Skip Navigation

User banner

Cowbee [he/they]

@ Cowbee @lemmy.ml

Posts
39
Comments
14005
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!

  • Liberal Double Standards

    Jump

  • Religion and racism were more justifications for the same base economic motivations, to be clear.

  • Liberal Double Standards

    Jump

  • Leftists have been opposing the US Empire every day for years, election season has nothing to do with it.

  • Liberal Double Standards

    Jump

  • Are you arguing that Donetsk and Luhansk don't deserve liberation, on account of that being a "campist" take? Why would a "non-campist" not support their liberation?

  • Removed

    Fuck Israel ❤️

    Jump

  • Lol, thanks!

  • Liberal Double Standards

    Jump

  • Russia is indeed capitalist, correct, not imperialist. Glad we can come to an understanding on why the US Empire is the biggest global obstacle to socialism, and that the Russian Federation's lack of imperialism makes it worthy of critical support in undermining the US Empire.

  • Liberal Double Standards

    Jump

  • I am talking about what most leftists understand to be imperialism, which is why I called it as such, and explained it so there's no room for doubt. The vauge concept of influence along international lines popular among apologists for imperialism as I describe it isn't inherently a bad thing, while imperialism as I describe it is, and is the biggest obstacle to socialism globally.

    If you want to rename imperialism to something else, and call imperialism "economic imperialism" then we can do that, I'd rather talk about the actual process itself than argue about nomenclature.

  • Liberal Double Standards

    Jump

  • In this case, the Statesian North imperialized the Statesian South, the Soviet Union imperialized Nazi Germany, etc. The definition you're using is absurd and reductionist, the one I'm using is consistent, explains why it exists, how it functions, and how to end it.

    If you're truly using "annexation" as a definition of imperialism, then communists don't have a problem with this "annexationist imperialism," as it can absolutely be a good thing. Communists oppose the definition I explained, let's call it "economic imperialism," because it's always bad and is the biggest obstacle to socialism globally.

    Changing the name of the process doesn't change the nature of it. Why are you getting so tripped up on what we call it, rather than the process itself?

  • Liberal Double Standards

    Jump

  • Russia is not stealing the surplus value and resources of the global south on an immense scale, which is the primary reason why its resistance to the US Empire and its European vassals plays a progressive role because of this.

  • Liberal Double Standards

    Jump

  • What "imperial ambitions" do they have? Why would Russia not care about the survival of ethnic Russians right on their borders? Again, the CPRF supports Donetsk and Luhansk, as do most communist parties globally, so just saying I'm "naive" doesn't actually form a coherent counterpoint.

  • Liberal Double Standards

    Jump

  • The "rules based global order" has really just been the institution by which the US Empire solidified their hegemony, that's the only reason they "defended" it.

  • All the homies hate Karl Kautsky

    Jump

  • To add on to LeninWeave's great comment, Lenin would also take down Kautsky even in works not focused on him. Kautsky and Kautskyites, Kautskyism, etc are mentioned 89 times in The State and Revolution, such as here:

    In this remarkable argument, Marxism takes a tremendous step forward compared with the Communist Manifesto. In the latter, the question of the state is still treated in an extremely abstract manner, in the most general terms and expressions. In the above-quoted passage, the question is treated in a concrete manner, and the conclusion is extremely precise, definite, practical and palpable: all previous revolutions perfected the state machine, whereas it must be broken, smashed.

    This conclusion is the chief and fundamental point in the Marxist theory of the state. And it is precisely this fundamental point which has been completely ignored by the dominant official Social-Democratic parties and, indeed, distorted (as we shall see later) by the foremost theoretician of the Second International, Karl Kautsky.

    Part of what makes Lenin so fun to read is that he never shies away from taking down those that drag the movement down.

  • Liberal Double Standards

    Jump

  • Nope, not really. Let's see:

    -The presence of monopolies which play a decisive role in economic life.

    Somewhat true domestically, Russia has many monopolies as a holdover from the socialist system. However, internationally, this isn't true at all, only 4 of the top 100 companies in the world are Russian. Considering having monopolies on the world stage is necessary for imperialism, this is false for Russia.

    -The merging of bank capital with industrial capital into finance capital controlled by a financial oligarchy.

    Similar to the first one, somewhat true domestically, but internationally Russia only has one of the top 100 banks. Same as the first, this is therefore false.

    -The export of capital as distinguished from the simple export of commodities.

    Russia primarily exports raw materials and resources, so no, not at a significant scale. There's more capital flight than export.

    -The formation of international monopolist capitalist associations (cartels) and multinational corporations.

    Again, Russia has no international monopolies, the closest is that they can make a lot of nuclear reactors. No.

    -The domination and exploitation of other countries by militaristic imperialist powers, now through neocolonialism.

    No neocolonialism is going on. Russia is annexing the 4 oblasts, but these are not colonies for Russia.

    -The territorial division of the whole world among the biggest capitalist powers.

    Russia has no colonies nor neocolonies, no "territory" to claim.

    Overall, Russia likely would be imperialist if it was financially more developed and capable of imperialism, but it can't because it isn't.

  • Liberal Double Standards

    Jump

  • Nope, why would it be?

  • 9/10 times, there's your problem right there...

    Jump

  • Sure, so in instances where socialism continues we can tell that it enjoys popular support. The soviet union dissolved, but we have billions living in socialism happily. I'm aware that one can say something and not mean it, but the fact that that's possible does not mean that it's always the case. You in particular never make any meaningful points, you cast a silly phrase or two and then act like everyone else is unreasonable.

  • I'm ready to study theory now

    Jump

  • No problem!

  • Instant turn off

    Jump

  • lmao

  • Do you think centrists are bad?

    Jump

  • Yep.

  • Do you think centrists are bad?

    Jump

  • It's really just theater, both uphold the interests of capital.

  • Founding Pedos

    Jump

  • Why don't you like ml memes?