所有
End Capitalism Before It Ends US
End Capitalism Before It Ends US
75 评论
-
On the ballot in 19 states totalling 220 electoral college votes.
Who wants to tell them you need 270 to win?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballot_access_in_the_2024_United_States_presidential_election
-
In case others need to hear this, please don’t vote third party. Even to start a revolution or whatever. It’s an incredibly privileged position to be able to endanger LGBTQ, immigrants, and women’s rights because you want to send a message. Vote Dem and back ranked choice or you may get the revolution the other way.
-
Don't vote for genociders. It is an incredibly privileged position to vote for someone genociding an entire people as if it is just a normal election year.
And don't kid yourself on what Dems will do. They don't actually fight for any of that particularly hard because they know you will vote for them anyways, even I'd they commit genocide. In fact, the thing to do if you care about others' welfare is to demonstrate that you are not an automatic lever pull, that you require real concessions. Otherwise you are just a cheerleader for their entire program indefinitely, and that includes genocide.
-
-
Amazing
-
I was hyped about Walz for* a few whole days, and the day after Harris picked him, i got the bright idea to check his past statements on Israel. When I searched, I learned within 15 minutes that not only was he AIPAC supported, but also that he strongly and vocally supported Israel until Harris needed to pick a veep candidate, and got quiet. That's when I noped. This is nothing new, he just couldn't suppress his support any more.
Psychological suppression is like pushing an inflated beach ball under water: you can push it down to a certain degree, and then it bursts back to the surface, splashing water everywhere in proximity (water representing feelings).
-
-
-
Most of the people voting for alternative parties are themselves LGBTQ, immigrants, and women.
-
Then this is for them, it’s a vote against your own interests. Statistically it can only hurt.
-
-
I just don't understand why we can't start the exact same revolution these people want during the primaries. It would make much more sense to win over/capture the party and then push that platform in the general. You get real power to get actual shit done without risking fascism by letting the GOP win due to the spoiler effect.
If someone can make the "revolution is necessary" argument, that should be a perfectly acceptable plan. I think they just want complete collapse so they can try and rebuild, which is complete psychopathic nonsense.
-
I just don't understand why we can't start the exact same revolution these people want during the primaries.
Are you suggesting a revolution is done within the bounds of the electoral system?
It would make much more sense to win over/capture the party and then push that platform in the general
- You can't "capture" or "win over" parties like that, the electoral system is a filter.
- You can't change a party's platform in the general with some grand prayer or anything, they will do what they need to to satisfy their donors.
You get real power to get actual shit done
No, you don't.
If someone can make the "revolution is necessary" argument, that should be a perfectly acceptable plan. I think they just want complete collapse so they can try and rebuild, which is complete psychopathic nonsense.
You're right, that is nonsense, please read leftist theory and talk to actual leftists. Nobody wants to rebuild from collapse.
-
Are you suggesting a revolution is done within the bounds of the electoral system?
Third party candidates and their supporters sure seem to.
You can't "capture" or "win over" parties like that, the electoral system is a filter
There hasn't been large ideological shifts within the 2 major parties? Are you serious? I will provide you an example: look at the GOP. The past several decades right wing radicals have focused on capturing local elections and statehouses, it has been wildly successful for them and has allowed these people to completely capture the party and expel pretty much any opposition. Capturing a party is absolutely in the table, we literally have historical examples with these same parties.
-
Third party candidates and their supporters sure seem to.
They don't.
There hasn't been large ideological shifts within the 2 major parties? Are you serious? I will provide you an example: look at the GOP. The past several decades right wing radicals have focused on capturing local elections and statehouses, it has been wildly successful for them and has allowed these people to completely capture the party and expel pretty much any opposition. Capturing a party is absolutely in the table, we literally have historical examples with these same parties.
Why has the GOP (and DNC) gone further right? Random radicals? No. Fascism is Capitalism in decline, it's an inevitability that the establishment parties would move towards it.
-
Look at Dem shifts since JFK.
-
-
I just don't understand why we can't start the exact same revolution these people want during the primaries.
