Like he'll yeah fuck the rich

  • anthropicprincipal [any]
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    4 years ago

    The USSR failed because it did not tolerate any political pluralism, and lept from crisis to crisis based on the whims of personality cults.

    I guess if you like personality cults...

      • anthropicprincipal [any]
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        4 years ago

        Well, it is true.

        Doctrinaire politics reigned from on high in the USSR which forbade even alternative ideologies of communism.

        • newmou [he/him]
          ·
          4 years ago

          A really great book that goes into this is Blackshirts and Reds by Michael Parenti btw. Breaks down a lot of things that simply didn’t work in the USSR. Definitely check it out

    • newmou [he/him]
      ·
      4 years ago

      Side question — what sort of world would you like? Not presupposing anything, or leading a question. Actually asking—what kind of structure do you think is best based on what you think humans deserve/could do?

      • anthropicprincipal [any]
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        4 years ago

        We won't have any realistic solutions to international issues like climate change, wage/chattel slavery, and the protection of basic human rights until an international institution has the power to affect those changes.

        So the question is: How does humanity enact an international representative government?

        I wish I knew the answer to that.

        • newmou [he/him]
          ·
          4 years ago

          Yeah I agree. Are there shortcomings of the Internationale you consider?

            • newmou [he/him]
              ·
              4 years ago

              Do you think an international body with a variety of ideological perspectives, some capitalist, some centrist, some communist etc, could solve those problems

              • anthropicprincipal [any]
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                4 years ago

                It is better than the alternative.

                Do you really think communists will win out if all ideologies except one are excluded?

                  • anthropicprincipal [any]
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    4 years ago

                    I agree, but I don't want to live in a society that only allows either neoliberal or communist solutions.

                      • anthropicprincipal [any]
                        arrow-down
                        5
                        ·
                        4 years ago

                        You are acting like most people sit down and hash out their ideology instead of adopting it piecemeal as they stumble through life.

                        Why should folks who aren't ardent and consistent in their beliefs be denied their voice? Also, who is going to determine this purity?

                        • newmou [he/him]
                          ·
                          4 years ago

                          Not a commentary on communism but a genuine question—do you think people “have a voice” under capitalism?

                          • anthropicprincipal [any]
                            arrow-down
                            5
                            ·
                            4 years ago

                            To varying degrees the people always have a voice.

                            You can't crush dissent completely under any system or we wouldn't be talking right now.

                            • newmou [he/him]
                              ·
                              4 years ago

                              Well here’s an interesting situation. I think most of the world would agree it’s important to “crush dissent,” to put it crudely and without context, of anyone who denies the Holocaust happened. And by “crush dissent,” that means all the ways to stop that sort of ideology from gainfully reproducing, hopefully short of literally jailing people, even though Germany does do that. Let’s say ideology X causes mass emmiseration, poverty, and climate catastrophe. But let’s say X also allows a minority of people to become very wealthy at the expense of the vast majority of the word’s population and ecology. If we want that to be different (do you want that to be different?), one way to start fixing things is by stopping the ideology of X from gainfully reciprocating, which involves education, raising of material conditions, organizing, and promoting community and healthy/ethical social relations, which is communism. The alternative is not doing that, and causing the extermination of the remaining 1/3 of wildlife and subsequently human life on the planet.

                            • Jorick [he/him]
                              ·
                              4 years ago

                              That's an odd thing to say in a community that had to relocate because of a ban on a larger platform, owned by a billionaire.

                        • constantly_dabbing [none/use name]
                          ·
                          4 years ago

                          You are acting like most people sit down and hash out their ideology instead of adopting it piecemeal as they stumble through life.

                          Perfect description of how the nazis improvised their genocides!

                      • anthropicprincipal [any]
                        arrow-down
                        5
                        ·
                        4 years ago

                        I'm not a communist, and I wouldn't speak for them.

                        As a Social Democrat I'd like to see international organizations with teeth that can actually enforce climate policies. Currently under WTO rules international corporations can just move shop to avoid rules.

