/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"I ain't driving 20 minutes to riot."

catalog
Mode: Reply
Name
E-mail
Subject
Message

Max message length: 8192

Files

Max file size: 80.00 MB

Max files: 5

Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

Remember to follow the rules


/leftypol/ is a non-sectarian board for leftist discussion. Join the Matrix: https://matrix.to/#/+leftychat:matrix.org Visit the Booru: https://lefty.booru.org/

(41.94 KB 600x600 a20c756.jpg)
Anonymous 10/18/2020 (Sun) 07:41:33 No. 1011534
Radical Social Democracy works, and it works better than any centrally planned system ever has. I've never been able to find a genuinely convincing argument in favour of socialism over social-democracy. Nationalisation of key industries, a robust welfare state, and strong unions in a largely market capitalist economy solve every problem you lot look to communism for.
>>1011534 >I've never been able to find a genuinely convincing argument in favour of socialism over social-democracy. The reason is simple, social democracy will always be temporary and depends on porky's easily reversed concessions. The state by its nature is easily captured by porky and will ultimately yield to their interest.
(42.84 KB 889x979 Stalin - Copy.jpg)
>>1011534 >capital continues to circulate >surplus value keeps being extracted <yeah bro we might be strong enough to take state power and transition to socialism but uhhh... communism bad
Not liquidating the bourgeoisie will just make them bite you in the ass later, you're not seeing the full picture.
>>1011555 Funny picture choice given your post.
>>1011553 Why would a democratic state with heavy regulation on money in politics be skewed in favour of a minority of the population?
>>1011548 These are descriptive, not prescriptive and say nothing about the efficacy of social-democracy.
>>1011555 I'm not a socialist, I'm a social democrat. The inequality of capital and extraction of surplus value can be remedied with regulation, tax, a robust welfare state and, strong trade unions.
>>1011594 >heavy regulation on money in politics lmao, if only
>>1011569 Bite us in the ass how? A coup? The proles are the majority, and would be the majority power holders bc of trade unions and a worker's party. Anything the bourgeoisie would try to do would be instantly crushed.
>>1011602 I'm not arguing for what exists, I'm arguing theoretics. As are socialists, I just think social-democracy is far more practical, far more achievable, and frankly, far more desirable as well.
>>1011597 >say nothing about the efficacy of social-democracy Except the fact that as the rate of profit goes down the bourgeoisie will replace you with austerity parties and all the gibs will be gone. >>1011607 >I'm not arguing for what exists, I'm arguing theoretics. Just like anarchists, then. Okay. I and everybody else live in the real world, though. Call me when your perfect socdem utopia is established in... never.
(2.73 MB uno.mp4)
>Do social democracy >Rate of profit falls >Crisis of the mixed economy >To much of a pussy to go full planned economy in response >Get Thatcher, the most far-right European leader of the last century >Same shit happens in every other socdem country >Yes, including the Nords who are slowly choking out their welfare Oops, I guess that was just a fluke. Actually no, that wasn't real social democracy, REAL social democracy has never been tried! Only reason why you saw any modicum of success was due to USSR existing on Europe's doorstep.
Is this a parody of socdoneleft's unparalleled stupidity?
>>1011609 >I and everybody else live in the real world, You're arguing theoretics too you dense fuck. Last I checked we're not living under global communism. >Except the fact that as the rate of profit goes down the bourgeoisie will replace you with austerity parties and all the gibs will be gone. Meme answer that says absolutely nothing. The tendency of the rate of profit to fall has never even been documented, just theorised by economists. This is no better than conjecture as it's based on a poorly understood theoretical phenomenon.
>>1011614 >Do communism >Have a lower quality of life than countries with economies a tenth your size >Half your country starves while your paranoid leaders execute each other >Collapse into neoliberalism on a scale never before seen
>>1011622 >be OP >be complete insufferable faggot who learned history from cold war propaganda >be succdem Checks out.
>>1011617 >Last I checked we're not living under global communism. No, but we have seen socialist countries that give the proletariat political power over a centrally planned economy and that this system has greatly improved conditions and reduced class alienation in said countries, so we know we don't need to keep capitalism like you do and we know that playing porky's game to take power in bourgeois parliaments is a waste of time.
>>1011622 >do communism kek. how young are you? This is extremely remedial stuff.
>>1011625 >be anon >be wholly politicall ineffectual retard with no justification for their ideology that they got by spending all of their time on imageboards >be a commie Checks out
>>1011630 It is just a bait.
(64.14 KB 794x794 15z8z7.jpg)
>>1011617 >>1011622 >>1011631 Always remember: NO REFUNDS
>>1011628 Which countries? Authoritarian hellholes like China? Backwards third world shitholes like the DPRK? Countries with worse worker protections than the USA like Vietnam?
