Skip Navigation

User banner

Cowbee [he/they]

@ Cowbee @lemmy.ml

Posts
39
Comments
14000
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!

  • Are people really just now realizing Japan is functionally a one-party state?

    Jump

  • The biggest eye-opener seems to be telling people that Sansung sells insurance, has luxury hotels like the Silla, etc. The ROK is a bit more "naked" in that sense, contradictions are more out in the open. Watching the Samsung Lions play the Lotte Giants, instead of the Yankees against the Dodgers, for example, puts it up in your face a bit more. However, you're absolutely right that the US' own megacorps are the ones at the top, and it isn't just "big tech."

  • Are people really just now realizing Japan is functionally a one-party state?

    Jump

  • Yep, though Japan's own imperial history gives it a qualitatively different character to the ROK, which has largely been the history of a colonized country turned imperial vassal. The ROK still has domestic mass manufacturing, though it largely keeps it through suppressing wages. At least, that's my present understanding. The ROK still has extreme anti-communism, but a stronger union movement, which of course isn't sufficient but does signify a more millitant working class. The ROK in general is a pot constantly on the verge of boiling over, including in the social sphere with rising feminist movements.

  • Are people really just now realizing Japan is functionally a one-party state?

    Jump

  • Yep! I tend to do that more when talking about 재벌 IRL, as for many Statesians they don't really know about them at all. One thing they all seem to understand immediately is that Samsung, LG, Hyundai, etc. are massive in the ROK and that the families at the top are thus the real rulers of the ROK. Also serves as a nice springboard to talk about where they came from, ie collaborators with the US and former Japanese colonialist government.

  • Are people really just now realizing Japan is functionally a one-party state?

    Jump

  • Yep, Japan has no working class movement and is thus entirely controlled by the far-right.

  • Are people really just now realizing Japan is functionally a one-party state?

    Jump

  • Japan oscillates between far-right politics exclusively, the working class has little organizing and struggle going on and the state is thoroughly controlled by private intetests. The Republic of Korea may be an example of a capitalist dictatorship controlled by 3 companies in a trench-coat, but has active labor struggles and a history of millitant unions, at least.

  • Founding Pedos

    Jump

  • Administration is not itself a class, and is necessary for any large-scale economy. Marxism opposes capitalism in theory and in practice. Management of industry is not the same as owning said industry. Marxism has never been about eliminating managament, because managers are not a class in and of themselves, but instead a section of the proletariat that perform necessary roles in coordinating production, distribution, and logistics.

    Where did you get the idea that Marxists oppose administration from? It certainly isn't found within Marx and Engels' writings, without severe misunderstanding. Moreover, you're displaying black and white thinking in believing administration under socialism is the same as capitalist ownership outright.

  • Founding Pedos

    Jump

  • Every Western country is a mix of capitalism and socialism.

    Capitalism and socialism are modes of production, ie descriptors for the principle aspect of a given economy. Having a public sector does not mean you have a socialist sector, just like having a private sector does not mean you have a capitalist sector. Public sectors in capitalism serve to support the private, and private sectors in socialism support the public. Determining which aspect is principle, ie governs the large firms and key industries, and which class controls the state, is how we check for capitalism vs. socialism.

    The US absolutely should move towards the socialism end but capitalism won’t vanish, most importantly because it’s detractors never offer a viable alternative.

    Socialism is a viable alternative, see the PRC, where public ownership is the principle aspect and the working classes control the state.

    Pretty much a guarantee that a big chunk of people wasting time and resources on an internet discussion board are in some way benefitting from capitalism.

    The English-speaking internet does have a large portion of labor aristocrats, ie those who benefit from super-exploiting the global south, but that doesn't mean socialism isn't a necessary advance. Imperialism is decaying, thankfully, which necessitates socialism, not to mention the moral victory.

  • Founding Pedos

    Jump

  • A less colonialist term for "citizen of the USA."

