• 1nt3rd1m3nt10n4l [he/him]
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    You're not wrong, the entire point of Marxist Internationalism & Solidarity is precisely to combat that tendency. In short, this is not really a counter-argument to Marxism, precisely because the vast majority of Marxist theory (that written between the Revolutions of 1848, and the revolutions in Russia & China) are written in exactly that context, and exists to address & make the argument to workers why that's a bad idea for them to do.

    Of course getting people to accept & understand that is harder than just saying it; but the point is that this isn't something Marxists are unawares of. If you are interested in further (digestable) info on the topic I would suggest the youtube channels Jonas Čeika - CCK Philosophy, Hakim, Yugopnik & Second Thought.

    • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
      ·
      10 months ago

      I'm not presenting an argument against Marxism, just its implementation as described by its founding thinkers.

      It gets sold as you only need to do it once, but it is something that needs constant attention and requires a review of those who say they follow The Revolution to make sure they still continue to do so.

      • 1nt3rd1m3nt10n4l [he/him]
        ·
        10 months ago

        It gets sold as you only need to do it once, but it is something that needs constant attention and requires a review of those who say they follow The Revolution to make sure they still continue to do so.

        Absolutely, no disagreement on that position.

        I think that's kind of true of all political programs though, to some extent. Everything is of course subject to entropy.

        Those are still good channels to check out though, if you're interested. :3

        • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
          ·
          10 months ago

          I only bring it up as a part of communism over other systems seems to encourage a political system resistant to political change. The requisites that you need to join a certain political party and that only that one party seems to create a political monoculture that will calcify into something that doesn't serve the people.

          • CascadeOfLight [he/him]
            ·
            10 months ago

            The opposite is observed in practice. In both the USSR and even moreso in the PRC, the single-party state encompassed wild swings in economic policy.

            The joke goes, in the US you can change the party but not the policy, in China you can't change the party but you can change the policy.