Skip Navigation

User banner

Cowbee [he/they]

@ Cowbee @lemmy.ml

Posts
39
Comments
13998
Joined
2 yr. ago

Actually, this town has more than enough room for the two of us

He/him or they/them, doesn't matter too much

Marxist-Leninist ☭

Interested in Marxism-Leninism, but don't know where to start? Check out my Read Theory, Darn it! introductory reading list!

  • Protestation

    Jump

  • Trying to base an economy entirely on cooperatives, unfortuately, still retains the base problems of market and profit-focused economics. Socialism remains a necessity, even if it can make use of cooperatives at certain levels of development, like Huawei in the PRC.

  • Protestation

    Jump

  • The alternative is socialism, ie an economy where public ownership is the principle aspect and the working classes control the state.

  • Protestation

    Jump

  • The Soviet Union, Cuba, DPRK, Laos, PRC, Vietnam, and former non-USSR socialist states in Europe such as the GDR were and are all examples of Marxism-Leninism being applied to establish socialist society. What makes you think the Soviet Union isn't an example? At a fundamental level, Marxist-Leninists seek to establish an economy where public ownership is the principle aspect, and the working classes are in control of the state. At a more detailed level, however, this can look very different depending on local levels of development, history, and unique material conditions.

  • Protestation

    Jump

  • To be fair, if you weren't raised in a socialist country, it's almost certain that you were taught a caricature of Marx and Marxist thought.

  • Protestation

    Jump

  • Even if those numbers were true, it isn't simply something that happens in a single year, is entirely consumed, and then starts fresh the next. Surplus is used for expansion and accumulation, which leads to more expansion and more accumulation the next year, so on and so on.

  • Protestation

    Jump

  • No? Socialism and capitalism have delivered demonstrably different results precisely because the social surplus within socialism was and is directed towards fulfilling the needs of the people, via large projects and social programs, which under capitalism are limited due to the capitalist class entitling itself to the vast majority of the surplus.

  • It is now my life mission to destroy the west

    Jump

  • He isn't as annoying about it as many Trots are.

  • It is now my life mission to destroy the west

    Jump

  • I didn't mean to 🫠

  • It is now my life mission to destroy the west

    Jump

  • Trotskyism is often just Marxism-Leninism, but anti-AES for nonsense reasons IMO. Some Trotskyist critique of capitalism and imperialism is good still, and Hudson is one of the better ones, though not perfect by any stretch. Trotskyism isn't a particularly coherent ideology at a theoretical level, and is mostly distinguished by what it opposes.

  • It is now my life mission to destroy the west

    Jump

  • We’ve been over this already, with sources I was able to provide. I directly responded to this. If you’re gonna complain about listening, don’t do it while repeating shit at me I already responded to.

    And yet your sources contradict your claims, showing instead that Marx became convinced later in life of the real revolutionary opportunity in Russia, not that it outweighed the revolutionary opportunity in western Europe.

    I listened to what you said, disagreed, and now you want to keep whining about it and insisting that its wrecker behaviour as if that’s respectful. Grow the fuck up or just leave it be.

    Wrecker shit. You went beyond disagreement into misunderstanding, either deliberate, or deliberately refusing to acknowledge.

    I suggest walking away, touching grass, and ideally joining an org if you aren't already a part of one. All 3 would be immensely beneficial, I believe.

  • Protestation

    Jump

  • Salaries are essentially abstracted wages, same with piece-rates. Marx goes over the different ways labor is paid in Capital.

  • It is now my life mission to destroy the west

    Jump

  • We agree that Marx believed Russia could have sidestepped capitalist development and gone straight from feudalism to the communalist movement to socialism to communism. However, he did not think this was more likely than revolution in western Europe. He simply saw it as it was, a great but likely squandered opportinity.