>>1011622 >Be worse than LatAm in 1918 >Be better than LatAm in 1991 Idk, looks like a success story to me. >Muh starvation Literally wasn't a thing after the 40's. Do you unironically think it was Holodohoax 24/365?
>>1011638 burger arrogance is a hell of a thing.
>>1011534 >Have a lower quality of life than countries with economies a tenth your size This is just a lie, straight up. In fact AES countries had significantly higher quality of life than capitalist economies of similar level of economic development.
Social demoracy ala the post-war model literally cannot happen with a big bad USSR to keep the porkies in check. China is refusing to export revolution and communism so idk people think they can return back to the past.
Oh, and gratz to the OP for pushing the goalpost from "SocDem is good" to "But the alternative IS EBIL!" My point in >>1011614 still stands. How do you cope with the fact that SocDem, as proven by history, is just a temporary period. Or are you some sort of DarkSouls theory of history retard that is happy with it, thinking it will just be epic cool socdem times interspersed with ebil neolib times?
>>1011622 The absolute size of an economy is a pretty bad predictor of the quality of life.
>>1011614 >Get Thatcher >the most far-right European leader of the last century Top kek
>>1011638 You're attacking the DPRK for being third world? How do you think first world countries got to be first world you absolute imbecile?
>>1011534 >works You can't even win elections, who cares.
(12.25 KB 317x267 Laff.jpg)
>>1011648 If you're going to point to the collapse of Wilson's govt in Britain, I can point to the collapse of the USSR. "The Labour party was voted out" is not the own you think it is. Especially not when you're arguing for the economic system of a country that fully collapsed.
>>1011663 And commies can win their revolutions? lmao.
>>1011670 The difference being it's an irrefutable and permanent fact of life that social democracy will always be voted out.
>>1011662 South Korea and Japan are two of the biggest economies in the world, and even Vietnam which was hammered by war and Western invasion has seen its economy eclipse North Korea's after liberalisation.
>>1011646 More conjecture
>>1011636 >literal neolib meme
>>1011639 >Holodohoax Commies denying basic historical reality, shouldn't have expected different tbf. >Idk, looks like a success story to me. And the Latin America comparison is nonsensical. The USSR industrialised in a manner that devastated the environment, and was horrid for worker's rights. There was a massive centralisation of political power that led to regular state violations of human rights and by the 80s they were just any other imperialist shithole but with a worse economy. It then collapsed into some of the most deadly austerity and neoliberalism seen in Europe. Not much of a succes that.
>>1011680 More cope, if communism is dead, succdemry is even deader since all you fags managed to do was to play good cop to commie bad cop.
>>1011685 We are done with your lies about phoney hoholdomor, social fascist.
>>1011677 >social democracy will always be voted out What's your solution for not having popular support? Totalitarianism? Being removed from govt in a free and fair election beats having the gestapo in red show up at your door and drag you away for not loving Stalin enough.
>>1011614 >Only reason why you saw any modicum of success was due to USSR existing on Europe's doorstep. This narrative always collapses in the face of the fact that Social Democracy collapsed in the 1970s and 80s, not the 1990s. You either have to assume that the bourgeoisie were psychic (in contrast to the insane warmongering of Thatcher and Reagan) and knew the USSR would implode, or make the (much more reasonable) assumption that they would rather destroy the world than carry on as they had. also I've yet to see a convincing argument that Neoliberalism hasn't, on the whole, reduced the rate of profit intentionally. More efficient competition will naturally lead to a lower rate of profit as a matter of policy.
>>1011681 >succdems are so bad even neolib ghouls can dunk on them
>>1011692 >the gestapo in red show up at your door and drag you away for not loving Stalin enough. Holy shit burger indoctrination is wild.
>>1011690 Ah yes, social fascist theory. Propagated by idiots that led the Nazis come to power because they didn't want to work with social democrats.
>>1011692 >giving a shit about any of this >in a system where 99.9% of propaganda outlets are owned by 20 people
>>1011695 Projection much? I'm not American
>>1011700 R E G U L A T I O N A N T I T R U S T
>>1011698 >idiots that led the Nazis come to power The social democrats. >because they didn't want to work with social democrats Yeah because you employed the fascists as your own goons for over a decade you dimwit.
>>1011702 Literally never going to happen and with zero precedence.
>>1011706 A bit like your communist utopia then.
>>1011663 Yeah, it's almost as if it takes time to build up a mass-movement and gain public support, whoever would have thought? Also this >>1011672
>>1011704 >The social democrats. it wasn't the social democrats who rejected a popular front with "social fascists" it wasn't the social democrats who went around saying "after hitler, our turn!" it wasn't the social democrats who allied with the nazis to try and bring down the Prussian state government in 1931 the SPD are indefensible shits, but the KPD managed a tragicomedy of fuckups before they found the correct line on naziism.
