Skip Navigation
Memes @lemmy.ml alcoholicorn @lemmy.ml

This was from 2017.

151
Memes @lemmygrad.ml The Spectre @lemmy.ml

This was from 2017. Democrats are just controlled opposition.
30 0
Political Memes @lemmy.world cm0002 @lemmy.world

This was from 2017.
233 6

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context
151 comments

  • don't get me wrong, if the choice for a non-violent revolution is there, i would take it every time.

    but if, somehow, i magically became the president without any kind of revolutionary effort, that's what i would do, and i would be totally justified in doing so

    • I am not advocating against revolution, I'm a Communist. If you became president of the US without revolution, you would not be able to execute any Capitalist you wanted, that's more what I am saying. Temper your dogmatism with pragmatism, read theory and study past successful revolutions, such as in the USSR, China, Cuba, Algeria, etc.

      Random executions doesn't transfer political power, adventurism was debunked back when the SRs failed to lead the Russian Revolution. Execution is a tool with its own use, but it isn't the best tool in all situations.

      • yeah, the USSR and China are not examples of successful revolutions, neither of those countries are communist

        • The former Soviet Union was Socialist, and so is the PRC. They haven't reached Communism, but they are examples of Socialism if you count Marxism as Socialist. What makes you say they weren't? Most people would disagree with you, especially Marxists, so I'm not sure what your stance is.

          • any marxist who thinks that the USSR or China is an example of a successful revolution is either ignorant, delusional, or worst of all, a tankie.

            they had some early successes but were immediately co-opted. motherfuckers need to learn about permenent revolution.

            now neither country is socialist, both are imperialist and well on their way towards fascism

            • The vast majority of Marxists globally are either "ignorant, delusional, or worst of all, tankies" then. The idea that the Soviet Union wasn't Socialist is an extremely fringe opinion among all of Marxists, typically limited to Trotskyists, themselves limited to Western Countries and devoid of any revolutions.

              Oh, you mentioned Permanent Revolution. I take it you're a Trotskyist, then? That explains your stance, but I really don't see why Permanent Revolution is relevant in any way, the theoretical basis relied on the assumption of the Peasantry as incapable of being truly aligned with the Proletariat and thus eventually would become counter-revolutionary. This ended up being false, and Socialism stabilized in the USSR, Cuba, China, Vietnam, Laos, and more, effectively debunking its relevancy.

              In China, the Trotskyists wished to martyr China by attacking the Kuomintang and the Japanese Imperialists both, rather than allying with the KMT before overthrowing them. Had the Trotskyists had their way, China would remain a colony.

              Today, the Russian Federation certainly is Capitalist and extremely Nationalist, but the PRC is still Socialist. I wrote a post on some common problems that some people run into when trying to determine Mode of Production. I also made an introductory Marxist-Leninist reading list, if you want to check it out. I think you'd benefit, especially since you took more of an adventurist route.

151 comments