Revolution does not follow the electoral cycle. PSL is constantly doing work. This is just a vehicle for reaching those who do not understand politics beyond electoralism and to raise the correct position that both capitalist parties create and maintain our oppression.
There is not going to be a revolutionary movement that begins work during a primary and then has completed the revolution at its end. Revolutionary work requires building organizations over years and decades.
It would make much more sense to win over/capture the party and then push that platform in the general.
The party will never allow that lmao. Every attempt to work within the most viable party for this, the Democrats, has resulted in them changing their own rules. Just see how it worked out for the members of the DSA who took over in Nevada.
You get real power to get actual shit done without risking fascism by letting the GOP win due to the spoiler effect.
Biden and Harris are just as fascistic as Trump. They are nationalists committing genocide scapegoating immigrants and people overseas and pumping huge sums of money into cops' funds in response to uprisings over racial policing and racial oppression. They are just polite about it and use the right euphemisms.
Their policies are, in fact, the main driver of an ascendant right. Their policies degrade conditions and the response to them and fail to address the scapegoating that marginalization provides.
If someone can make the "revolution is necessary" argument, that should be a perfectly acceptable plan.
Of course it is necessary. You think the capitalists will just let you vote them out of power?
I think they just want complete collapse so they can try and rebuild, which is complete psychopathic nonsense.
Please do less bullshit guessing and actually learn about this topic.
-
They are just polite about it and use the right euphemisms.
Yes. That my cognitive dissonance was so loud I could clearly see the evermore rightward march of the Democratic party, be horrified by ever-shifting rhetoric and policy but failed to recognize it until one of our brothers here pointed out to me in direct yet civil terms, i was embarrassed. Not ashamed, because I think shame wouldn't have allowed me to admit to myself, let alone others, that this is exactly correct.
No matter our nationality, political ideals, deep, honest, fearless introspection is necessary.
Sometimes I feel the fear of Uncertainty stinging clear And I, I can't help but ask myself How much I let the fear take the wheel and steer It's driven me before, and it seems to have a vague Haunting mass appeal But lately I'm beginning to find that I Should be the one behind the wheel
-
Yes, it's horrifying what a small change in perspective - a new angle of criticism, for example - can reveal about our world. There's no need to feel embarrassment, we are all embedded in a milieu of PR campaigns and a handful of political memes recycled indefinitely and it is so pervasive that it is not something that poli sci professors usually escape, either. Usually it's the exact opposite. They repeat and entrench lines of thought handed down to them without ever critically engaging with it. Universities across the West teach collective action problems as if they are laws and not constantly openly contradicted by example or that politucs is a one-dimensional axis from liberal to conservative. The latter truly reveals how little they have questioned or learned and opens up its own interesting questions about how academia functions. But anyways, point is, even the people nominally tasked with becoming experts on these sorts of things don't just automatically recognize this predominant myopia.
Recognizing such pervasive false perspectives and tropes tends to require a cold splash of reality that contradicts the narrative or extensive reading to discover new thought patterns. Or like in your case, talking to someone that has already done so. All we can do is be open to the constructive self-criticism like you make note of and to do our best to be personally morally consistent and empathetic.
-
Thank you for your generous and insightful reply. I'm definitely not a political scientist, and I guess the embarrassment was for myself, realizing on the one hand that our policies are terrible, and on the other, that hope lies with the Democratic party.
While I don't salivate at the idea of war, and especially civil war, I can not fear it; dread and fear not always being the same thing or of the same source. I'll do what is necessary, while also acknowledging that my opponents are decent, but misguided and just as heavily brainwashed people. I just hope when it comes to that, fascism won't prevail, whether that happens in whatever years I have left, or follows the generations behind me.
-
Nothing inherently good about being a political scientist! They are wrong or naive so often it is ridiculous. I think it is just an interesting example of how the people paid to think about such topics are still embedded in propaganda milieu and spectacle. You can very much become far more educated and insightful than one, it just takes healthy criticism and reading.
While I don't salivate at the idea of war, and especially civil war, I can not fear it; dread and fear not always being the same thing or of the same source.
