Jun 15, 2022SEGA GOONWhere are the chinese billiomaires funding Stop Capitalism TV
Oh wait...
there's unironically more chinese billionaires funding pro-capitalism anti-communism propaganda than there chinese billionaires funding anti-american propaganda
crazy how nature do that
Jun 15, 2022·1 replyMany Ulsan residents not only work at Hyundai factories, they shop at Hyundai department stores, send their children to Hyundai schools, receive medical treatment at Hyundai hospitals and root for Ulsan Hyundai FC, the town's professional soccer team.
Sounds like hell
- Jun 15, 2022·1 reply
???
- Jun 15, 2022Lein
Many Ulsan residents not only work at Hyundai factories, they shop at Hyundai department stores, send their children to Hyundai schools, receive medical treatment at Hyundai hospitals and root for Ulsan Hyundai FC, the town's professional soccer team.
Sounds like hell
Samsung owns entire neighborhoods this is pretty normal in S. Korea
IDK if it's any worse than having a bunch of corporations and landlords offer the same service tbh
Jun 15, 2022·1 replyLein???
I think he on some Freudian shyt
- Jun 15, 2022·1 reply
Majima-san....I kneel...
- Jun 15, 2022
Crine
Jun 15, 2022·3 repliesWomanpuncher69@Cudderwalks what’s ur thoughts on the cuba revisionism topic
Sorry for the late response, I'm by no means an expert on Cuba but here's my general thoughts.
Cuba is/was a progressive country and does have some good elements. They are struggling against US imperialism and I obviously side with them against that. However, all this doesn't make them Socialist or "on the path to Socialism."
The Cuban revolution was not a Socialist revolution. Che himself describes it as "the bourgeoisie’s desire to free themselves from the economic chains of imperialism." He said Castro was a leader of the "leftist bourgeoisie." The Cuban revolution was a movement to free itself from a dictator in Batista and US imperialism but not a socialist revolution.
Cuba was a semi-colony to the Soviet Union and essentially a puppet state. Thus largely Cuba followed the Khrushchev and Brezhnev model. In their "communist" parties first congress Castro self criticized for not getting in line and following the Khrushchev/Brezhnev model sooner.
When Castro unveiled his "new economic system" he described a state capitalist economy where workers are paid based off the profitability the enterprises they work for and lose their jobs if production would be cheaper without them. How is this socialism?
Today Cuban's are able to buy and sell property, stay in luxury resorts, run private stores. The Cuban government has continued more and more to open itself up to private business. Just do a quick google search and you will find plenty of capitalist reforms going on in Cuba.
- Jun 15, 2022·1 replyCudderwalks
Sorry for the late response, I'm by no means an expert on Cuba but here's my general thoughts.
Cuba is/was a progressive country and does have some good elements. They are struggling against US imperialism and I obviously side with them against that. However, all this doesn't make them Socialist or "on the path to Socialism."
The Cuban revolution was not a Socialist revolution. Che himself describes it as "the bourgeoisie’s desire to free themselves from the economic chains of imperialism." He said Castro was a leader of the "leftist bourgeoisie." The Cuban revolution was a movement to free itself from a dictator in Batista and US imperialism but not a socialist revolution.
Cuba was a semi-colony to the Soviet Union and essentially a puppet state. Thus largely Cuba followed the Khrushchev and Brezhnev model. In their "communist" parties first congress Castro self criticized for not getting in line and following the Khrushchev/Brezhnev model sooner.
When Castro unveiled his "new economic system" he described a state capitalist economy where workers are paid based off the profitability the enterprises they work for and lose their jobs if production would be cheaper without them. How is this socialism?
Today Cuban's are able to buy and sell property, stay in luxury resorts, run private stores. The Cuban government has continued more and more to open itself up to private business. Just do a quick google search and you will find plenty of capitalist reforms going on in Cuba.
"Cuba was a semi-colony to the Soviet Union and essentially a puppet state"
"I'm by no means an expert on Cuba"
I would say that's an understatement
Jun 15, 2022CudderwalksSorry for the late response, I'm by no means an expert on Cuba but here's my general thoughts.
