Happy labor day comrades.
never forget:
All wheels stand still if it's our will
never forget:
All wheels stand still if it's our will
-
ICMag with help from Phlizon, Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest for Christmas! You can check it here. Prizes are: full spectrum led light, seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
commies
- Thread starter Cannavore
- Start date
conventional socialism wasnt really democratic either. that's a more modern/western take on it but even then that's not correct because most in the US who call themselves democratic socialists are actually social democrats who have no interest in abolishing capitalism. for a long time socialism meant arming the workers and overthrowing the government/capitalism by force.
Montuno
...como el Son...
No estoy en absoluto de acuerdo con esto: el concepto de democracia va unido al marxismo original (que es, por cierto, una ideología originalmente nacida en y pensada para el mundo occidental capitalista industrializado): la clase obrera llegada al poder debería transformar esa "democracia representativa capitalista de partidos" en una "democracia directa". (Y luego, pero ya mucho más tarde, el Eurocomunismo hasta especificó como dentro de esa "nueva " democracia directa" los ciudadanos podían expresar su decisión de abandonar la vía marxista y volver al sistema capitalista y de partidos anterior")...
Lenin interpreto el marxismo para una sociedad que era muchísimo más agraria que industrial, y ni siquiera una democracia burguesa capitalista de partidos, sino una autocracia: No había modo de llegar al poder democráticamente, sino por la fuerza (revolución). Aun así, el leninismo (y el troskismo) buscaba crear la democracia directa tras la revolución (no me queda en absoluto claro en el estalinismo).
Vuelvo a recordaros como muy pocos años despues del nacimiento del régimen soviético bolchevique, diferentes partidos marxistas obtuvieron democráticamente el poder (e igualmente democráticamente lo abandonaron, si no fue por golpes de Estados o invasiones) en España, Francia, Chile, Costa Rica...
I do not agree with this at all: the concept of democracy is linked to the original Marxism (which is, by the way, an ideology originally born in and thought for the industrialized capitalist western world): the working class coming to power should transform that "capitalist representative party democracy" into a "direct democracy". (And later, but much later, Eurocommunism even specified how within this "new "direct democracy" the citizens could express their decision to abandon the Marxist way and return to the previous capitalist and party system")....
Lenin interpreted Marxism, later, for a society that was much more agrarian than industrial, and not even a bourgeois capitalist party democracy, but an autocracy: There was no way to come to power democratically, but by force (revolution). Even so, Leninism (and Trotskyism) sought to create direct democracy after the revolution (it is not at all clear to me in Stalinism).
I remind you again how very few years after the birth of the Bolshevik Soviet regime, different Marxist parties democratically obtained power (and also democratically abandoned it, if it was not by coups or invasions) in Spain, France, Chile, Costa Rica...
Salud!
Salud a tod@s tras este recién pasado 1° de Mayo.
'Boogieman'
Well-known member
Marxism will never happen in America in my lifetime and I'm young. Invest your money instead of blowing it and you will live a happy life. I only make 30k a year but my 401k is already in good shape. Personally I'm waiting for american weed stocks to crash (because democrats don't have the votes for legalization) to capitalize!
sure i understand what you are saying. my post you are quoting i was being a bit tongue in cheek/trolling about american society and how they claim to be so independent. but also the part about the social democrats i find to be 100% true. american social democrats are not marxists whatsoever. the soc dems in america call themselves something that is further left than what they are (dem socialists) but they/the dominantly moderate left wing movement in the US is mainly dominated by the social democrats.
that's not without saying that bernie sanders and the social democrats have absolutely helped future US generations of Americans move further to the left than the current overton window. because they definitely have even if most of these people are not necessarily accurate in terms of their political definitions and ideologies. this bears it out in the statistics. younger US generations have increasingly less favorable ratings of capitalism over time (for instance just the other day I saw something that mentioned US millenials control just 4.2% of the wealth, which equals to be 4x poorer than the average baby boomer at the age of 34). when you look at statistics like this it's no wonder capitalism is failing. american propagandists have done such an incredible job to conceal and obfuscate this reality by basically claiming everything BUT existing capitalism is the problem that the system has created it's own defenders, often times labor/middle class. sometimes even violent ones and i imagine it will only get worse.
hope you understand!!
you say this as if 50% of the american work force isn't making $30,000 or less while CEO's on average make 320x what the average worker makes. you say this as if the US isn't the only modern/western country on the planet that doesn't guarantee health care to all of it's citizens through a taxpayer program that is far cheaper than what we currently do.
that's great you're happy to be a pleb. the rest of us aren't. you don't have to be a leftist (even though you should be) to realize you're being ripped off while the elite get richer during a pandemic.