I dread and fear all war but also understand that the violence comes for us regardless, we just get to choose how to organize, become resilient, and strategically protect ourselves while also engaging in meaningful action. The ruling class will never let us vote them out. We may succeed at voting out their preferred sects of the political class, and thus agitate and build against them, but they will bring violence in response - violence that, per the dominant thought patterns, won't be called violence. It will be joblessness, deprivation, essential services shut down. Capital strikes, etc. And such crises can then be leveraged to restore their preferred sects. Civil war is not likely to spring up early, but as a downstream outcome of repeated struggles like this, of preventing eventual popular will. We will also probably lose at least one round, assuming we cannot organize quickly enough. What that kind of thing looks like can be real horror, which is why we must organize. We need our losses to look like 1905 Russia not 1965 Indonesia. We should also be realistic in that these kinds if fights will happen earlier and more successfully in the third world and one of our duties is to support them, particularly as our governments and media apparatuses will be leading the charge to demonize them.
I'll do what is necessary, while also acknowledging that my opponents are decent, but misguided and just as heavily brainwashed people.
Some will be decent and misguided. Others will be misguided but not at all decent, having cruelty and racism and a desire for domination deeply embedded in their psyche. It will be virtually impossible to sympathize when they do overy violence to us. They already do "civilly", like with cops that harass and murder, particularly against black and brown people. Or like ICE. Or the soldiers that dehumanize the people in a country they invaded. Historically, those most targeted by them will rightfully want justice.
I just hope when it comes to that, fascism won't prevail, whether that happens in whatever years I have left, or follows the generations behind me.
On the bright side, the world is rebuilding structures and relationships that can rein in empire. And in the US, the nascent left is relearning all of the old lessons of the last 300 years. The opposing forces are escalating and organizations are building, which is better than the unipolar malaise of the prior 40 years.
-
I dread and fear all war but also understand that the violence comes for us regardless, we just get to choose how to organize, become resilient, and strategically protect ourselves while also engaging in meaningful action. The ruling class will never let us vote them out. We may succeed at voting out their preferred sects of the political class, and thus agitate and build against them, but they will bring violence in response - violence that, per the dominant thought patterns, won’t be called violence. It will be joblessness, deprivation, essential services shut down. Capital strikes, etc. And such crises can then be leveraged to restore their preferred sects.
Interestingly, I view this as violence, too. But that's because maybe 25 years ago, a philosophical Taoist introduced me to the idea that some construction techniques are violence to nature, some aren't, so having that understanding naturally led to understanding certain control techniques, inside intimate family or larger social structures, as violence, and that's a whole other controversial topic.
With regard to fear, I only meant it's coming so it's kind of pointless to fear it. Most people have fears whether homelessness, hunger, or the horrors of war; and most of us will feel the fear and do what needs doing, anyway. I'd entirely avoid it, were it not necessary.
Civil war is not likely to spring up early, but as a downstream outcome of repeated struggles like this, of preventing eventual popular will.
I believe that for at least some of the J6ers, this was the motivating factor.
We will also probably lose at least one round, assuming we cannot organize quickly enough. What that kind of thing looks like can be real horror, which is why we must organize. We need our losses to look like 1905 Russia not 1965 Indonesia....And in the US, the nascent left is relearning all of the old lessons of the last 300 years. The opposing forces are escalating and organizations are building, which is better than the unipolar malaise of the prior 40 years.
I'm looking at aligning with an organization, and volunteering, now; I wish there were more who are. It would be preferable, I'm just not confident most of my fellow compatriots will see it coming (USA, which is why I included that bit out of order in the quote). And most (not all) will take up arms for our oppressors, if the current on- and offline discourse is indicative of that future event, but I'm in the Bible Belt, so there's that consideration.
We should also be realistic in that these kinds if fights will happen earlier and more successfully in the third world and one of our duties is to support them, particularly as our governments and media apparatuses will be leading the charge to demonize them.
We do what we can, and a few listen. I'm still so proud of Bolivian indigenous people for having fought and won, against military grade weapons with common gardening tools, their water rights back from Bechtel! What a noble example to have been set for us.
Some will be decent and misguided. Others will be misguided but not at all decent, having cruelty and racism and a desire for domination deeply embedded in their psyche. It will be virtually impossible to sympathize when they do overy violence to us.
