deadacc

4y

you seen this movie

genuinely one of the weirdest things ive ever seen but the animation is really nuts

krishna bound

4y

“You can’t Google info on mass shooters anymore”

deadacc

4y

you seen this movie

genuinely one of the weirdest things ive ever seen but the animation is really nuts

krishna bound

4y

“You can’t Google info on mass shooters anymore”

SEGA GOON

4y

I'm not the big philosophy guy here tbh, I'm more the politics and economics guy

There is the famous Lenin quote: "There are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen."

The role of any communist should be to prepare for whenever these "weeks" happen. They are a handful of moments in the history of any part of the world where there is an opportunity for revolution. However, we are very limited in individually causing these moments to happen. We are subject to the wheels of history like everyone else (so are the capitalists).

“The first lesson a revolutionary must learn is that he is a doomed man.” - Huey P. Netwon

This quote shows me that many revolutionaries were fully aware that they would not reep the fruits of their actions during their lifetime, but that they were merely planting seeds for the future. A Marxist has to become comfortable with the scale of history and understand that for example the transition from feudalism to capitalism took centuries and a few failed attempts. The peasant revolts of the late Medieval Ages for example all failed. There is no reason to believe that it would be any different for socialism, although maybe the wheels of history spin faster this time because of information dissemination speed increasing.

Furtheremore, the achievements of the previous generations live through us, as do their struggles. That is why reading their works and studying their history is so important, because they already suffered many similar things and we can learn from them. You could read parts of Marx or Lenin and think it was written in 2022. Many problems didn't fundamentally change. The way we culturally package things change, and we must understand the shifts of society and even inside capitalism (capitalism has different phases and developments too), but the core mechanisms didn't really change since the days of Marx.

Marx is valuable because he was at the right place at the right time. Germany was still semi-feudal, so he was able to see how primitive capitalism was slowly seeping into Germany. Engels was a factory manager (later owner) in England and saw the first organized working class movement, the Charterists. He too was at the right place at the right time. They were able to view how ideologies changed, how economic modes of productions changed. They saw how liberal revolutions failed (1848/1849 revolutions), and how the Enlightenment values were forgotten in the pursuit of profit and private property. In our time, these systems are very settled in. The last shift that occurred was the shift towards neoliberalism occurring between the late 70s and the early 90s - this wasn't as major of a shift as Marx and Engels witnessed. We are just approaching the "end of the end of history" recently.

I also believe as a matter of strategy that every part of the world - imperial core, semi-periphery and periphery - must use different aims.

Capitalism cannot be reformed into socialism. Socialism can only be born out of a revolution, in which the proletariat forcefully imposes its will onto the bourgeoisie. However, revolutions can take different forms. A revolution can be a rapidly unfolding event, but a revolution can also be a gradual event. A rapid revolution is vastly preferable over a gradual revolution. In the periphery, revolutions will be rapid. In the semi-periphery, revolutions will either be rapid or gradual. In the imperial core, revolutions are highly unlikely as of now. Hence we must adapt our strategies here. Revolutions in the imperial core will only become likely if a good part of the periphery and semi-periphery are already socialist.

A gradual revolution can win if:
1. Land is nationalized; or: 100% taxation of land
2. Finance is nationalized
3. Military, intelligence and police are controlled
4. Money-to-labor voucher transition occurs
5. The judiciary and other political structures are slowly taken over.
If market socialism is necessary, it should only be a transitional method.

These points are very hard to achieve as of now - and this isn't even a full-fledged revolution. Perhaps the pink wave countries of Latin America could have achieved these if there were a big communist sponsor - however, without one, they are not able to cross the Rubicon, especially in taking over the military. But if we look at China versus Venezuela, the reason China works and Venezuela doesn't is that in China, land is nationalized, finance is nationalized and military is controlled by the party. At least in theory, China has the tools to progress to a socialist mode of production rather easily.

If China should not decide to take the role of the socialist hegemon aiding other movements (very likely), then the only other chance I see is smaller countries turning socialist in a regional revolution spreading to several countries and them sticking together very closely in political and economic affairs.

