Left Reformism

[Comrade Kaile]

due to it being about left wing im not sure this belongs here but oh well

many of my comrades have debated about leftist reformism, and i understand that trying to change the capitalist system is about as likely as creating artificial petrol, but i dont understand why they state these things... one of them actually stated that reformism had had its chance to prove itself and failed... i got quite confused

so id like to ask what are the reasons and underlying factors that makes socialist reformism impossible.

[ZeroNowhere]

Mainly because it's an oxymoron.

[Comrade Kaile]

ok scratch the socialism crap, but i mean why cant you reform the system to your own needs?

[Steve_j]

ok scratch the socialism crap, but i mean why cant you reform the system to your own needs?

It can be reformed to a certin extent, the internal antagonism of capitalism are constantly causing the system to reform itself and as such the nature of capitalism develops.

As many of us here are looking to eradicate capitalism in order to unite workers with the product of their labour, any reforms to this extent will threaten the existance of capitalism itself, thus capitalism will (and does) deploy any means at its disposal to crush such reforms.

Look at the bullshit comming out of american media directed at obamba, simply because he wants to reform health care :blink:.

Look at the numerous coups in latin america backed by capitalist countries and the dupport they recieved from the rich in those countries.

And in regards to workers wanting control of the means of production look at the capitlist reponse in germany, italy and spain :(

[Havet]

Most "left" reforms are unsustainable in the current system, and end up doing more harm to the working class, as well as promoting worker dependence on a massive oppressive centralized institution instead of promoting worker movement and organization (and in some cases restricting it) such as cooperatives, communes, unions, etc.

I am absolutely anti-reformist because those who are already in power, in the way the current system is made, always start with an advantage over those who seek to change the system. Besides, as RGacky3 often says, the ability to achieve power for our own purposes does not justify the power the current "leaders" have.

For me its counter-economics to prepare for the revolution, or the revolution altogether, or seasteading, or just getting the hell out of that place to a more free existing place.

Also, I already answered this question in my thread, "Why Anarchists Don't Go Into Politics (http://www.revleft.com/vb/why-anarchists-dont-t114834/index.html?t=114834)". Check it out if you wish.

[Comrade Kaile]

thakyou for that, i think i will check out that link

[IcarusAngel]

If reformism has failed why then do living standards in the twenty-first century far outweigh living standards during the so-called "Gilded Age," even while we are reaching Gilded Age levels of inequality? How have Latin Americans brought better standards? By reforms.

I would like to see someone put forth proof that reforms don't work.

One example might be the existence of right-wing Libertarians, who are trying to undue everything workers (including socialists) struggled for in the twentieth century, and have succeeded to some extent. Another would be the success of corporations in mounting a highly successful campaign against the reforms, that has funded these Libertarians.

Actually, this thinking is along the lines of hayenmill's statement above.

However, I tend to believe that this is more likely the failure of humanity. There is nothing to show that Libertarians couldn't come back in a free-society that has done away with capitalism.

There is also ENORMOUS problems with the claim of some on Revleft that "things have to get worse before things get better." This is almost as bad as Misean lines of thinking. If you look at history, this either leads to reformism or conditions much worse than even American capitalism.

[eyedrop]

Two main factors for me is capital flight and the need to attract investments. These two factors always pushes all the nations towards the lowest "denominator" and is always pushing every reformist government to the right.

One shouldn't dismiss the welfare state though, even if it has it's limitations. It is hard pressed to slowly start seizing the means of production, or allow them to be seized by the economical blackmail.