anarcho_blinkenist

joined 2 months ago
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

What does that have to do with the internal collapse of the USSR?

you've still not made any actual assertions. "The internal collapse of the USSR" makes it seem like you're gesturing toward having some actual knowledge, which you're refusing to disclose, instead making smug assertions that this hidden vague knowledge that you refuse to declare means you're right. So, what does "the internal collapse of the USSR" actually mean to you? What are you imagining (the pictures and words in your brain) when you say "the internal collapse of the USSR," and what were the causes in your opinion for whatever you're imagining?

It doesn't seem like you actually know what you're talking about, because you're desperately avoiding making real substantive statements in any of these comments, instead throwing tantrums when pressed on what you actually think. Tell us your actual positions, without petulant 'McCarthy-if-he-was-a-redditor' tantrums, or otherwise stop pretending to have any.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

But we both know that’s not why it collapsed.

okay, then tell us why you think it collapsed? These vague insinuations and gesturing don't prove your point, they make it seem like you're unsure of the basis of your own assertions.

Edit: And for the record, the first ever experiment of a modern socialist country in history, with no earlier examples to work off of, succumbing to a series of both external and internal contradictions doesn't say anything concretely about the viability of socialism as a whole. In fact, their massively successful strides toward constructing new relations of society, and the betterment of living standards for the vast masses of its people, and the provided security of housing, employment, nutrition, community, and healthcare which was established after fully collectivizing and industrializing (industrializing in 1/10 of the time it took the west to industrialize, without the fundamental basis of primitive accumulation through global colonialism, settler-colonialism, genocide, chattel slavery, child labor, aggressive wars, and malthusian sanitation practices that under-girded the western industrial revolution; and doing so after suffering such destruction in WWI and the civil and counter-revolutionary-interventionist war no less) proves there are extremely strong cases for it being a model of success to learn from and build off of, while learning from its shortcomings and mistakes.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Cases in point:


There's a long and ongoing history of this; for the US, UK, and Israel.

And just for fun, and just in case

[–] [email protected] 111 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (12 children)

The "middle class" never existed. The "middle class" is an invented wedge to split the working class and try to turn segments of itself, against itself. It has no material basis. It is the 'myth of upward mobility under capitalism' distilled into a propaganda phrase to obscure the dualistic and antagonistic class relations in capitalist society between the PROPERTIED and UNPROPERTIED (those who own capital and those who do not), and the contradictions and conflicts therein.

It is false consciousness; personified by and in the 'middle manager' who is PROPERTYLESS (proletarian), but paid more and promised the "opportunity of more to come" to align themselves with the interests of the PROPERTIED, and take on the role of a low-level overseer -- to function as both a compliance enforcer and a mediative focus-dulling pain-sponge standing in the middle of, and soaking up the conflict between, the ONLY REAL TWO CLASSES IN CAPITALIST SOCIETY: The Worker, and the Capitalist.

"Middle class" is liberal sleight-of-hand in its core and conception, and a term to be derided and discarded in all use, except as a magnifying glass to show the ways capitalism distorts and deceives about the real nature of its own properties and relations; and how the ruling class generates and contributes to the development of false consciousness through their reframing of production's own characteristics, in order to reify into political "identities" to be captured and capitalized upon those roles which naturally manifest out of the laws of functional industrial-productive logistics, ie. the need for 'managers' to administrate complex or large-scale productive and distributive tasks. This serves double roles in the laws of colonial and imperial relations in places like the USA, as this distinction is also in practice highly racialized and rooted in the ongoing historical unfolding of these basal-and-superstructural systems of exploitation.

Make note of the conspicuous absences and obfuscations when duopolist-exploiter X or Y says they "fight for the middle class;" that they are not fighting for you or me in the working class, but pandering to those "temporarily embarrassed millionaires" that they've bought off enough or otherwise tricked into this false consciousness, to give them their ever-shrinking electoral margins they require and fight each other over so they don't have to pay any mind to the working class masses who make up the majority; because they in reality work for the big bourgeois, the capitalists, and the petty-bourgeois "small business tyrants" who think of themselves as capitalists


all at the expense of the working class domestically and abroad.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I’ve come to realize that a significant portion of people just think other people should die and that’s fair and they’re OK with being the ones to do it.

It has always been this way. Particularly because there are people and groups who actively materially benefit from the enforced poverty/slavery and oppression of other people and groups within the social organization of our societies. The enforced poverty/slavery will never stop without sufficient and sufficiently organized, centralized, disciplined violence to overcome those who actively benefit from the enforced poverty/slavery by means of the same; and then maintaining that authority over the exploiters until their interest and strength are no more.

It's the same reason why there's never been a "peaceful bloodless decolonization." Why would the colonizer ever willingly permit that? They would be, from a standpoint of their own material interest as a societal class, complete morons to do so and make such a willing choice. Which is why (and this is historically borne out) they must be not given a choice by an organized militant anti-colonial resistance. This is also why the "authoritarianism" criticism of the doctrine and practice of revolutionary groups like Castro's revolutionaries or Lenin's Bolsheviks is laughable; the liberal peanut gallery can only have that criticism because they succeeded and survived to be criticized; having overcome the oppressors who, in the event of the revolutionaries' failure (historically borne out in how every failed revolution played out including the previous ones in those countries); would show the truth of themselves as 1000x more vicious, having honed that capability for 100x longer.

