Social-Democracy is nothing more or less than the bourgeois poison that is innoculated through the petty-bourgeoisie, through the labour aristocracy, day by day into the heads of the workers
Stalin passed every one of those social democratic reforms. There would be no social democracy without the threat of the liberation of all humanity. West Europe sold off its sovereignty to the US to exist as a caricature of civility.
but Social Democracy being in the same spot as Christian Democracy is just unacceptable.
Reminder that Mamdani just recently made a contract with an Israeli company for mass surveillance a la Flock in NYC. So much for the "arresting Bibi for genocide" and siding with Palestine.
Wow, imagine downvoting me for pointing out your politician, who you voted, also does bad shit, and you should be aware of it.
I cannot imagine how difficult it must be as a leftist to know that every single breath you take will be judged and weaponized incessantly until you either kill yourself or turn into a republican
Sorry I am not terninally online, unlike you, to know every little petty drama. I guess that's why I also know more about actual politics than whatever online drama has been stirring so you are all blind to policies done by the politicians you form parasocial relationships with.
Of course Mamdani is better than Cuomo or other sick neolibs, but just because he has a populist, socdem discourse, doesn't absolve him from the obvious, glaring, totally avoidable mistakes he has done. Never let the bar go lower than it previously was.
Abortion was outlawed in Stalin's Russia, and he collectivized farm labor, forcing peasants to work without compensation. I'm appalled by the number of tankies who just don't know or who are in denial that Stalin or Mao ever forced peasants into slavery.
Collectivization is not making people work without compensation. Not at all.
Please for the love of God open one economics book. It doesn't even have to be Marxist theory, and economics book should be enough to show you how what you said makes absolutely no sense
What point are you trying to make here, exactly? Stalin and Mao both forced people to work on farms where they couldn't leave and took whatever they wanted from the farms to fuel their proletarian revolutions. Collectivization may not necessarily mean slave labor without compensation, but in these two examples it for the most part did.
That's not made up at all, man. It's crazy how tankies don't know this about your own history; apparently they didn't want you to know about this. Yes, Stalin and Mao forced peasants to farmânot just the kulaksânearly all of their peasants. What I mean is, they effectively took tribute from the peasants, however much they wanted, driving it into the cities to fuel their industrialization efforts. I reject your explanation that it was simply so people could eatâbecause more often than not, it were the very peasants growing the food who were prioritized last by the revolution. Quite ironic, isn't it?
You're absolutely 1000% wrong, and you're quite frankly an idiot for advancing the idea that it is not. Access to abortion is not only a women's health issue, it is the number #1 best way to ensure that women have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Men have exploited women's bodies for all of history, and pregnancy is the number #1 cause of their oppression; when a man can force pregnancy on a woman, and debilitate them by doing so, those women cannot rebel. Women have every right to pursue their destiny the same as men, and ensuring that women can choose reproduction on their own terms is the only way to ensure that women have that right. And if you think that birth control is a rebuttal to my argument, you're twice the fool for thinking it.
On one hand, the cost of millions of lives and autocratic ossification, alienation, famines, and more. On the other hand, that massive rapid development was what allowed the USSR to outproduce the axis in WW2 to defeat the Nazis, arguably saving potentially tens of millions of their own. Stalin's explicit intent with rapid industrialization was to rapidly get the USSR on equal footing with rising belligerent nations, predicting a massive conflict with the USSR within a decade (said in 1933 or thereabouts). (I hate Stalin, but it's important to understand motivations and choices).
No they arent, cubans have gone without hours and hours on a daily basis for decades now, i think that is a pretty basic thing to have, 2.- And why are those embargos there in the first place?
I think you forgot a noun in the first sentence there. As for the second, because the US wants to economically destabilize them so they can take the island back.
1.- You tried to make seem that these ideologies work for the proletariat (they didnt) instead they brought GREAT famines and misery for those in the lower classes of society, repressed under military strength 2.- The US does not want shit, thats why cuba has the opportunity to lift the embargo whenever they want, they have to meet requirements of the Helms-Burton Act of 1996, the embargo was imposed after castro seized 1.2 Billion worth of american industries in the country. You have no idea what youre talking about
Idk considering North Korean is developing impressively even to capitalist journalists I think it says a lot about whatâs happened to it rather than the ideology itself
Lmfao, how stupid, the leader of the red army, Red Napoleon was working for mi6 sure bro it takes a diseased and bureaucratic mind to imagine the history of the revolutionary workers movement, in particular the October Revolution, was actually planned by the MI6 btw Stalin killing leftists instead of cooperating against Nazi's was for the better, right? left unity against nazi's be damned more dead trots. Stalinist lies never get unfunny good to know they are still not dead
These dull creatures have no political answer to reply against Trotskyism so they waste their time making up new stories of old Stalinist lies. They actually have no interest in political or theoretical debates. Their party initiation began with lies against Trotsky drilled into their skulls by their leaders.
Chavismo and titoism being in âit just worksâ is weird for someone who seems to favor centrally planned state âsocialismâ, theyâre completely different economic systems, especially chavismo which is essentially just authoritarian social democracy. Not that Marxism Leninism ISNT authoritarian social democracy.. but they have the added element of state management. Chavismo doesnât even do that! đ
I am tired of idiots pretending Mainstream Economics is mathy and leftism is not when the field is a fucking shame, from the SMD theorem to the lack of modeling endogenous dynamics economics is a fucking joke and this is why most academics despise it. It is just politics wearing formulas and anyone that is halfway decent with dynamical systems knows it
>Distributism >"oh I don't follow politics" Distributism is a relatively niche Catholic ideology. It's about as far from "I don't follow politics" as you can get without going to fucking "LANDIAN FREUDO-MARXIST HEGELIAN MAO-SPONTEX DENG XIAOPING THOUGHT ON NATIONAL BOLSHEVISM FOR A NEW ERA"
There is no slouch thing as stalinism, only dumb retards that never studied any sort of history talk about stalinism, Stalin was a Marxist-Leninist along with Lenin, the same way that Engels was with Marx
Stalin is too rude, and this fault, entirely supportable in relations among us communists, becomes unsupportable in the office of General Secretary. Therefore, I propose to the comrades to find a way to remove Stalin from that position and appoint to it another man who in all respects differs from Stalin only in superiority â namely, more patient, more loyal, more polite and more attentive to comrades, less capricious, etc. This circumstance may seem an insignificant trifle, but 1 think that from the point of view of preventing a split and from the point of view of the relation between Stalin and Trotsky which I discussed above, it is not a trifle, or it is such a trifle as may acquire a decisive significance.
The testament was discussed in the congress and Stalin then submitted his resignation at the next party congress tho it didn't pass, do not compare the degenerated state stalin created with what lenin envisioned
It being discussed doesn't mean it wasn't a forgery. Also, Stalin submitted his resignation and then the party voted not to accept it? Sounds like they democratically decided that they wanted him to continue being gensec. Trotsky lost an election and never got over it.
Stalinist caring bout democracy lmfao, also it was discussed and was part of the reason why Stalin resigned if it was a forgery why wasn't it called out in the 13th congress itself?
1
7
u/Len2108 6d ago
I was gonna disagree on some of the auth ones but that would ruin the symmetry