So to the euros out there who are reading this -- gaius, gypsy, montuno, etc -- is the NHS and other taxpayer health insurance programs/free health care considered communism where you are from?
how do the right wing/conservative parties feel about this type of health care plan?
should a person go bankrupt from medical bills? is this morally acceptable to allow people to go into debt from bills or to die because they put off seeing a doctor? becuase these are huge problems in the US. we are not a healthy country as a whole.
is asking for what the rest of the developed world has = communism? becuase in a nutshell arguement this is basically the furthest "left" policy being discussed in the US, with Joe Biden not even willing to entertain the idea that this is possible (even though it is, he's just a absolute shill for medical corporations and big business).
how do the right wing/conservative parties feel about this type of health care plan?
should a person go bankrupt from medical bills? is this morally acceptable to allow people to go into debt from bills or to die because they put off seeing a doctor? becuase these are huge problems in the US. we are not a healthy country as a whole.
is asking for what the rest of the developed world has = communism? becuase in a nutshell arguement this is basically the furthest "left" policy being discussed in the US, with Joe Biden not even willing to entertain the idea that this is possible (even though it is, he's just a absolute shill for medical corporations and big business).
the system here is complicated, they allow medical care its self to be profit based, they also allow the insurance companies to be profit based, they just regulate the amount that can be charged for the insurance. you have to have it and it covers everything except dental. if you are earning less then a certain amount the government will pay at least partially for the insurance. there is a kind of stipend towards it they give people with big families or low income. if you are totally broke bum on the street, the gov pays the whole premium so that even then you will always get full medical treatment. apparently its cheaper then paying for emergency treatment of uninsured citizens
Last edited:
There are no true communist countries/states. It doesn’t exist in the real world (and never has)
jeezum I learned that in ur political Theory class...
you could at least be consistent... I can’t embrace an idealogy that flip flops on basic terminology all the time
Montuno
...como el Son...
No hay inconsistencia alguna.
En mi país, todos los grandes avances sociales llegaron en los años 30 con los dos gobiernos marxistas de la época: te hablo de voto para las mujeres, derecho al aborto, igualdad sexual, educación y salud universales.... Cuando todo eso cayó por el golpe de Estado e invasión exterior fascista y posterior dictadura, fue la lucha (y la sangre y la vida) de las fuerzas de izquierda (sobretodo marxistas) la que logró reconquistar, poco a poco, esos logros...
Así mismo, en la mayoria de los demás países del mundo que nunca tuvieron gobiernos marxistas, también ha sido mayoritariamente la lucha de las fuerzas de izquierda (marxistas o no) quien consiguió esos logros.
Para poder entender algo sobre el tema, antes de lanzarte a pedir "consistencia" ideologica a los demás, te recomiendo que consultes, al menos en wikipedia o parecido, como cuando un partido marxista comunista accede al poder, lo hace desde un sistema capitalista; en un modelo democrático, el capitalismo sobrevivirá bastante tiempo mientras va siendo sustituido por el socialismo; en un modelo autocrático (la URSS) puede intentarse "de golpe". Y solo una vez alcanzado el socialismo pleno, podrá iniciarse la marcha hacia el comunismo.
Ningun partido comunista jamas ha pasado más allá de intentar consolidar la fase socialista.
Así mismo, muchos marxistas no son comunistas sino socialistas, y no creen o no desean la fase comunista.
Y así mismo, también hay marxistas no comunistas ni socialistas sino socialdemócratas, que creen que la " eterna transición del capitalismo al socialismo" es en si el objetivo...
Y por supuesto, también existen socialistas y socialdemócratas no marxistas...