>>1011707 At least out of the two unachievable things I don't invite the neolibs over to fuck my wife every four years.
>>1011693 Communism bloc and nuke fright were already over by 1970s you ahistorical retard, by then everyone but the most spooked knew USSR presented no legitimate threat to capitalism.
Socdems betrayed what was going to be the most important revolution in workers history. Germany+Russia socialist bloc could've decided the outcome of world socialism in our favor. But no, they had to save the Weimar republic. Because of socdems we got the timeline of fascism and neoliberalism
>>1011712 >it wasn't the social democrats who allied with the nazis Wrong.
>>1011677 And it can be voted back in when it becomes popular again. Just look at Finland where Social Democrats recently voted to shorten the workweek.
>>1011720 Damn I kinda don't give a shit about your meme country.
>>1011720 kek, and they call commies and anarkiddies delusional.
>>1011660 Yes, because Hitler was socdem gang This post was made by-semi unironic gang
Why is it that every argument in favour of socialism is just ahistorical conjecture and rejection of reality? Could it be because socialists have no real arguments and they were radicalised by memes on a fucking imageboard?
>>1011724 >thing that actually happened heheh that'll never happen, stupid delusional socdems
>>1011731 >gets voted out again in 4 years LIKE A BOSS
>>1011729 Why is it that every argument in favour of social democracy is just ahistorical conjecture and rejection of reality? Could it be because social democrats are faggots?
>>1011714 >Communism bloc and nuke fright were already over by 1970s you ahistorical retard No they weren't you fucking mong. The UK government only started publishing "Protect and Survive" in 1980. "Threads" and "The Day After" were both 80s films, not earlier. Detente died with the proxy war in Afghanistan and the election of the warmongering Thatcher and Reagan. Most western intelligence agencies failed to predict the implosion of the USSR and were kind enough to publish their own paranoid military fantasies in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Military_Power for public consumption. If the Soviet Union posed no legitimate threat, they wouldn't have done their damnedest to kill it off.
>>1011737 Nah they are just tools of the porkie, regardles of wherever they understand it or not. So that means they have to drink neolib kool aid even harder than neolibs themself.
(47.90 KB 499x860 Bernie killed Rosa.jpg)
>>1011715 >Oh no, socdems killed muh heckin Rosarino 100 years ago! I guess we must conclude Bernie and Corbyn are evil even though they weren't even born yet when that happened!
>>1011715 grossly delusional. if the German workers movement wasn't strong enough to take on the Weimar republic, it wasn't strong enough to hold out against the blackest reaction that would be provoked among other European powers and the US. "oh if only x" might work for your stories on alternatehistory.com, but as a serious mode of analysis they do not work. you cannot build socialism atop a "just-so" story.
>>1011741 Why would we be mad about two irrelevant politicians with no control over anything?
>>1011717 name 3 examples
>>1011744 >betrays the revolution >the material conditions made me do it top kek
(107.85 KB 1005x289 keynesian consensus.jpg)
>>1011737 because in capitalist countries the historical precedent is on the side of social democrats.
>>1011751 With six hour work day you can now work two jobs. Goodie.
>>1011741 The socdems that killed Rosa are probably were in al likelihood way more far left than Bernie or Corbyn, though. So if anything those two are worse than the Rosa killers. Also unironically the SDP were still deserving of support after 1920ish. If Thalmann and co weren't buttmad about the backstabbing, they might have managed to build a good united front against the Conservatives and NSDAP.
>>1011749 >the material conditions made them do it unironically yes. the alternative is moralism. "betrayal" of a revolution requires a duty of loyalty to said revolution, which the SPD did not have. If you cannot defeat your enemy, that's your strategic and tactical fuckup and there's been a dismal failure to learn from it.
>>1011534 HEY RETARD MAYBE YOU CAN DO THIS SHIT IN YOUR RICH EX-IMPERIAL NATION. YOU THINK THEY CAN DO THIS SHIT IN HAITI. THATS WHY YOU NEED A PLANNED ECONOMY TO BUILD PRODUCTIVE FORCES FUCKING RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD RETARD
>>1011756 Stop larping as a third worlder, if you're on this website your country can do social-democracy.
>>1011747 To be fair, Bernie Sanders is still a marginal figure in U.S. politics, but his ideas are catching on pretty quickly. But Jeremy Corbyn can hardly be called "irrelevant" when he lead the second biggest party in the UK. He probably would have won if Brexit had't been stealing the show.
>>1011750 >Growth Nothing to do with Keynes vs Neolibs, but due to the falling rate of profit. >Unemployment Since when does the capitalist system view this as a negative? If anything its an argument for neoliberalism if you are a porky.
>>1011744 >if the German workers movement wasn't strong enough to take on the Weimar republic They did, that's the whole point of a betrayal, dumbass. Germany had the biggest and strongest labor movement in the world.