Tbh, and perhaps it's a reflection of my character, it's virtually impossible for me to sympathize in the moment a decent human is doing overt violence to me. Survival instinct is powerful, and sympathy and empathy are usually before and after, during is entirely different.
My apologies for the disjointed reply. I left off this reply to consider it more broadly. Distractions began immediately when I began typing this, and it's a deep topic that could perhaps be better discussed over food and beverages, or at least in person. Or perhaps it's just an uneasy topic, knowing that for all considerations we foresee, there are many we can't. I do very much appreciate your encouragement and well-considered reply.
-
-
-
-
-
Biden and Harris are just as fascistic as Trump.
Get the fuck out. Stop. You are being irresponsible with this bullshit rhetoric and you're actively contributing to harm. Knock off the militant edgelord bullshit.
-
The Biden-Harris administration is massively pro-cop, providing the largest national infusion into cop budgets in history, has ramped up anti-immigrant policies attempting to outflank Republicans from the right, including working on Trump's border wall, broke a strike, forced the public back to work by normalizing a pandemic, and is now committing a genocide via Israel.
What do you think it means to be fascistic?
-
Stop being a militant purist, it makes you one of the impediments to actual progress in this country.
-
What on earth is purist in what I said? Do you have nothing to say in response to my explanations? Am I right in them? Where am I wrong?
-
-
-
-
Biden and Harris are just as fascistic as Trump
Yeah, and I'm the one bullshitting...
-
The issue here is likely that you aren't familiar with what fascism was.
Trump, Biden, and Harris are all liberals, as in of the popular ideology of capitalism. They are in favor of markets to "solve problems" and tend to try to remove barriers to them. When organized labor threatens this, they try to have it both ways by saying they are pro-union while doing strike breaker things in action. When finance demands blood, they assent, whether this is domestic in the form of raising unemployment or cutting benefits to make workers more desperate or overseas using similar financial tricks or just straight-up war.
Fascism was a political movement that really only existed for a short period as capitalism emerged as fully imperialist and countries that had too small of a piece of the pie but a people that expected a big one had a serious contradiction between liberal policies (which would see their material well-being and status decrease) and the need for imperialism to carve out that inter-country exploitation to offset this. Fascism was born as an anti-liberalism, a faux anticapitalism, that sought a restoration of a semi-imagined past glory, an ascendant nation built on imperial expansion, and various aesthetics and scapegoats serving these ends.
It is currently impossible for a US president to be an actual fascist. The US sits at the throne of international capital and every major candidate seeks to maintain this system, not tear it up for further expansion because it is somehow behind the other powers and faces being imperialized.
What is possible is for candidates to forward policies that are genocidal, xenophobic, racist, warmongering, pro-cop, pro-state surveillance, personally aggrandizing, etc etc. Sometimes people say this is what is fascistic. But these are all common features of liberalism! The main difference between the Nazi (fascist) expansion and genocides of Germany Eastward vs. the US expansion and genocides of indigenous Americans is that the Americans succeeded. They had the power and time and will to carry out the deed. The horrors of fascism are of mainstream liberalism, they were all inspired by liberal imperial conquest, industrialization, and mass murder.
But again, none of the candidates are actually fascist, they uphold the liberal status quo. Trump is just more rude about it. He openly scapegoats immigrants while Biden and Harris simply pretend to care about them while implementing the sane or worse xenophobic policies. Notice how Democrats tried to outflank Republicans with their border bill? How they are projecting a "strong" border? That the Biden admin is completing sections of Trump's wall? The massive ramp up of rejecting and deporting asylum seekers? These are all fascistic things. The difference is largely perception. Democrats don't care about kids in cages when they do it. The topic isn't even covered, there are no PR pushes. It fades into an uncognizant background normalization where the average Dem assumes it is all over without actually checking on the detention centers or listening to the people doing solidarity work for those inside them or the people waiting just across the border in terrible conditions.
And again, the Biden-Harris administration is committing a genocide via full material and diplomatic support for and defense of Israel.
If you oppose the horrors of fascism, you need to begin actually questioning and opposing the forces that create and maintain them. That includes fighting against people like Biden and Harris, who have at least as substantial of a legacy of such material harms, if not more. Again, genocide. Do not support genocids. That is not an okay thing to do.