  • Sometimes I say "I don't know"

    Jump

  • Yea, it's always a tightrope.

  • Sometimes I say "I don't know"

    Jump

  • Whenever people ask me about politics at work beyond being vaguely progressive

  • Liberal Double Standards

    Jump

  • I'm aware that Ukraine is in Europe, I was responding to their comment in the format they made it in.

  • Liberal Double Standards

    Jump

  • You're looking more at what the capitalists used to overthrow the aristocracy while entrenching their own rule here. Marx was an atheist, and built on the labor theory of value, for example. However, these liberal values were made with a mechanistic materialist outlook, not a dialectical materialist outlook, and as such could not actually stand for proletarian liberation.

    Marxism is secular, has the labor theory of value, etc, but not because Marx was a staunch liberal and believed capitalism to not be capable of fulfilling these. Rather, he built upon what was already created to build new ideology.

  • 'The Chinese government bans all new investment in Israel'

    Jump

  • Thanks! 🫡

  • Founding Pedos

    Jump

  • No problem!

  • Liberal Double Standards

    Jump

  • 🫠

    Also technically it's Deng Xiaoping Theory, as the CPC doesn't consider it as fundamental as Mao Zedong Thought or Xi Jinping Thought.

  • Liberal Double Standards

    Jump

  • Haha, I appreciate it!

  • Liberal Double Standards

    Jump

  • Brunch isn't bad itself!

  • Founding Pedos

    Jump

  • That's a great comment, thanks for linking it! And ReadFanon hit the nail on the head, so to speak, we have to train and practice for revolution, while being cognizant that distrusting any and all formalized structure sets us back, as these formalized structures appear whether we acknowledge them de jure or not. Jo Freeman's essay is also wonderful for showing how we really need to formalize vanguards, so as to legitimately democratize them and prevent people from naturally dominating the space.

  • Founding Pedos

    Jump

  • I’ve been thinking for a long time that any large-scale organization will lead to greed, corruption, injustice, et al.

    Why? Seriously, think about it. Are you appealing to a supernatural explanation like "human nature," or a materialist answer? Is the presence of any corruption or greed unacceptable or incapable of countering with structures and checks?

    It’s only since I’ve been reading about ML that I learned I lean anarchist. Vanguard parties sound like a bad idea to me.

    Why are vanguards a bad idea, in your eyes? The working class should organize, and the most politically advanced should organize in parties. Can you imagine if we refused to let scientists perform research? If we refused to let surgeons handle surgery? Why should revolution be any different? Any long-term, complex project should be led by those who study and train for it.

  • Founding Pedos

    Jump

  • Copying over @Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml 's comment reply to you:

    This is a very idealistic view of history. Ideology did not create material conditions, material conditions created ideology (and ideology was used as a tool to reinforce material conditions)

    The slavery, genocide, capitalism and colonialism came first. Then liberalism was created to justify it. And I do want to emphasise that all of those 4 things were justified using liberal logic, that was the point of liberal logic.

    The first liberals deemed the “unenligtened” to be subhuman, incapable or governing themselves, worthy of being treated like livestock and as fundamental threats to the ruling order. This was their justification for doing everything they did, you can read their writings on native Americans and Africans and see exactly what classical liberalism was all about.

    Later waves of liberals ended up using liberal logic to abolish slavery. Great. But the reason they did this was because the capitalist mode of production had superceded the slave mode of production. The surplus of proletariats hated competing with slaves and having their wages be reduced. Meanwhile the northern bourgeoise often had friction with the southern planters since the planters were rentiers extracting wealth from the whole economy like parasites.

    Modern liberals now proclaim themselves to be great champions of “liberty” (the liberty for the bourgeoise to buy property), but they by in large continue to support capitalism and western imperialism*. And frankly, why wouldn’t they? That was what the ideology was created for.

    *you can see this in their insistence upon using “white man’s burden” arguments whenever foreign intervention comes up