>>1011759 Different anon, but i am literally from "third world" country. Having an internet connection means shit.
>>1011759 Most of the world population is 3rd. If we're discussing socdem-socalism the fact that soc-dem can't be done in most of the world seems pretty important.
>>1011758 >muh Freikorps pathetic cope. the nazis were so irrelevant at the time that they don't even get a name check on "Spartacist uprising" or "Bremen Soviet Republic".
>>1011760 He also would have won if his party wasn't filled with literal glowies that he barely tried to fight. He also would have won if the UK state didn't organise a terrorist attack a month before the 2017 election in which they accused him of being a terrorist sympathiser
>>1011760 Both of those parties are closed systems and their ideas will never be allowed to enter mainstream politics (again). They did everything they could to stop Corbyn and won't make the same mistake twice.
>>1011762 If they were strong enough to take on the Weimar republic they would've won. They didn't, so they weren't. "The government of a bourgeois state is shooting me for trying to overthrow the bourgeois state" is many things, but it's not a betrayal.
>>1011765 >constantly groom the nazis via having a love affair with proto-fascist freikorps >eventually cheer said nazis into government >we dindu nuffin!
>>1011756 Evo Morales did a good job building the economy of Bolivia as a socdem. He did get coup'd though, so I'll give you that. Then again, Marxist-Lenist leaders have gotten coup'd too, so its not like that's a fool-proof method against imperialism either. A little off-topic, but I would argue that the best way to prevent imperialistic coups would be to replace the national army with decentralized, community-controlled militias. That way there is no central command for an imperialist power to hijack.
>>1011770 >cheer said nazis into government [citation needed]
>>1011753 I don't think he was buttmad, more "didn't trust people who backstab you" which seems reasonable. Also I don't see how a united front would work when people were brutalised into voting for the nazoids
>>1011773 When they actually do something to prevent being couped by fascists who will rape the land people like you call it muh authoritarian terror
>>1011774 I've provided enough examples for you. Go prove it wrong.
>>1011781 None of those are nazis and none of them involve SPD "cheerleading" Genuinely pathetic.
(1011.75 KB oh no no no.mp4)
>A KPD resolution described the "social fascists" [social democrats] as the "main pillar of the dictatorship of Capital". >In 1931, the Communist Party of Germany (KPD) referred to the Nazis as "working people's comrades". >In Prussia, the largest state of Germany, the KPD united with the Nazis in unsuccessful attempt to bring down the state government of SPD by means of a Landtag referendum. >In 1931, the KPD, under the leadership of Ernst Thälmann, internally used the slogan "After Hitler, our turn!" since it strongly believed that a united front against Nazis was not needed and that the workers would change their opinion and recognize that Nazism, unlike communism, did not offer a true way out of Germany's difficulties. >After Adolf Hitler's Nazi Party came to power in Germany, the KPD was outlawed and thousands of its members were arrested, including Thälmann. Those events made the Comintern did a complete turn on the question of alliance with social democrats and the theory of social fascism was abandoned. At the Seventh Congress of the Comintern in 1935, Georgi Dimitrov outlined the new policy of the popular front in his address "For the Unity of the Working Class Against Fascism".
>>1011784 Okay, sorry for making you feel bad about your retarded ideology destroying Europe because you couldn't resist betraying the people that put you in power.
>>1011769 The Weimar government was a symptom, not a cause. Social democracy abandoning the socialist revolution was the cause.
(593.39 KB 1915x1273 59c9138a85600a38003b3bc0.jpg)
>>1011789 >He thinks i'm a socdem just for taking him to task on his lack of historical knowledge
>>1011792 >historical knowledge is when you CTRL+F wikipedia articles for the word "Nazi" lmfao
>>1011779 There are more ways to prevent fascist coups besides putting people into gulags or restricting freedom of speech. I already gave a non-authoritarian solution, although I will admit that no one has tried it yet. I would like to see someone try it though. Pretty much anything is preferable to gulags.
>>1011793 an improvement from linking wikipedia articles without reading them at all while pretending the freikorps and the nazis were the same thing
Then why are there fascists in my country? Why is my wage going down?
>>1011796 If I went back in time and killed Hitler he would be replaced by another Hitler from the freikorps, you're pretending that they aren't joined at the hip
>>1011797 >Then why are there fascists in my country? The presence of fascists in a country means jackshit if they can't actually take power. The UK, for example, has had fascists movements since the 1930s yet none of them have ever come close to seizing power.
>>1011798 Conjoined twins are still separate individuals. When the question is "Who brought the NSDAP to power" in 1933, it's truly pathetic to imagine that the only possible way to prevent that specific outcome was to time travel back to 1919, particularly when the KDP were co-operating with the Nazis in some respects as late as 1931.
