Political Discussions for "Adults"

OccultHawk · 08-01-2019, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

*San Fran for the self-aggrandizing gentrifiers

Church

~~jwb~~ · 08-01-2019, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

*San Fran for the self-aggrandizing gentrifiers

I guarantee if they go there Beto will break out a lisp

OccultHawk · 08-01-2019, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

I guarantee if they go there Beto will break out a lisp

~~jwb~~ · 08-01-2019, 01:31 PM

I think the Soviets probably would side with me on this one.

Even Marx wasn't exactly an anarchist and was more fixated on the power of science and technology.

~~jwb~~ · 08-01-2019, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor

Lenin after a certain point would side with you

after he took central control of all the Soviets

but Lenin was considered to be Right Wing by the Left Marxists

Marx was more focused on the flaws of Capitalism than he was with what was going to replace it, but in the Manifesto whats loosely described is an anarchist society

Marx made some comments here and there about how the state would ultimately fade away... But his vision was one based more on technological advancement and he spoke of a dictatorship of the proletariat to usher in this transition of power.

Modern day Communists sometimes try to rewrite characters like Lenin as right wing based on what they ended up doing, which nobody wants to be associated with. But they were far left in terms of ideology and as such drew nothing but derision from the right wing at the time as they represented an ideological purging of the ranks of anyone who wasn't sufficiently dedicated to their revolution.

There were actual anarchists, going back to the French revolution, such as guys like Proudhon, and Marx was continually at odds with them in one way or another ideologically.

~~jwb~~ · 08-01-2019, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor

I'm talking about the left wing communists of Lenin's time

they wrote that they no longer associated with him

it's not just a retrospective view, there was a left wing and a right wing side within Marxists

communists, anarchists, libertarians, they're not entirely uniform movements and mean different things to different people

Oh I'm perfectly aware they weren't a monolith
That was part of the problem... They would purge left wing and right wing opponents alike. But they were certainly on the left in the grand scheme of things.

****, prominent leftists and Marxists intellects in the West defended Stalin and the Soviets well into the 1960s. Only in retrospect did the left finally decide to disown them. That's why Orwell got so much **** at the time he wrote animal farm cause he had first hand experience with the intolerant stalinists.

Funny enough he was a supporter of Trotsky who
in many ways had similar ideas to Lenin & Stalin minus the power.

Mindy · 08-01-2019, 03:04 PM

theres going to be way less candidates on the next debate...

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/01/u...mid=tw-nytimes

~~jwb~~ · 08-01-2019, 03:11 PM

I recall reading that he proposed something very similar to the 5 year plan and sometimes even accused Stalin of stealing ideas from him.

Obviously there are difference too but he didn't strike me as less of a hard line ideologue capable of atrocities. Just didn't have the power.

~~jwb~~ · 08-01-2019, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor

and sure but also no

it is true that a lot of Marxists found Lenin/Stalin to be such a powerful symbol that they held onto it far too long

hell I still have met Leninists today

this does not change the fact that the Left Marxists of the actual time and place opposed him and that Stalin was the right wing reactionary in this equation

Some opposed, some were within the ranks. And generally they alternated as a regime between easing up on capitalism like under the NEP to reveling in revolutionary zeal and cracking down on whoever they deemed to be bourgeois. At no point in time were they economically right wing. You could call some other aspects of the state right wing but generally they were on the left and thus hated by the far right and moderate left alike, as well as certain far left rivals. Their only defenders though were certain apologists from the far left who sympathized with the vision of communism.

~~jwb~~ · 08-01-2019, 03:37 PM

I view the NEP as a stunted form of capitalism that was just less punitive towards capiltalists than some other eras of Soviet rule. It came about as a pragmatic necessity because the economy was faultering. Then the "permanent revolution" would start to lose steam and they would go back to purging and punishing the Kulaks etc. Then the economy would take another down turn, so rinse and repeat.

The 5 year plan was ultimately for the purposes of industrializing to fulfill the vision of creating a society based on urban workers. So I see that essentially as something that is more in line with a particular form of visionary Marxism than anything else.

Though to be fair it probably also helped defeat Hitler which I guess is a good thing.

08-01-2019, 03:04 PM	#2547 (permalink)
Mindy ask me about cosmology Join Date: Oct 2016 Location: Milky Way Galaxy Posts: 9,045	theres going to be way less candidates on the next debate... https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/01/u...mid=tw-nytimes __________________ https://www.instagram.com/shhons_meme_agency

08-01-2019, 01:31 PM	#2544 (permalink)
~~jwb~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 4,403	I think the Soviets probably would side with me on this one. Even Marx wasn't exactly an anarchist and was more fixated on the power of science and technology.

08-01-2019, 03:11 PM	#2548 (permalink)
~~jwb~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 4,403	I recall reading that he proposed something very similar to the 5 year plan and sometimes even accused Stalin of stealing ideas from him. Obviously there are difference too but he didn't strike me as less of a hard line ideologue capable of atrocities. Just didn't have the power.

08-01-2019, 03:37 PM	#2550 (permalink)
~~jwb~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 4,403	I view the NEP as a stunted form of capitalism that was just less punitive towards capiltalists than some other eras of Soviet rule. It came about as a pragmatic necessity because the economy was faultering. Then the "permanent revolution" would start to lose steam and they would go back to purging and punishing the Kulaks etc. Then the economy would take another down turn, so rinse and repeat. The 5 year plan was ultimately for the purposes of industrializing to fulfill the vision of creating a society based on urban workers. So I see that essentially as something that is more in line with a particular form of visionary Marxism than anything else. Though to be fair it probably also helped defeat Hitler which I guess is a good thing.