Currently reading October but know nothing rn about the middle-end of the USSR

  • SimMs [none/use name]
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    4 years ago

    the concept of revisionism is immaterial critique and an intellectual braindead spillway to avoid reckoning with the policies of socialist states. there is no date when the country started to turn to shit. the nature of the country doesnt change with a bad head of state. this is a crutch we need to cut the fuck out with immediately

    edit: there has never been a coherent analysis of revisionism. feel free to produce one

    • RedDawn [he/him]
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 years ago

      Dumb take. “The nature of a country doesn’t change with a bad head of state” ok, but the nature of a country can and does change, I don’t see how anybody could possibly deny that, so the question remains valid.

      • SimMs [none/use name]
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 years ago

        those are administrative arrangement. everything and everyone revises itself all the time. the leninists have constructed revisionism as a wedge to separate all that they cant properly analyse or reckon with against all other history

        • RedDawn [he/him]
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 years ago

          everything and everyone revises itself all the time

          Right and the nature of those things change with the revisions, despite you claiming otherwise in the comment I responded to.

          • SimMs [none/use name]
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 years ago

            thats marxist language. adjustments, arrangements and the constant flux of change cannot be categorized as "revisionism" because that which have been charged as such arent any different to any other dynamic. states dont "degenerate", what in particular have led something to change class character? what are the regime changes and how do they influence material conditions and visa versa? We must discard this term and lobotimize that discourse. What happened? Did a national bourgeoisie consolidate as Mao would have it? Could we explain it through a concentration of vested interest or the weberian bureaucracy?

            you havent clarified your terminology. "changes" and the grand concept of revisions arent the same

    • Classic_Agency [he/him,comrade/them]
      ·
      4 years ago

      Revisionism is basically just capitalist realism. People, for whatever reason, material or personal, cling to aspects of the current system as the idea of radical change is either scary or seen as unrealistic for some reason. Revisionism cannot be done away with until capitalism as a mode of production is destroyed.