>>1011794 Almost every country used labour camps as prisons and got rid of them around the same time. If you think putting people trying to take down the socialist in prison is authoritarian then you should go live in the woods and return to monke and stop bothering humans
>>1011594 Because that's impossible. Economic power is political power. Politicians get cushy jobs from big corporations if they did their bidding. Big corporations use their economic leverage to force the government to do things by theatening to leave, fire workers, close factories, etc. The rich control all the media and use that media to promote their interests and villify everything else. If you think the only problem is a corporation donating directly to a political party then it's just proof you are naive as all hell and there is no way you could ever be convinced with rational arguments and real life proof. If social democracy is so great, why have all social democracies fallen from grace? Why do you want to live in a society based on constant conflict between the majority and a few parasitic capitalists? Needing constant, day in day out, organising, protesting, fighting, striking, just to keep minimum wage on a livable level? I don't want that society. I don't want to live under the modern version of a king who owns the land with no justification whatsoever.
>>1011800 Ok fuckhead. Why is the proto fascist party, who demonizes everything as a leftist conspiracy, a major party in parliament and why do they have the most members out of any party? Despite this country being one of the original social democracies?
>>1011808 People who are actively seeking to overthrow the government are reasonable to imprison, but not just anyone who disagrees with the what the government does. And even with insurrectionists, we should be humane and seek to reform them rather than put them in brutal forced labor camps.
>>1011809 And to add to your comment, look at the capability of politicians to convince people that they are doing social democracy when they're not even doing that. A shitload of western libleft morons are actually convinced jacinda ardern is anything but a charismatic neoliberal furthering the imperialist agenda just because AWW SHE'S SO CUTE AND CHARISMATIC AND DOWN TO EARTH AND SAYS PEOPLE SHOULD BE NICE!!!
>Rosa Luxemburg drew up her founding programme and presented it on 31 December 1918. In this programme, she pointed out that the communists could never take power without the clear support of the majority of the people. On 1 January she again demanded that the KPD participate in the planned elections, but she was outvoted. >The revolt was improvised and small-scale and was quickly crushed by the superior firepower of government troops. Berlin was largely undisturbed. Long-distance trains continued to run on time and newspapers remained on sale, as the rebels passively confined themselves to only a few select locations >Insurgents seized key buildings, which led to a standoff with the government. During the following two days, however, the strike leadership (known as the ad-hoc "Revolution Committee") failed to resolve the classic dichotomy between militarized revolutionaries committed to a genuinely new society and reformists advocating deliberations with the government If world communism truly hinged on an uprising as shabby as this then there was truly never any hope.
>>1011812 Again you're just rattling off cold war propaganda with zero sources. This bullshit may work in your college socialist club but we aren't going to take that bullshit as read
>>1011809 >Politicians get cushy jobs from big corporations if they did their bidding. Big corporations use their economic leverage to force the government to do things by theatening to leave, fire workers, close factories, etc. The rich control all the media and use that media to promote their interests and villify everything else. The solution here is regulation and trade unions. Don't allow politicians to have any non-public sector job for a few years after leaving office, put them up with a pension in the meantime. >The rich control all the media and use that media to promote their interests and villify everything else. Only because of monopolies that can be broken up by the state. You can set strict regulations on coverage of political candidates etc. and having publicly owned broadcasters to set the standard. >Needing constant, day in day out, organising, protesting, fighting, striking, just to keep minimum wage on a livable level? That's literally just politics though. You're asking for a system where the left can be in power and we can achieve our goals without ever working for them, that's incredibly naive.
>>1011811 >Tories are proto-fascist Where are their Brownshirts? When was their Beer Hall Putsch? Where is their voter intimidation? When did they outlaw other parties? Bear in mind that the NSDAP outlawed all other parties as soon after their coalition got a majority in the Reichstag.
>>1011816 >You're asking for a system where the left can be in power and we can achieve our goals without ever working for them Are you really surprised?
>>1011816 >Only because of monopolies that can be broken up by the state. Nigga it doesn't matter if it's a monopoly or small ones, they're all owned by people of the bourgoies class. 3 Vs 100 isn't a difference when there is plenty of bourgoiesie in the world.
>>1011816 >The solution here is regulation and trade unions. Don't allow politicians to have any non-public sector job for a few years after leaving office, put them up with a pension in the meantime. Explain how you make the politicians vote to ban themselves from being a politician
>>1011815 So who do you think is reasonable to imprison?
>>1011816 >That's literally just politics though. You're asking for a system where the left can be in power and we can achieve our goals without ever working for them, that's incredibly naive. Bitch. If there was no bourgoies class who needed wages to go down in order to profit more, higher wages would litterally be in the interest of every person in society, just like how roads existing is in the interest of every person.
>>1011534 I remember thinking like you before. what made me move more in favour of democratic socialism is what we have seen in the last 50 years : despite having lost quite some ground to workers, the bourgeoisie had reconvered most of it now. how can we preserve what we or other generations have fought for against the bourgeoisie ? now, when I think about it, there is only one conclusion that comes to my mind. getting rid of the bourgeoisie as a class.