A gradual revolution takes years of fighting and backlash (imagine how hard even it was for Venezuela to do its mild anti-imperialist) social democracy), and even a rapidly unfolding revolution takes years, if not decades of preparation. 1917 couldn't have happened without 1905.
A revolution can occur in random moments, but it can only be steered into the direction of socialism if a proper movement is already in place. It is too late to start organizing once revolutionary fervor already spreads, let alone post-revolution.

Us in the imperialist core must follow a minimum-maximum goal, as Marx, Engels, pre-WW1-SPD and pre-1917-Bolsheviks demanded. The minimum goals are in reforms, short-term gains. Reforms are useful for the movement. With reforms, the communists can win the trust of the people, increase class consciousness and spread their name.

Rejecting reforms in order to promote accelerationist goals is counter-productive. Reforms alone do not decrease revolutionary pressure. The idea that we shouldn't bother with reforms at all is what Marx called revolutionary phrasemongering and the famous phrase "if that is what Marxism is, then I am not a Marxist". How will we gain the trust of people if we just speak of a distant hypothetical future event than of the now?

However, minimum goals of reform must always be combined with maximum goals of revolution. Reforms without revolutionary struggle is counter-productive, revolutionary struggle without engaging in reforms is counter-productive. Reform and revolution are not dichotomies, as is often portrayed. They must co-exist with each other; they are two sides of the same class struggle. The vanguard must combine both methods. This is the real crux of the thing: It is rare to see communists do both these days, you either have reformist types or purely revolutionary types, neither of which are effective in the imperial core.

Now, even if we are "effective", this doesn't mean we will switch to socialism. I think our short-term goals should be reforming and organizing within the workers movement while raising class consciousness, the mid-term goal should be to aid the semi-periphery and periphery of the world by keeping pressure on our bourgeoisie to keep peace and oppose imperialism, and the long-term goal should of course be a systemic change of our mode of production.

These timelines will mostly likely be accelerated through climate change. But even climate change won't make let's say France the new epicenter of socialism, it will still start in the semi-periphery and periphery of the world.

The Western socialist movement is probably at a point of 1870s, 1880s again if we were to recall the ghosts of the past as a comparison. It's gonna need a mass movement (1890s, 1900s) and massive shifts in world history (1910s) to make any long-term progress.

To round off, some Marx and Engels quotes:

"Marx treats the social movement as a process of natural history, governed by laws not only independent of human will, consciousness and intelligence, but rather, on the contrary, determining that will, consciousness and intelligence."

"But here individuals are dealt with only in so far as they are the personifications of economic categories, embodiments of particular class-relations and class-interests. My standpoint, from which the evolution of the economic formation of society is viewed as a process of natural history, can less than any other make the individual responsible for relations whose creature he socially remains, however much he may subjectively raise himself above them."

"It is not the consciousness of men that determines their being, but, on the contrary, their social being that determines their consciousness."

MrMudManMood

4y

@DontAtMe have you read black skin, white masks and if you have what are your thoughts

MyBallsAndMyWord

4y

I have not but I really need to

MrMudManMood

4y

Word

I've been struggling with disability for a long time and haven't been able to read for a while as part of that and your posts about Wretched of the Earth were part of what inspired me to get a second copy (I've had one for years from a professor that's been a benefactor to me but can't access it currently due to my disability and it's much easier for me to read when I have something in hand)

I bought a used copy but it's been delayed for weeks so the store that I bought it from is offering to send another book of similar cost so I was looking at some of Fanon's other stuff

Toward the African Revolution looks really powerful too

krishna bound

4y

"demographic change will be a victory for liberals everywhere, 'they' want to flood our country with immigrants so democrats can steal elections"

the demographic change:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/06/us/politics/mayra-flores-latina-republicans.html

Yuzzy

4y

I can fix her

krishna bound

4y

· edited

for real tho that headline is wild af, someone sat down and wrote that

krishna bound

4y

"demographic change will be a victory for liberals everywhere, 'they' want to flood our country with immigrants so democrats can steal elections"

the demographic change:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/06/us/politics/mayra-flores-latina-republicans.html

space0cadet

4y

Wtf she's married to a BORDER PATROL AGENT

krishna bound

4y

75% of CBP agents ive met have been latino

Womanpuncher69

4y

love to see the american dream in action

krishna bound

4y

75% of CBP agents ive met have been latino

krishna bound

4y

out of the most racist people ive met directly or indirectly in my life only 1 of them has been white lol
god bless america