Or do you disagree?
-
I have no interest in discussing this topic with someone who lives in a different reality than the rest of us. If you're not able to make an honest assessment of the threats here we aren't going to get anywhere productive. Have a nice day!
-
I just laid out an honest assessment of the threats, the real and material things, the history and current policies. And you are now bailing rather than look at them squarely and actually respond to the content.
Please engage in good faith or not at all.
-
-
-
-
-
If you want to change the system and think you can do it from within, the primaries are the time. If you don’t think you can do it from within, do it from without and have your revolution on the streets—dont spoil the candidate that more closely aligns with your views.
-
If you don’t think you can do it from within, do it from without and have your revolution on the streets—dont spoil the candidate that more closely aligns with your views.
Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans more closely align with Marxist views, both are so far removed that it isn't a spoiler.
-
-
-
the dems are treating immigrants just as badly and deporting even more, they did nothing to protects womens rights to abortions or to protect lgbtq people and they are actively supporting a FUCKING GENOCIDE in case u forgot. They dont deserve a single fucking vote. If they lose and i doubt they will maybe it will teach them not to be genocidal at the very least.
-
You seem pretty ill informed or willfully ignorant if you are saying both sides are the same. Politicians listen to the people who vote or donate to them not to the lunatic fringe. The right wing, and especially the Supreme Court have actively worked to destroy women’s rights, increase the influence of dark money, remove restrictions on executive authority, and funnel public money to religious organizations. Don’t let your anger with the pace of progress blind you to the stakes here.
-
Politicians listen to the people who vote or donate to them
Politicians do not listen to people who vote for them unconditionally. Why would they?
-
i never said they were the exactly the same infact i said they were even worse for immigrants at a national level because they are. And lets be very fucking clear here u are ok with genocide i am not that is the difference any other year i wouldnt care, but right now we have a regime in government who openly and loudly supports genocide who revels in the slaughter of children, the question at the polls is a simple one do u support that genocidal regime or not.
-
There are many questions at the polls and the Israel issue is only one - and one that by law cannot change until we overhaul Congress. These are stupidly complex political issues that can't be boiled down to supporting genocide. I am against genocide and I wish America had a stronger stance against what the Israeli government is doing, but we're playing the cards we've been dealt.
The fact that "any other year" you wouldn't care suggests you are not familiar with the decades of work the US has put into the middle East and all the difficulty and frustration involved.
The question at the polls is really: who has a chance of actually winning, and which of the two viable options is less bad for Palestine? And keep on mind, congressional seats will also be on the ballot. Congress is the only body that can rewrite the laws that dictate what we can or cannot do in the middle East.
-
right now there is genocidal regime in power u can either support them or not do that, that is all, i know to u amerikkkans genocide is nothing having committed so many thru out ur history and feeling proud of them and all that but for normal people there is no space for compromise here.
-
Yawwwwn
Politics IS compromise.
Genocide is wrong no matter who's doing it. That's not even the argument here. Sadly, half a dozen presidents ago Congress decided the US needs Israel for some reason (very likely because it's mentioned in their dumb little book as key for the second coming of their dumb little god) so now there's a binding agreement and nobody can say anything bad about Israel. Violating that causes a whole storm of international drama that would (shock!) cause more destruction than the current horrifying, illegal, and whitewashed genocide.
I'm dumbing this down for you. You're welcome.
Where we are now the government's hands are tied unless it gets overhauled. Since there are only two viable political parties, the lesser of two evils is the choice - and you're right, they're both evil, but there's the "supports genocide" evil and the "supports genocide AND fascism AND suppression of women & minorities AND oligarchy AND Russia etc" evil. Dems in power = slim possibility of overhaul. GOP in power = no possibility of the public having any sway ever again.
Your smug all or nothing rhetoric is short sighted, excessively privileged, and frankly dangerous. I'm ignoring you now. Feel free to post your gotcha and declare yourself victorious.
