Lilybump

joined 6 days ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Do you have any source to support your claim he committed genocide?

 

Are there any other reasons for this distaste besides them not being supportive of AES?

 
 
[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

I have become more and more convinced—and it is only a question of driving this conviction home to the English working class — that it can never do anything decisive here in England until it separates its policy with regard to Ireland most definitely from the policy of the ruling classes, until it not only makes common cause with the Irish but even takes the initiative in dissolving the Union established in 1801 and replacing it by a free federal relationship. And this must be done, not as a matter of sympathy with Ireland but as a demand made in the interests of the English proletariat. If not, the English people will remain tied to the leading-strings of the ruling classes, because it will have to join with them in a common front against Ireland. Every one of its movements in England itself is crippled by the strife with the Irish, who form a very important section of the working class in England. The primary condition of emancipation here—the overthrow of the English landed oligarchy—remains impossible because its position here cannot be stormed so long as it maintains its strongly entrenched outposts in Ireland. But, once affairs are in the hands of the Irish people itself, once it is made its own legislator and ruler, once it becomes autonomous, the abolition there of the landed aristocracy (to a large extent the same persons as the English landlords) will be infinitely easier than here, because in Ireland it is not merely a simple economic question but at the same time a national question, for the landlords there are not, like those in England, the traditional dignitaries and representatives of the nation, but its mortally hated oppressors. And not only does England’s internal social development remain crippled by her present relations with Ireland; but also her foreign policy, and in particular her policy with regard to Russia and the United States of America. —Marx, Marx to Ludwig Kugelmann In Hanover

In other words, for the British workers to liberate themselves, they must fight for the Irish workers and support them in both words and deeds. Marx advocated replacing the U.K. with a voluntary federation of nations, quite akin to the U.S.S.R.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago (4 children)

I recommend this excellent video which refutes third-worldist narratives on the labor aristocracy.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago (8 children)

Replacing class struggle with national struggle is not going to better our movement. Western workers are still exploited and as proletarians (which is defined by their relations to the means of production, not their income level), their class interests remains in socialism.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Socialist states do not take on the form of superpowers.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 days ago (2 children)

different states will mostly naturally move towards socialism.

No offense, but this sounds very similar to the notion of "peaceful transition to socialism" advocated by Khrushchev. Socialism is done through revolutionary violence (a universal law), not peaceful growth.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 days ago

I am not being dismissive.

 

It has been several months since I was diagnosed with schizophrenia and I can only say: it is horrible. I would not wish it on anyone with even a small amount of good in them.

I just got out of an psychotic episode in which I accused my best friend of plotting against me because she knew of a communist party I was going to form and that I was blessed by the gods to do their work on Earth. I keep hearing voices and the only way I can accept them is to think of them as gods. These ideas may sound insane, and they are, but it's impossible to get rid of them. I keep making connections which aren't there and subconsciously form my own reality out of nothing.

I wish I could be normal. I wish I did not hear voices. I wish I did not see things which were not there. I wish I could separate fantasy from reality.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Exactly. Our goal should be world socialist revolution, not capitalist multipolarity.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 days ago (4 children)

I feel like this question can only come from someone in the imperial core.

I am trying to understand this question as a Marxist through a Marxist lens. Marxism has the same answers to questions regardless of where you are.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (6 children)

We’re already in a multi polar world,

And it's a world mired in conflict, oppression, disease, anti-communism, and fascist tyranny. I'm not sure what the appeal is.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 days ago (11 children)

Nobody is suggesting that Russia will become an imperialist power in the course of a day or even a few years. Rather, what is being suggested is that Russia will become one after a difficult series of armed conflicts, annexations, etc. etc. Looking at Nazi Germany, it went from being a defeated imperialist power with practically no sphere of influence to one which conquered nearly all of Europe and waged war in multiple continents in the course of a few years.

Let us no forget that the Russian state was born out of reaction to a similar extent the EU countries were, coming out of the restoration of capitalism in the USSR and rise of the new Soviet bourgeoisie, its undemocratic and illegal dissolution, the rapid introduction of neoliberal "shocktherapy" under Yeltsin, the events of 1993, etc. This state is obviously and backwards force with horrible origins and so it becoming imperialist is not far away to say the least.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

But isn't having major powers divided going to cause yet another world war which will kill millions or perhaps billions? Wouldn't the end result be Russian unipolarity and thus the same issues you mentioned?

 

Personally, I fail to see why many Marxist-Leninists support multipolarity. The primary goal of the Leninist movements has always been "workers of the world unite!" and not "non-US-aligned countries unite!".

To be clear, in saying this, I am not endorsing US-led unipolarity. I am just saying that multipolarity is not inherently good as some MLs suggest. For example, the world in 1914 and 1939 were without a doubt multipolar, and those both resulted in brutal world wars which killed millions.

Could somebody explain why people support multipolarity so much?

 

I have often heard the term "state capitalism" being used by Western academics to refer to AES states like China or Vietnam. Lenin also uses the term a lot in The Tax in Kind and distinguishes it from true socialism.

 
 

"This, incidentally, raises the question of opportunism. Opportunism means sacrificing fundamental interests so as to gain temporary and partial advantages. That is the gist of the matter, if we consider the theoretical definition of opportunism. Many people have gone astray on this point. In the case of the Brest-Litovsk Peace, we sacrificed Russia’s interests, as understood in the patriotic sense, which were, in fact, secondary from the socialist point of view. We made immense sacrifices, yet they were only minor ones. The Germans hated Britain implacably. They hated the Bolsheviks too, but we held out a bait, and they fell for it."

Lenin, Speech Delivered at a Meeting of Activists Of The Moscow Organisation of the R.C.P.(B.)

 

“This person does not grasp class struggle; he has never referred to this key link. Still his theme of ‘white cat, black cat,’ making no distinction between imperialism and Marxism.”

This supposed quote by Mao comes from the top of this work here. Does anyone know its origins?

view more: next ›