoided. Any concentrated power would restrict gun ownership without significant power to oppose such a move.
 
OP
OP
sphagnum

sphagnum

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,010
How, exactly? Are you saying a DoP wouldn't immediately abolish private property?
sphagnum said:
It's possible, sure. If the proletariat seizes power, that doesn't mean that everything immediately changes.

I don't think the USSR properly achieved DoP status due to their elections not being free/fair, but let's say for a moment hypothetically that they were. Bourgeois elements still existed. The NEPmen were growing in the 20s. The government controlled the "commanding heights" but still allowed private ventures until Stalin's five year plans. The DoP isn't synonymous with socialism - its a state structure trying to complete the revolutionary transfer of power and control.[
/quote]

Nothing happens immediately!
 
Oct 29, 2017
4,826
The national socialist who shot up a New Zealand mosque cites the Chinese Communist Party and their nationalist, socialist, and ethnic based political structure as one of his many inspirations.