US didn't collapse after Vietnam, why would they collapse now. People who are politically powerless hope for catastrophe but the left in most countries no longer have the mass base and political power to do anything when the opportunity presents itself. There is a lot of work to be done.

  • CrimsonSage [any]
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    This is it. The US empire still has a lot going to for it:

    1. Third largest population in the world. Relatively well educated and affluent.
    2. Significant, if decaying capital.
    3. The largest military in the world.
    4. A complex and highly funded intelligence state.
    5. Massive natural resources and a diverse geographic base that is resistant to climate change (As compared to say Bangladesh).

    And yeah there is a lot of dysfunction and incompetence I all of these, but why assume that other countries/powers are more competent or at least not as dysfunctional. The USA has been top dog for over a century now and it would be foolish to assume it did so by sheer luck.

    Like don't get me wrong, the US is definitely on the decline at the moment but that doesn't mean that the empire is even close to toppling or that work doesn't need to be done. A strong leader and an organized social force backing them could easily reverse the trajectory of decay.

    Now is the time to start the organizing and hope that the weakness that seems to be there gives the left space to organize and agitate in preparation for a catastrophic break. We saw the possibility of the BLM protests, people are fucking pissed and Labor is flexing its muscle for the first time in decades. Take hope comrades, we are still in the cool zone.

    • ABigguhPizzahPieh [none/use name,any]
      hexagon
      ·
      edit-2
      3 years ago

      I think what's painful for people to hear is that even if it did collapse tomorrow no one should doubt that the outcome wouldn’t be a glorious revolution but a violent destructive fascist backlash. That’s not because somehow that sort of a situation always results in a violent fascist reaction but because the left has absolutely zero capacity to create any sort of alternative on a continental scale anymore.

      There aren't even powerful trade unions anymore and trade union consciousness is barely the baseline

      • CrimsonSage [any]
        ·
        edit-2
        3 years ago

        the left has absolutely zero capacity to create any sort of alternative on a continental scale anymore.

        Well yeah, but you gotta start somewhere, and I think we have the wind at our back in the moment. The greatest tool the oppressor has is to convince you to give up and there is no hope because then you defeat yourself. The least you can do is make them have to actively defeat you and sometimes simply living as a descent human being and educating those around you is resistance enough. Not everyone is a Lenin or a Mao, Communism is built through the labors of millions being the best people they can and standing up when they can.

        • ABigguhPizzahPieh [none/use name,any]
          hexagon
          ·
          3 years ago

          I'm sorry for coming off as if I'm being a doomer or saying don't do anything. I'm saying the desire for total collapse when there's no party or movement (whatever your tendency) capable of taking advantage of the chaos is putting the cart before the horse.

    • Theblarglereflargle [any]
      ·
      edit-2
      3 years ago

      Didn’t the USSR have 2 through 5 as well when it collapsed? Not denying your comment because it’s true just something I thought about now.

      • dinklesplein [any, he/him]
        ·
        3 years ago

        a large part of the ussr's dissolution was that citizens of the eastern bloc wanted the luxuries and consumer goods of global north capitalism. the us doesn't have this issue - no average american is thinking about how much better life would be if they just adopted socialism with chinese characteristics. its just capitalist realism - in the ussr, there was an alternative that was (unjustly) idolised. the usa doesn't have that (ur succdems dont count)

      • CrimsonSage [any]
        ·
        3 years ago

        Yes... Kind of... The fall of the soviet union was less a failure of the soviet system and more a failure of the party. The CPSU was a hollow shell of a revolutionary marxist movement and lost any ability to lead, so when there was a genuine political shock to the system it didnt have the capacity to react. dinklesplein gets a big part of it, the other part was the inability for the party to actually interface and generate a truly democratic polity for the people. So when the citizens of the soviet union were given the offer of the illusion of material abundance vs the moribund stagnation of the CPSU they took it. People will accept less in terms of material gratification if you give them a reason too and a vision to make part of their own to work towards. Democracy isnt just counting ballots dropped through a slot, you can make ballots say anything. Genuine democracy is making sure that the will of the people is reflected in the shape of the polity.

        Hence why the current failures of liberal leadership are so important to any organizing effort we make.

        • dinklesplein [any, he/him]
          ·
          3 years ago

          yea, the core of it is that the cpsu failed. the stuff i mentioned was simply the symptoms of it.