Por lo tanto, no hay ninguna incoherencia.
De echo, el gobierno actual de mi país, esta actualmente formado por socialdemócratas no marxistas (2/3) y socialistas y comunistas marxistas (1/3) pero vivo en un régimen capitalista.
Salud.
There is no inconsistency.
In my country, all the great social advances came in the 1930s with the two Marxist governments of the time: I'm talking about the vote for women, the right to abortion, sexual equality, free universal education and health care..... When all that fell due to the fascist coup d'état and foreign invasion and subsequent dictatorship, it was the struggle (and the blood and life) of the left forces (above all the Marxists) that managed to win back, little by little, those achievements...
Likewise, in most of the other countries of the world that never had Marxist governments, it has also been mainly the struggle of the left forces (Marxist or not) that achieved those gains.
In order to understand something about the subject, before you start asking for ideological "consistency" from others, I recommend that you consult, at least in wikipedia or similar, how when a Marxist communist party comes to power, it does so from a capitalist system; in a democratic model, capitalism will survive for a long time while being replaced by socialism; in an autocratic model (the USSR) it can be tried "all at once". And only once full socialism has been achieved can the march towards communism begin.
No communist party has ever gone beyond trying to consolidate the socialist phase.
Likewise, many Marxists are not communists but socialists, and do not believe in or desire the communist phase.
And likewise, there are also Marxists who are neither communists nor socialists but social democrats, who believe that the "eternal transition from capitalism to socialism" is in itself the goal....
And of course, there are also non-Marxist socialists and social democrats...
Therefore, there is no incoherence.
In fact, the current government of my country is actually made up of non-Marxist social democrats (2/3) and Marxist socialists and communists (1/3) but I live in a capitalist regime.
Cheers.
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
'Boogieman'
Well-known member
What drives you with jealous when you have the means to live a happy life? Do you need a personal jet or a multimillion dollar yacht to be happy? 30k a year I already have a nice ranch house almost paid off in the country (thanks to weed stocks rocketing in February 2021 after the March crash of 2020) I put money away in stocks and my 401k, I'm even thinking about buying a little boat. I'm genuinely happy and I just don't understand the jealously. I don't consider myself a pleb.
'Boogieman'
Well-known member
No but can you define what you mean by stealing from us?
i've been using this as an example a lot lately, but i think it illustrates an important point as to why people are fed up with our economic system.
"According to a groundbreaking new working paper by Carter C. Price and Kathryn Edwards of the RAND Corporation, had the more equitable income distributions of the three decades following World War II (1945 through 1974) merely held steady, the aggregate annual income of Americans earning below the 90th percentile would have been $2.5 trillion higher in the year 2018 alone. That is an amount equal to nearly 12 percent of GDP—enough to more than double median income—enough to pay every single working American in the bottom nine deciles an additional $1,144 a month. Every month. Every single year.
Price and Edwards calculate that the cumulative tab for our four-decade-long experiment in radical inequality had grown to over $47 trillion from 1975 through 2018. At a recent pace of about $2.5 trillion a year, that number we estimate crossed the $50 trillion mark by early 2020. That’s $50 trillion that would have gone into the paychecks of working Americans had inequality held constant"
The Top 1% of Americans Have Taken $50 Trillion From the Bottom 90%—And That's Made the U.S. Less Secure
https://time.com/5888024/50-trillion...ality-america/
yes i know you're self employed or have a family business or whatever so this probably doesn't fully apply to you, but when you take into account that something like 70% of Americans (might be wrong on the %, going by memory) work for corporations, this is still happening to the majority of American workers out there and will probably only get worse as inequality grows.
?puedo ir al bano por favor?
also quick question before I go the bano
why is it that consolidating the socialist phase is so difficult that it devolves into genocide everytime it’s tried in real life ?
is there something inherently evil about govt taking a citizens personal property without their consent?
how about when the govt murder the citizen and their family?
you think this unique to the socialist far left?
death squads are a hallmark of the far right
Nazi Germany vs USSR - who killed more?
pretty much even Stephen on that one
extreme politics kills, no matter the label you want to stick on