                        • bamboo68 [none/use name,any]
                          ·
                          4 years ago

                          I’d like to see international organizations with teeth

                          how do you deal with every single school of IR thought besides the Marxists saying this is a violation of national soverginity? How do you feel about the PRC being the biggest actor on the world stage pushing for these kinds of reforms and offering this kind of commitment to International Orgs?

                          • bamboo68 [none/use name,any]
                            ·
                            4 years ago

                            In a speech on Monday to the World Health Assembly, the governing body of the Geneva-based World Health Organization, Xi called for greater international cooperation in fighting the pandemic. He also said China will provide $2 billion over two years to support the fight. Taiwan dropped a request to be included in the gathering after objections from Beijing.

                            “Covid-19 vaccine development and deployment in China, when available, will be made a global public good, which will be China’s contribution to ensuring vaccine accessibility and affordability in developing countries,” Xi said via video.

                            from: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-18/china-s-virus-vaccine-will-be-global-public-good-xi-says

                        • Gay_Wrath [fae/faer]
                          ·
                          4 years ago

                          Okay, so you're against policies you can't even name? LOL bro....

                    • bamboo68 [none/use name,any]
                      ·
                      4 years ago

                      well guess what buddy those are your choices and were actually willing to allow liberal thought and expression just not fucking property relations

                • newmou [he/him]
                  ·
                  4 years ago

                  Well I think that situation would define winning for communists, sure. Personally I think if there was an international body where all parties were anti-capitalist, who then could control resource management and development of the world via a system of dispersed democratic committee from the bottom up, that would be the only thing that could save our planet from mass extinction, and also the only thing that could create social structures that don’t allow for worker exploitation. But in my mind there’s a lot of folks who would consider themselves leftists who are not anti-capitalists. Which, clock ticking, what do we do? I’m curious if we have enough time to continue the decades and decades of capitalist-communist argument that’s gotten us to where we are now, if that argument would move us forward through time still without changing economic structures, you know? Cause capitalism is the current mode of production. So that’s gonna continue until it’s stopped. What’s gonna stop it?

                  • anthropicprincipal [any]
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    4 years ago

                    Over half of the world supports free market political parties.

                    It is utopian to suggest they should be excluded from an international organization.

                    • PermaculturalMarxist [they/them]
                      ·
                      4 years ago

                      I think you need to separate the idea of "having a capitalist economy and liberal-democratic political system" and that of "supporting free market politics." We live under these systems not because they have overwhelming support, but because they have been handed down to us and are very difficult to change. For the most part, around the world people live under capitalism against their will.

                    • newmou [he/him]
                      ·
                      4 years ago

                      Perhaps it comes down to whether or not you believe that, ecologically at the very least, we have time to humor the arguments for a system that has caused 2/3rds of wildlife extinction just within the last 50 years

    • Civility [none/use name]
      ·
      edit-2
      4 years ago

      The USSR failed because the US State department lead by Hillary Fucking Clinton succesfully couped them.

      If anything a more authoritarian power structure and less "political pluralism" could have seen it still going strong to this day and I say this as someone who is generally critical of vanguardism and socialist personality cults. The failure of the August Coup and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.

      Much better examples of the dangers of power concentration and vaguardism are the Sino-Soviet split, which was at least in part driven by Mao and Kruschev's personal dislike of each other, and the terror tactics the Bolsheviks used in the late 1910s to establish dictatorships of the proletariat (from which they excluded peasants) in overwhelmingly peasant dominated areas.

      That being said, while there are valid criticisms to be made of the Bolshevik revolution and USSR policies, they were better for the world and the people of Russia than what came before them, what came after them, and 90% of other nation states that existed at the same time as them. While you can point to some things they maybe could have done better, it's hard to argue that they shouldn't have overthrown the Russian Empire, that they should have imitated the rapacious capitalist imperialist looting of the rest of the world the EU & USA wholeheartedly engaged in, or that it was a good thing the USSR capitulated into the neoliberal shock therapied protofash mafia disaster of a state that is modern Russia.