Cuba is/was a progressive country and does have some good elements. They are struggling against US imperialism and I obviously side with them against that. However, all this doesn't make them Socialist or "on the path to Socialism."
The Cuban revolution was not a Socialist revolution. Che himself describes it as "the bourgeoisie’s desire to free themselves from the economic chains of imperialism." He said Castro was a leader of the "leftist bourgeoisie." The Cuban revolution was a movement to free itself from a dictator in Batista and US imperialism but not a socialist revolution.
Cuba was a semi-colony to the Soviet Union and essentially a puppet state. Thus largely Cuba followed the Khrushchev and Brezhnev model. In their "communist" parties first congress Castro self criticized for not getting in line and following the Khrushchev/Brezhnev model sooner.
When Castro unveiled his "new economic system" he described a state capitalist economy where workers are paid based off the profitability the enterprises they work for and lose their jobs if production would be cheaper without them. How is this socialism?
Today Cuban's are able to buy and sell property, stay in luxury resorts, run private stores. The Cuban government has continued more and more to open itself up to private business. Just do a quick google search and you will find plenty of capitalist reforms going on in Cuba.
Cmon bruv
- Jun 15, 2022·1 replyCudderwalks
Sorry for the late response, I'm by no means an expert on Cuba but here's my general thoughts.
Cuba is/was a progressive country and does have some good elements. They are struggling against US imperialism and I obviously side with them against that. However, all this doesn't make them Socialist or "on the path to Socialism."
The Cuban revolution was not a Socialist revolution. Che himself describes it as "the bourgeoisie’s desire to free themselves from the economic chains of imperialism." He said Castro was a leader of the "leftist bourgeoisie." The Cuban revolution was a movement to free itself from a dictator in Batista and US imperialism but not a socialist revolution.
Cuba was a semi-colony to the Soviet Union and essentially a puppet state. Thus largely Cuba followed the Khrushchev and Brezhnev model. In their "communist" parties first congress Castro self criticized for not getting in line and following the Khrushchev/Brezhnev model sooner.
When Castro unveiled his "new economic system" he described a state capitalist economy where workers are paid based off the profitability the enterprises they work for and lose their jobs if production would be cheaper without them. How is this socialism?
Today Cuban's are able to buy and sell property, stay in luxury resorts, run private stores. The Cuban government has continued more and more to open itself up to private business. Just do a quick google search and you will find plenty of capitalist reforms going on in Cuba.
1. Isnt New Democratic Revolution what Maoists want though? Mao wasn't any different in that regard than Castro. With the founding of the People's Republic of China, the Communist Party headed a democratic-bourgeois government of alliance between the classes that participated in the national liberation, under a policy of state capitalism and people's democracy. This is what Mao called New Democracy, or People's Democratic Dictatorship
2. Socialism is explicitly a transitional mode of production, introducing or abandoning some market aspects doesn't instantly change that. Under your metric socialism probably never has existed anywhere on Earth, which would make the term meaningless after we already lived 100 years of October Revolution
- Jun 15, 2022·editedSEGA GOON
1. Isnt New Democratic Revolution what Maoists want though? Mao wasn't any different in that regard than Castro. With the founding of the People's Republic of China, the Communist Party headed a democratic-bourgeois government of alliance between the classes that participated in the national liberation, under a policy of state capitalism and people's democracy. This is what Mao called New Democracy, or People's Democratic Dictatorship
2. Socialism is explicitly a transitional mode of production, introducing or abandoning some market aspects doesn't instantly change that. Under your metric socialism probably never has existed anywhere on Earth, which would make the term meaningless after we already lived 100 years of October Revolution
Apologies for any typos, typing this up while on break on my phone
Yes, in a semi-feudal or semi colonial society there needs to be a New Democratic revolution. However there needs to be a second stage aka socialist revolution. That never occurred in Cuba.
China during its New Democratic revolution wasn’t socialist either nor was the Soviet Union during nep.
A dictatorship of the proletariat has never been established in Cuba. At its height it could be classified as a far left social democracy.
And on your second thing there have been three socialist countries in my opinion. The USSR from 1928-1956, Albania from 1947-1985 and China from 1956-1978. However, Albania and China adopted revisionist lines before they destroyed their DOTP.
