this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2024
3 points (100.0% liked)

Memes

53557 readers
588 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)
[–] bi_tux@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

don't worry, the soviets joined ww2 as well

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Yep, and beat the Nazis.

[–] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Lol, you mean the state capitalists? You're not making the (weak, "whatabout") point you think you are, but hey, your confidence in your wilful ignorance in defence of those exploiting you for profit* is almost impressive! (but not really) 🙄😂

*E: and guess what, I don't even need to know where you live to say this, because every working class person on the planet is currently being exploited for profit through both labour and war, but don't let that get in the way of the bootlicking you've come here to do in self-destructive defence of your beloved capitalism (I threw up in my mouth a little)...

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Calling something state capitalist when capitalism heavily relies on the state by default shows you need to hit the books on how capitalism actually functions.

[–] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Pretending something that was never stateless, classless, and moneyless but rather quite the fucking opposite (E: and was never going to end up there, either) was communism, shows you need to hit the books on how communism is actually intended to function.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

The USSR never pretended it was Stateless, Classless, or Moneyless.

You have no clue what you're talking about, how Communism is "supposed" to function, how Marx, Engels, Lenin, and so forth believed it to come into function, or how the USSR functioned.

If you want basics on how the USSR functioned, I can recommend some books, or if you want a basic intro of Marxism I can recommend some works as well.

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

I didn't call it communism, and neither did the ruling communist parties. Transitional socialism is the proper word.

[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

He already said capitalists, state capitalism is still capitalism, no matter if you call it communism.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The USSR was Socialist, what on Earth are you talking about?

[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

and North Korea is democratic, it's in the name after all.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

When did I say names determine structures? Even then, the DPRK is fairly democratic in actuality.

[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

oh you are a fucking tankie, makes sense.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

I'm a Marxist-Leninist, if you equate taking theory seriously to whatever caricature of a tankie you hold in your mind-palace then I don't know what to tell you.

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Calling something state capitalist when capitalism heavily relies on the state by default shows you need to hit the books on how capitalism actually functions.

[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Calling something state capitalist when capitalism heavily relies on the state by default

I have no idea what you are trying to say with this, but perhaps you should look things up before pompously trying to diss people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Perhaps you should read theory. The USSR was State Capitalist with respect to the NEP, but was Socialist for its entire existence

[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I can only read 2 pages from what you linked, and am not paying 40 dollars to read the rest, certainly not when they already display a gross oversimplification and anti-Marxist definition of Capitalism (critically leaving out competition, Capital accumulation, and so forth), and therefore take a vulgar revisionist stance. There's no analysis of class dynamics, just an over-reliance on the presense of Wage Labor.

Please read theory, I can make recommendations for the basics if you'd like.

[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There’s no analysis of class dynamics

We do not think there was a struggle between capitalism and communism across the twentieth century. For us, communism never ended in that century because it never arose there. Our conclusion is built on the fact that communism –if understood as a distinct, non-capitalist class structure– was neither a significant, nor a sustained part of the history of any of the nations conventionally labeled communist.

emphasis mine, their entire argument is based on the fact that the USSR lacked the class dynamics of communism, thus weren't communist.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Nobody, not even the USSR, claims they reached upper-stage Communism. They were Communist in ideology, and Socialist in structure. Their argument is a left-anticommunist argument against a claim nobody made.