>>1011823 I've already said that, then you come out with your Robert Conquest bullshit.
>>1011828 So you think that only fascists and other class traitors should be imprisoned? Because they weren't the only ones who got gulag'd: >The Gulag is recognized as a major instrument of political repression in the Soviet Union. The camps housed a wide range of convicts, from petty criminals to political prisoners, large numbers of whom were convicted by simplified procedures, such as by NKVD troikas or by other instruments of extrajudicial punishment. In 1918–22, the agency was administered by Cheka, followed by the GPU (1922–23), OGPU (1923–34), later by the NKVD (1934–46), and in the final years by the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD). The Solovki prison camp, the first corrective labor camp constructed after the revolution, was established in 1918 and legalized by a decree, "On the creation of the forced-labor camps" on April 15, 1919. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulag Then of course there's the thorny business of determining who is a fascist and/or a class traitor. When that responsibility is given to the wrong people, those terms can end up being used rather, ah, broadly.
>>1011818 Oh, I should also mention that the Conservative Party has been around since 1834, but they still have not once gone fascist in all those years.
>>1011833 Cry me a fucking river. Social democlap reformist organisations like extinction rebellion are on terror group lists next to Isis. 1. Most of us aren't Stalinists 2. We will figure it out 3. We are already being repressed in most capitalist countries, we can do better than what we have now.
>>1011833 Imagine being this retarded. It just means prison. USSR had prison, which in fact at that time were more progressive than the rest of the world because they were trying to rehabilitate prisoners by teaching them trades, paying salary and not putting them into 5x5 cages with other 20 guys.
>>1011818 I'm not from England you autistic Anglo Holy shit do you English speaking demons ever think to think beyond your own shithole of a country?
>>1011833 You respond to a post accusing you of using cold war propaganda by using... more cold war propaganda
>>1011840 You're the one who brought up the UK you moron
>>1011839 Uhm, holy shit, uhm, sweaty, uhm, don't you know that uhm, teaching people trades and paying them for societally valuable work in prison is litterally slavery? Cringe. You should put them in litteral cages instead and beat them to death for owning a phone, duh.
>>1011840 tbf in >>1011800 he says "The UK" and you respond "this country, which was one of the original social democracies". It's easy to consider "this country" as an acceptance of "The UK" as the country being discussed. (Since to introduce a different country you'd say "Well over here," "in my country," or something.)
>>1011839 >Just some low quality tankie apologism Yeah whatever man, deny the Holodomor while you're at it if it floats your boat. >>1011840 >I'm not from England you autistic Anglo Oh my bad, I thought you were talking about the UK since I was talking about it. That said, what country are you from? I'm actually not British myself, but American.
>>1011849 No you dumb fuck you brought up the UK. Holy shit do you actually have brain damage? >>1011800 Here. You replied to ME bringing up the UK as a shitty example to try to justify your position. I never said anything about the UK nor was the conversation about the UK because you just used it as an offhand example.
>>1011852 >deny the Holodomor while you're at it if it floats your boat. Do the sources of claims mean nothing to you? You will believe anything about the USSR as long as it's parroted on wikipedia or in western media? You are unbelievably dense >I'm actually not British myself, but American. That much is obvious, social fascist
>>1011850 Did you know that Solzhenitsin (the famous guy who wrote antisoviet Archipelago Gulag) had cancer and was successfully treated form it in labor camp? Such inhumane system, right?
>>1011534 There is still unemployment and exploitation of labour under social democracy.
Im done talking to these socdems. Just like real life it is easier to convince and talk with a proto fascist than with a social democrat. Social democrats just go into a spasm about "muh Stalin muh gulags" and "at least we are going somewhere" while declining back to 1920sliving and labour standards. I fucking hate social democrats so much. There is litterally no convincing them. Everyone who is a social democrat by now has already made the explicit choice to reject communist. Every other person to the right of social democrats at least has the option of considering the fact that the logical conclusion of the goals of social democracy is communism. That if every answer you can give to fixing capitalism is either "regulate it so much it's basically state run", "nationalise it" or "break up companies into progressively smaller chunks so the owners have less power", despite this going against the core logic of capitalism, that maybe you should just go all the way and do away with capitalism, that you can't make a plane out of a car by hammering it really hard. But social democrats already evaluated that dilemma and for some reason still chose to choose the side of the bourgoiesie. Social democrats are truly more dangerous than fascists sometimes. Thälmann was right all along.
(272.32 KB 822x532 based leftypol user.png)
>Just like real life it is easier to convince and talk with a proto fascist than with a social democrat
>>1011852 >Yeah whatever man, deny the Holodomor while you're at it if it floats your boat. I guess you have nothing to say on the previous topic, so you gallop to another asinine claim and when i debunk it you will just switch to another, eventually going full circle. Been there done that. Stay on topic and admit you know shit about USSR history.