- Jun 15, 2022
Jun 15, 2022·1 replyI'm just not gonna engage with anybody calling Cuba a soviet colony but it's funny how arbitrary what "real socialism" is becomes when socialists who aren't ultras start using that language. At least there is consistency with the second group.
- Jun 15, 2022·1 replythe reds
I'm just not gonna engage with anybody calling Cuba a soviet colony but it's funny how arbitrary what "real socialism" is becomes when socialists who aren't ultras start using that language. At least there is consistency with the second group.
Maybe it was a stretch to say colony, but how can you say Cuba was largely an independent country not impacted by Soviet imperialism?
During the Cuban missile crisis the Soviets promised the US they could inspect Cuba, without consulting Castro. Castro criticized the Soviets for this but still couldn't do anything about it.
If they were an independent country, why were the Soviets making agreements with the US involving Cuba without Cuban consent?
When the Soviet Union fell apart, Cuba's economy suffered greatly. Due to the fact they were so heavily reliant on the Soviets. This again doesn't sound like an independent country.
@frolein you could answer this too
- Jun 16, 2022·1 replyCudderwalks
Maybe it was a stretch to say colony, but how can you say Cuba was largely an independent country not impacted by Soviet imperialism?
During the Cuban missile crisis the Soviets promised the US they could inspect Cuba, without consulting Castro. Castro criticized the Soviets for this but still couldn't do anything about it.
If they were an independent country, why were the Soviets making agreements with the US involving Cuba without Cuban consent?
When the Soviet Union fell apart, Cuba's economy suffered greatly. Due to the fact they were so heavily reliant on the Soviets. This again doesn't sound like an independent country.
@frolein you could answer this too
A lot of this sounds like a simple reality surrounding the inherent power imbalance that exists between the largest and the smallest countries of a political bloc and not an invariably exploitative relationship between the two
In my opinion
- Jun 16, 2022·edited·1 replyamericana
A lot of this sounds like a simple reality surrounding the inherent power imbalance that exists between the largest and the smallest countries of a political bloc and not an invariably exploitative relationship between the two
In my opinion
In a Socialist political bloc, why would one country have power/control over another? If one country is using it's size and resources to dictate what is happening in another country to serve it's own interests, is that not imperialism?
There is a difference between providing support to another Communist nation/movement and the Soviet/Cuban relationship.
Cuba was heavily dependent on Soviet aid/protection so the Soviet's make decisions on Cuba's behalf without consulting the leaders of the Cuban communist party.
It's clear that Soviet imperialism was impacting Cuba and forcing it's hand on the country.
"Each Communist Party must decide for itself since it is responsible for its own revolution, not in order to separate it from the world revolution, but precisely in order to serve it.
Proletarian internationalism underlies the advice they give us and the opinions they express. But, we are the ones who must decide whether we accept these or not." - Gonzalo
Jun 16, 2022·1 reply
comrades. need some socialist optimism. who got it- Jun 16, 2022·1 replyspongebob comrades. need some socialist optimism. who got it
Hi
- Jun 16, 2022Cudderwalks
Hi
wassup wit u
Jun 16, 2022·2 replieshow tf do people read books so fast
if i read 10 pages in one sitting thats a huge success
- Jun 16, 2022Cudderwalks
In a Socialist political bloc, why would one country have power/control over another? If one country is using it's size and resources to dictate what is happening in another country to serve it's own interests, is that not imperialism?
There is a difference between providing support to another Communist nation/movement and the Soviet/Cuban relationship.
Cuba was heavily dependent on Soviet aid/protection so the Soviet's make decisions on Cuba's behalf without consulting the leaders of the Cuban communist party.
It's clear that Soviet imperialism was impacting Cuba and forcing it's hand on the country.
"Each Communist Party must decide for itself since it is responsible for its own revolution, not in order to separate it from the world revolution, but precisely in order to serve it.
Proletarian internationalism underlies the advice they give us and the opinions they express. But, we are the ones who must decide whether we accept these or not." - Gonzalo
thats more on the USSR tho than Cuba, and I agree that the USSR was revisionist at this point and Cuba isnt a special example like look at Khrushchev calling for Hoxha to be couped