-
Like i said u amerikkkans are very comfy with genocide not a big deal for u i get it u are evil but for actual fucking humans with empathy and emotions and shit there is no compromise with genocide. I reiterate u are trying to excuse voting for a genocidal regime because u might get a few crumbs of positive legislature YOU ARE PATHETIC, and u are evil. We are done here.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
It's an incredibly privledged position to intentionally decide to sacrifice Palestinians and support a genocidal regime, one that is failing to assist the rights of queer people, women, and immigrants, and one that is failing to adequately address climate change, and is working towards World War 3.
back ranked choice
- Would not fix the problem that candidates are filtered and preselected
- Will never pass at meaningful numbers
- Neither party wants RCV
-
Mfw privilege means not having my homeland bombed, including medical facilities and schools: 😞
-
I'm so sorry to hear that, I truly am. One thing that gives me hope, however, is that the genocidal entity is in its death throes. The contradictions have never been sharper, the Israeli Tiger is made of paper.
If you are specifically interested in Palestinian liberation, and not the Middle East in general, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine released a book titled Strategy for the Liberation of Palestine in 1969, a strategy they adhere to to this day.
-
Oh, I'm in the USA. I'm sorry friend, I'm just waking up and wasn't clear with my words.
That looks decent, I'll add it to the list.
Back to the ME: It is incredibly sad that we North Americans don't recognize that despite under our unemployment, sleeping in cars, squatting or sleeping rough, we think we have no privilege. That's not including those who are well- homed, fed, clothed, employed, transported who feel they don't enjoy privilege.
Edited
-
-
-
Tanked choice was passed in Maine and elsewhere. Many blue states are tying electoral votes to the nationwide popular vote to remove that stupid distribution. Primaries are open. Only one party is trying to make voting more accessible.
As for Palestine, if you don’t subscribe to the lesser of two evils then I guess there isn’t much to talk about but don’t let the Nirvana fallacy blind you too much.
-
Tanked choice was passed in Maine and elsewhere. Many blue states are tying electoral votes to the nationwide popular vote to remove that stupid distribution. Primaries are open. Only one party is trying to make voting more accessible.
Like I said, it's kept as a carrot yet isn't sufficient and won't impact anything.
As for Palestine, if you don’t subscribe to the lesser of two evils then I guess there isn’t much to talk about but don’t let the Nirvana fallacy blind you too much.
The GOP and DNC are 100% aligned on Israel.
-
-
-
Do you think they are running because they expect to win? Are you familiar at all with the Marxist view of Electoralism?
-
They aren't going to end capitalism if they don't win.
The best they can hope to do is take votes away from Harris ensuring a Trump win, which is 180° the opposite of their message.
-
So no, you aren't familiar with the Marxist stance on Electoralism. For reference, they are Marxists.
No, they do not need to win the election to end Capitalism. Participation in bourgeois elections is to delegitimize the system (such as pointing out Dem/Rep collusion to kick them off the balot in Georgia), and advertise their platform.
Marxists believe revolution is necessary and electoralism is a sham.
-
That sounds like a way to get a lot of people killed and end up worse than how you started.
-
Historically, Marxist revolutions have dramatically improved conditions.
-
Happy to hear more info here
-
You'd have to be a bit silly to think the Tsarist regime was better for Russia, the nationalist Kuomintang for China, the fascist slaver Batista for Cuba, etc.
-
The vast majority of every poverty alleviation statistic for the last 50 years has been China.
Generally speaking, third world countries do not advance without tackling the worldwide capitalist system. This is because it is set up to enrich international corporations largely seated in the heart of first world countries, particularly the US, and can only sustain itself through the maintenance of profits acquired through exploitation of those third world countries. Unequal exchange, forcing international business-friendly labor laws on them, preventing them from building up their own industries so they must import necessities, structuring their economies around whatever the imperial core needs (lithium, oil, an underpaid service industry), forcing them into situations where they have a ton of dollars and therefore must import using them, etc etc.