>>1011861 I have litterally converted two proto fascists to communism in real life and never managed to do the same with a social democrat. Social democrats think the same way as neoliberals, just from a proletarian class perspective.
>>1011855 >Do the sources of claims mean nothing to you? You will believe anything about the USSR as long as it's parroted on wikipedia or in western media? You are unbelievably dense So what better sources do you have? Soviet propaganda? >That much is obvious, social fascist I never even explicitly stated my ideology. I don't even cling strongly to any particular ideology, I just go for whatever works and is feasible. I mean, anarchism sounds nice, but the political climate in my country isn't really conducive to it right now. So social democracy will do for now. >>1011856 I'm sure the Nazis cured a couple of diseases in their camps too. Does that invalidate all of the atrocities committed?
>>1011860 Extremely based
>>1011861 >>1011864 That anon isn't even a socdem he's just baiting.
>>1011865 Ok retard I'll spell it out for you. The holodomor is a hoax propagated by Nazis in both your shithole country and in Ukraine. The same people who rounded up jews in the USSR to be sent off to die. >I mean, anarchism sounds nice, but the political climate in my country isn't really conducive to it right now. So social democracy will do for now. This nicely sums up both your complete theoretical ignorance as well as your complete inability to see how your pathetic movement isn't achieving anything and is being subsumed into the imperialist hegemony. >I'm sure the Nazis cured a couple of diseases in their camps too. Does that invalidate all of the atrocities committed? Oh, this has to be bait right? Not only comparing socialists to nazis but saying the nazis would treat people they put in concentration camps?
Social democracy is objectively the moderate wing of fascism.
>>1011865 >I'm sure the Nazis cured a couple of diseases in their camps too Ah yes, im sure they cured diseases in their extermination camps
(198.63 KB 850x400 Starmer 3.png)
(202.65 KB 850x400 Starmer 12.png)
>>1011873 based
>>1011879 what point are you making here
Look at this amazing meme I found on r/sandersforpresident fellow radical leftists. :) Remember to vote for Biden so we can have chairman sanders for the health subcommittee.
(789.24 KB 585x859 sf4wx57q67q51.png)
>>1011534 >Radical social democracy works Take a fucking look at what happened in Bolivia and tell me revolution isn't needed.
>>1011880 no point, radio.
(974.75 KB Glow.webm)
>>1011594 The media is a thing that exists. >>1011607 >Not liquidating our enemies <More desirable >>1011622 (picrel)
>>1011865 >I'm sure the Nazis cured a couple of diseases in their camps too. Yes they did treat the people who's illness made them unfit for working. But if diesease was too grave or required too much effort, then you were killed or experimented on. Cancer was a death sentence there. >>1011874 >extermination camps You had literal death camps like Treblinka and work camps like Madhausen. This is important cause you could organise yourself some treatment in the latter >>1011868 >the nazis would treat people they put in concentration camps? Primary role od medics was to prevent dieseases and stuff like lice from spreading. Treatment was secondary and was mostly about letting people lay in bed for a week before going back to work.
>>1011598 >I'm not a socialist, I'm a social democrat. then you are not radical socdem, lmao. you should read something about history of social democracy before using big boy words
(39.54 KB 410x598 BASED DEPARTMENT.jpg)
>state good corporations bad succdems are literally reverse lolberts. disgraceful.
>>1011534 obvious bait, OP is a faggot and a liberal
>>1011925 t. anarkiddie
>>1011925 >State good >Socdem I'd say more like "Paper in ballot good"
>>1012013 communism and state don't mix though.
>>1011534 Central planning worked well enough in the USSR and today we have far better tools to carry it out.
>>1011534 I don't know how you can say "it works" when Jeremy Corbyn is a prime example of why it doesn't. If the government don't want you in power, they can make sure you don't get into power. Corbyn's campaign was literally sabotaged by both the media and the party and the military even threatened a coup.
>>1011868 >Ok retard I'll spell it out for you. The holodomor is a hoax propagated by Nazis in both your shithole country and in Ukraine. The same people who rounded up jews in the USSR to be sent off to die. It isn't just Nazis that say the Holodomor was a real thing. Pretty much every reputable historian I know of says it was a real thing. The only major point of contention I know of was whether or not it was deliberate and thus a genocide. >This nicely sums up both your complete theoretical ignorance as well as your complete inability to see how your pathetic movement isn't achieving anything and is being subsumed into the imperialist hegemony. At least socdems and demsocs are actually building multi-tendency leftist mass-movement in my country. The dozen or so communist parties are busy larping as revolutionaries while demsocs are actually getting people elected and making an impact on our politics. >Oh, this has to be bait right? Not only comparing socialists to nazis but saying the nazis would treat people they put in concentration camps? Firstly, you have to recognize that "of the 18 million who were sent to the Gulag from 1930 to 1953, roughly 1.5 to 1.7 million perished there or as a result of their detention". Secondly, I will admit that I did some digging and could not find any specific instances of Nazis curing any diseases, so I'll give you that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulag
>>1011884 Revolutions get coup'd and sabotaged too. Just look at Burkina Faso under Thomas Sankara.