    In other words, if Marx believed there was a 75% chance the revolution would first come to western Europe, and a 25% chance it would come to Russia, it is correct to say that he believed it would most likely come first to western Europe. It is, therefore, equally incorrect to say that he believed it could only happen in western Europe, as you allege I say (but I have disproven this), as it would be to say that Marx believed it would happen in Russia first (as you appear to be saying).

    You're getting labled a wrecker because there's no logical explanation for why you would maintain that I claimed Marx said revolution could only happen in the west, and that it could only happen because they were developed capitalist countries. I never said anything of the sort, and even elaborated on my views to you. Instead, you jumped to condescending remarks, pretending that this is new information to me, and jump to insults.

    I do agree, this isn't ever going to get anywhere if you can't even treat me with the respect of listening to what I said.

  • It is now my life mission to destroy the west

    Jump

  • Yes, we indeed had a minor back-and-forth, yet you can't for some reason admit to misunderstanding my original claim, no matter how much I explain that to you. Now that you're getting called out on it, you retreat to insult.

  • It is now my life mission to destroy the west

    Jump

  • It is now my life mission to destroy the west

    Jump

  • What else would you call repeatedly misframing what a comrade is saying? We are both presumably communists, and we've both read the literature. If I am telling you that I never once said Marx thought revolution was only possible in the west, and you continue to quadruple-down on that, what possibly could be your goal?

  • It is now my life mission to destroy the west

    Jump

  • There absolutely was, no matter how many times I explain that I never said Marx believed revolution would only happen in the west you keep insisting that I did. Either you misunderstand, or you deliberately lie. This is wrecker bullshit.

  • It is now my life mission to destroy the west

    Jump

  • Marx also aided and worked with western revolutionaries. He didn't make a complete pivot, he saw new opportunity where he previously thought there was none. I have never said that Marx only thought a revolution would happen in the west, this is nonsense. Touch grass, comrade.

  • It is now my life mission to destroy the west

    Jump

  • If Russia continues to pursue the path she has followed since 1861, she will lose the finest chance ever offered by history to a nation, in order to undergo all the fatal vicissitudes of the capitalist regime.

    Marx thought Russia had a unique opportunity to sidestep capitalist development, and kick off revolution in the west. He made it clear that if conditions continued as they had, however, that this opportunity would never materialize. I've read Capital and its post-scripts, I've read his letters to Russian revolutionaries. I used to be an anarchist, and these get thrown around all the time to make it seem like Marx was supportive of anarchism at the end of his life (which he wasn't). This isn't new information to me, you're just confusing Marx saying Russia had a great opportunity to skip capitalism with Marx saying he thought Russia would in fact do so.

  • It is now my life mission to destroy the west

    Jump

  • I don't know why you're continuing to double and triple-down. We agree that Marx believed Russia could have sidestepped capitalist development and gone straight from feudalism to the communalist movement to socialism to communism. However, he did not think this was more likely than revolution in western Europe. He simply saw it as it was, a great but likely squandered opportinity.

    In other words, if Marx believed there was a 75% chance the revolution would first come to western Europe, and a 25% chance it would come to Russia, it is correct to say that he believed it would most likely come first to western Europe. It is, therefore, equally incorrect to say that he believed it could only happen in western Europe, as you allege I say (but I have disproven this), as it would be to say that Marx believed it would happen in Russia first (as you appear to be saying).

  • It is now my life mission to destroy the west

    Jump

  • Ah, I see the problem. I never said Marx said socialism could only begin in western, capitalist societies. Here's what I actually said:

    To be annoyingly accurate, Marx still held the belief that the west would be the first to revolt and establish socialism

    Notice how I didn't say he thought it was only possible in western, capitalist countries. I specifically said that he thought that they would be the first. In the case of the commune movement in Russia, he said they were essentially squandering a very real chance to avoid that same path of development, not that he believed Russia would be first.

    In short, the strawman you made of my point is indeed flatly wrong, and if I had said what you thought I said I would agree that it was indeed wrong. But I didn't make that point.