Under this scenario, conditions in these countries regularly degrade. Poverty and a lack of infrastructure, low wages, and the necessity of a pro-international-capitalist government means petty autocracy around the basics of life. High unemployment, rates, few prospects, a brain drain, and eventually internal violence via black markets, the associated organized crime, the government, and those who correctly recognize the problem and attempt to directly combat it (fighters for national liberation, socialists, etc). Things are not good and they rarely get better, quite the opposite. They shift according to whims far outside their control at virtually any level, as they are enslaved by capital right down to their national government. Resistance movements rise up for simple things like insigenous rights, land rights, etc, and the federal government suppresses them with far greater violence.
When organized anticapitalist forces win a revolution, they tend to work directly against the problems that fomented the revolution. They address issues of land rights, abolish systems like feudal relationships and the most heinous capital relations, invest in public education, utilities, housing, etc that were denies by their xapitalist comprador governments.
And the US responds. It attempts to destroy them, as it requires control over its vassal states to maintain its position at the top of a conveyor belt moving their resources and other labor products over to itself. Much of what you see that is negative in countries run by socialists is of that particular legacy. The US killed 20% of the population in North Korea and tried to isolate it so it spawned Juche. After the fall of the USSR, its primary trading partner, the US unleashed a massive series of sanctions, attempting to starve the country of everything needed to run it. The meme of a starving, poor North Korean is from the poverty created by fuel and food from sanctions. You until the late 80s North Korea regularly outperformed South Korea. This playbook has repeated many times. Those countries that can both carry out the initial revolution and then defend it against attack do much better than the alternative offered to them.
You might be thinking, "hey, but what about Japan or Taiwan or Estonia? They are doing okay." This is true, though you should keep in mind that they have been propped up in order to act as forward bases against targets of US Empire, namely Russia and China. And they are reigned in and will be subjugated as soon as it is seen as more beneficial than not for US interests. Japan experienced this in the 90s when the US created a massive recession for them.
-
-
I went to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_revolution and clicked on the most recent successful entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nepalese_Civil_War
The civil war was characterized by numerous war crimes and crimes against humanity, including summary executions, massacres, purges, kidnappings, and mass rapes. It resulted in the deaths of over 17,000 people, including civilians, insurgents, and army and police personnel; and the internal displacement of hundreds of thousands of people, mostly throughout rural Nepal.
That's not great.
-
Who did the killings? What are the numbers on social violence, social murder, in the previous status quo? The capitaliat status quo is one of poverty and disposession, hard lives and early deaths due to a lack of infrastructure, safety in workplaces, poor nutrition and healthcare, environmental degradation, etc.
That violence is intentionally maintained by the capitalist order, it is violence done to every working person, but particularly those in the global south like Nepal. Include it in your calculations. Watch it dwarf those numbers.
-
You'll notice that the government did far more of the killing than the Communist revolutionaries. And, like I said, metrics are improving since overthrowing the previous regime.
-
Isn't Nepal just a liberal government with a major party being nominally Maoist?
-
Could be, I haven't investegated as much as I should have, I probably could have attacked the notion that sortition was a good idea of gathering information on Communist movements.
-
-
-
Survivorship bias, after we murdered everyone that was having a bad time everyone was having a great time.
-
Do you seriously believe that?
-
-
-
-
That's exactly how it went down last time they were successful.
-
-
They do need to win an election to end capitalism, because they have no power unless they win.
They can literally do absolutely nothing to accomplish their goal unless they win, but then since they mathematically can't win either, all they can do is yell impotently into the void.
-
Which part of "revolution is necessary and electoralism is a sham" was difficult for you?
-
They aren't running for a revolution, if they were, they wouldn't be on the ballot for an election.
It's all performative nonsense.
-
I'll just copy and paste my earlier explanation, hope it makes sense for you this time:
Participation in bourgeois elections is to delegitimize the system (such as pointing out Dem/Rep collusion to kick them off the balot in Georgia), and advertise their platform.
Marxists believe revolution is necessary and electoralism is a sham.
-
If they want a revolution, they would revolt.
They aren't. They're running, poorly, in an election, where they will be 100% ineffectual and their message, if it's heard at all, completely forgotten.
-
Taken right from their very public PSL Party Platform online. You clearly are entirely unfamiliar with Marxism and PSL, why act like you know more than you do? I can make theory recommendations if you want, but don't pretend to know what PSL's goals and methods are without even reading the party platform, that's silly.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
75 评论