>>1012162 >If the government don't want you in power, they can make sure you don't get into power. Corbyn's campaign was literally sabotaged by both the media and the party and the military even threatened a coup. The same shit would happen to a revolution you know. Also, tell me more about how much more success revolutionary movements have had in the UK than Jeremy Corbyn's socdem movment.
>>1011884 Morales was democratically re-elected. He was ousted via a foreign coup. I fail to see how Bolivia proves your point.
>>1011603 >moves out of the country yeah ok
>>1012028 That's some tough talk form someone with a socdem/demsoc party flag
>>1012228 >He was ousted via a foreign coup. >I fail to see how Bolivia proves your point. yeah I wonder whats the point mmm
>>1012222 >Pretty much every reputable historian I know of says it was a real thing. The only major point of contention I know of was whether or not it was deliberate and thus a genocide. yes exactly it happened and it's irrelevant > The dozen or so communist parties are busy larping as revolutionaries while demsocs are actually getting people elected and making an impact on our politics. omg they are vooting and participating in the status quo how heroic
>>1011555 >surplus value keeps being extracted Cool, people are living well, why should I care moralfag? Evo Morales is more of a SocDem than a socialist yet you guys simp for him because he has this commie aesthetic. Grow a fucking spine. >>1011884 Open a fucking history book and find out what happened with the communist countries. What do y'all have nowadays? DPRK and Cuba and that's it.And even then half of you (leftcoms, maoists, trots) do not consider this places actual existing socialism.
>>1011617 >The tendency of the rate of profit to fall has never even been documented, just theorised by economists. uhhh. no there empirical evidence
>>1011603 are you aware of any of history since the 1970s and onwards?
>>1011534 >social democracy >central planned you assume it has to be either of these two
>>1011809 Based answer >If social democracy is so great, why have all social democracies fallen from grace? as a britbong this resonates deeply in my soul
why do socdems think they can build a bridge between bourgeoise and proletariats that will never be burned by opposing class interests?
>>1012425 I'm not anti-rev but your case would make sense if the coup wasn't backed by the biggest of western imperialist powers.
>>1011534 I bet op worships nords. what a faggot.
(873.06 KB 2700x3900 EkWRL5tXgAAeW40.png)
>This is what succdems actually believe
(135.95 KB 723x960 enver_hoxha_118.jpg)
>>1012483 >The social-democrats consider the capitalist state as a state above classes, as an interpreter and champion of the interests of society as a whole, they are opposed to breaking up the old bourgeois state machine, they are opposed to the dictatorship of the proletariat, which, according to them, is the negation of democracy, is a totalitarian rule and so on and so forth. And the revisionists spread the illusions that the capitalist state may change its class nature, that it may become a state that will express not only the interests of the bourgeoisie but also those of the proletariat and of the laboring masses, they say that Lenin's thesis on the indispensability of breaking up the bourgeois state apparatus must be modified, that the dictatorship of the proletariat is an outdated idea, or, at most, suitable only for backward countries, that it may take not only various forms but also quite a different content. Social democrats and fascists have a strangely similar view of the state
>>1012483 They aren't Marxists
>>1011534 In the real world self described Social Democratic parties just act as the left wing of capital and eventually liberalize over time out of necessity, while openly ML parties just do what Social Democrats said they would. ML in reality is succdem, succdem in reality is just liberalism with, at best, sovereign wealth fund characteristics and at worst austerity.
>>1012243 They fought hard to get where they are (only socdem normal state in a Region of night mare Us puppets) so they have the respect of us anons
>>1012656 With this line of thought Posadists are simply trots, so what group would act like them?
Why not both? You can make a country democratic socialist through social democratic policies as a transition. For example all failed businesses instead of being bailed out as their current form could be bailed out to be turned into coops. Private businesses could be restricted to the point they are no longer the dominating portion of the economy.
>>1011534 Have fun dying of climate change and exploiting the third world
>>1012636 Unironically, yes
>>1012425 Socialist countries can be couped as well, and MAS are already coming back to power.
>>1012725 This is what Lenin proposes in "On cooperation" and i'd say it's standard ML praxis especially after taking power in really backwards countries.
>>1013163 Mas is coming back to power after waging a year long struggle with 15 day of general strike and 30 dead and dozens of injuries though, so it's still WAY more militant than your average Western succdem.

Delete
Report

no cookies?