Look up any countries' "Red Terror" in history, then look up their corresponding "White Terror." You will see [wiki:NSFW images if you click on them]. Or read about any decolonization struggle. Like in Algeria, where every uprising that killed 10 Frenchmen resulted in a colonial reprisal with hundreds of butchered Algerians.

We live in a material reality with material interests which are enforced by people who will use your pacifism as a means to exploit you easier, and kill you easier if you even are seen as inconvenient or 'in the way' of those interests, let alone if you resist and struggle against them. And that argument has been happening since Marx and Engels' time in the framework of materialism; and was exactly the realm of rationale behind the policy of terror with the Jacobins before that in the French Revolution; from which many later revolutionaries took lessons and learned from the mistakes and refined within their contemporary material conditions and circumstances.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Stop acting like liberal Trumpers and the name wouldn't mean anything. "Blue MAGA" didn't come from nowhere. The "agenda" you're speaking of is holding up a mirror to you and the near-entirety of your party and its hypocrisy and dishonesty, and its corporate arms-dealer backers in the Miliary-Industrial-Media-complex, and uncritical upscale-college-liberal footsoldiers and the tantrums you throw to avoid confronting uncomfortable realities

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Makes one think who all has been benefiting from the expansion of militarism and conflict, doesn't it? But no need for us to worry, because I'm certain the peace-loving Democrats, who I'm assured by very democracy-valuing liberals, are despite all appearances definitely not nearly-indistinguishable from the open-fanged right-wing Republicans, and will stop this US militarism which is destroying the planet faster than anyone.

Pay no attention to the 3rd parties who actually come out against militarism; If we just give the wing of the bipartisan-imperialists who actually rely on working class margins whatever votes they want regardless of their actions forever, then surely because of how appreciative they are of us that they will gift to us some result that's remotely different than all of exactly this and exactly what brought us here... right?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

C A P I T A L I S T I N N O V A T I O N

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (7 children)

It's very weird having scrolled in my feed toward the world stuff. It almost seems artificial, like the redditors all collected here with all the hivemind weirdness and astroturfing.

and yeah, Democrats would rather send their dark-money and 'venture-capitalist'-funded PAC lawyers to purge 3rd parties from ballots (really democratic, Democrat party; I'm writing in PSL regardless if they can't get back on and telling everyone I know to) than make themselves appealing at all to the people abandoning their moribund and redundant party 'like rats from a sinking ship'.

They would rather fight with the Republicans over the (shrinking) voter base of rich and upper 'middle class' petty bourgeois rightwingers, and alienate all of their leftwing base, and continue abandoning the 35-50% that straight up don't vote for either of these duopoly-of-exploiters in this fascist-and-vampire show, than reorient toward positions of "not genocide" or "not nuclear-brinksmanship forever-war proxy-wars" or "not-constantly bipartisanly increasing and expanding the US military and neo-colonial racketeer system which is incidentally one of the leading contributors to climate change."

or "not continuing filling the world with CIA torture camps" or "not being just as or in some ways more right wing than trump on immigration somehow

It's telling that they refuse to do any of these things a large portion of the population wants; to the point where Muslim groups are advocating voting for 3rd parties who aren't for drinking the blood of Palestinians (apparently a tall order for US politicians), and instead would rather put so much effort into demonizing and crushing 3rd parties who do advocate against these things.

I don't even know if they're capable of not flying to the right and pandering to right wingers more and more due to their donor base. Their structure is inherently based on funding and campaigning and working for the worst billionaire imperialists and arms-dealer death-merchants in the world and AIPAC and tech monopolies etc. If we all pushed up the PSL to hold their working class margins hostage that they (unlike republicans) actually rely on and take for granted, they might break in half trying to reorient. Maybe they'd float a reformist party to prevent everyone going socialist against the open-fanged republicans who nobody ever had any illusions about and half the dems who are basically republicans will join them, and the other half will flee to the new reformist party (probably alienating their "left wing" into more radical politics because that party would become democrat-ified)

People just want to be lied to about the Democrats that they're different and 'acting resistance' at all to the republicans, when they're really not that different


and where they (barely) are different, they just capitulate and help the Republicans do whatever they were going to do, in the name of "bipartisanship" and "reaching across the aisle". Like when Obama had both houses of congress and refused to enshrine women's bodily autonomy and LGBTQ civil rights into law. And then gave away a free Supreme Court seat in capitulation. Then Biden denounces the idea of pushing to expand and pack the court because it'll "politicize the court" as if that ship isn't gone past the horizon forever, while doing nothing as women's and LGBTQ rights are torn down throughout the country, even with a Democrat president. It's almost like they don't actually care, or even like when women's rights and LGBTQ rights are under attack because they can drum up fear about the republicans and look 'better' by comparison after creating the problem in the first place, and keep the vampire-and-fascist (dog-and-pony) show going, and get all the gullible liberal votes that "they'll vote for us anyway


we're not the republicans" Which circles back to why they're so scared of and pushing demonization and repression of 3rd parties I guess. That's a pretty sweet cruise-control-deal they have hoodwinking the populace in a sort of face/heel drama for their 'audience'

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

the soviet union hasn't existed for like, 33 years. You need to wake up. In fact I think you need a mirror, because you are so knee-jerk reactionary with needing to engage in a nationalist either/or narrative here that you are making it up for other people out of wholecloth.

view more: next ›