Log in

View Full Version : USA: The real "Stalinist" state



Amal
24th March 2012, 08:29
http://revolutionaryfrontlines.wordpress.com/2012/03/23/american-protesters-discovering-they-dont-have-the-rights-and-freedoms-they-thought-they-had/
http://revolutionaryfrontlines.wordpress.com/2012/03/23/theres-a-north-american-strategy-to-take-away-the-right-to-mass-protest-michael-ratner/
http://revolutionaryfrontlines.wordpress.com/2012/03/23/nba-miami-heat-players-make-hoodie-protest-over-murder-of-trayvon-martin/
USA is now slowly become a very good "Stalinist" state by their own standard definition.

Goblin
24th March 2012, 21:36
They have always been a Stalinist state...

Comrade Samuel
24th March 2012, 21:56
NO.

Rooster
24th March 2012, 21:59
The USA is heading towards being state-capitalist? :confused:

ColonelCossack
24th March 2012, 22:01
In what way shape or form is America "Stalinist"...

It escapes me.

marl
24th March 2012, 22:10
The USA is heading towards being state-capitalist? :confused:

I guess corporations that own the means of production also own our government.

Rafiq
24th March 2012, 22:10
I think the over all usage of the term "Stalinism" on Bourgeois-Liberal democratic states is really, really stupid. Police state, cracks protests they deem are threatening toward their class rule are qualitative characteristics of all Bourgeois states, whether they be "Stalinist", Fascist or Liberal Democratic. It's called protecting the rule of your class.

though, the calling of the United States "Stalinist" can really sort out who the Radicals are and who the Bourgeois-Liberals are.

gorillafuck
24th March 2012, 22:11
this is ridiculous. for one, it's equating authoritarianism in general with stalinism. for two, the authoritarian behavior of the US towards the occupy movement and black people in america is not reflective of the stalin-era soviet union.

Rafiq
24th March 2012, 22:11
I guess corporations that own the means of production also own our government.

No, "Corporations" are just another form of Bourgeois dictatorship, a more organized, and efficient one in defending their class rule. The state has always been controlled by the Bourgeoisie.

But in times of deep crisis, the state and the bourgeois openly cooperate, as such was demonstrated in Fascism.

Rafiq
24th March 2012, 22:12
this is ridiculous. for one, it's equating authoritarianism in general with stalinism. for two, the authoritarian behavior of the US towards the occupy movement and black people in america is not reflective of the stalin-era soviet union.

I think the "Authoritarian-Libertarian" dichotomony is also ludicrous. Every form of class rule can be categorized as Authoritarian, it's useless.

Sir Comradical
24th March 2012, 22:22
Don't insult Stalinism.

ВАЛТЕР
24th March 2012, 22:30
It isn't in any way, shape, or form becoming "Stalinist".

Liberal nonsense...:rolleyes:

Rooster
24th March 2012, 22:32
I guess corporations that own the means of production also own our government.

Well, that wouldn't really make it state-capitalist. They could own or dictate to the state but that doesn't make them the state.

Rusty Shackleford
24th March 2012, 23:01
¿WHAT. THE. FUCK. AM. I. READING?



fuck.

Franz Fanonipants
24th March 2012, 23:05
this is the best thread

l'Enfermé
24th March 2012, 23:09
No, it's not.

Rusty Shackleford
24th March 2012, 23:17
No, it's not.
now it is.

Hit The North
24th March 2012, 23:22
Don't insult Stalinism.

Stalinism is an insult.

gorillafuck
25th March 2012, 02:22
I think the "Authoritarian-Libertarian" dichotomony is also ludicrous. Every form of class rule can be categorized as Authoritarian, it's useless.I know but it's an easy way of saying heavy handed, basically.

Amal
25th March 2012, 03:38
Sorry to say, but most have failed to understand the sarcasm. I just want to point out US rulers are doing the same thing that they previously termed as "Stalinist".

Franz Fanonipants
25th March 2012, 04:05
Sorry to say, but most have failed to understand the sarcasm. I just want to point out US rulers are doing the same thing that they previously termed as "Stalinist".

yeah but like a good amount of revleft can't be bothered to get hot around the collar over "stalinism" cus we don't really fear/hate/despise the soviet union.

Rafiq
25th March 2012, 04:53
I know but it's an easy way of saying heavy handed, basically.

Still, practically all states are heavy handed when they need to be.

MustCrushCapitalism
25th March 2012, 05:20
My liberal bullshit detector is going crazy.

Please, don't continue the bourgeois tactic of giving Josef Stalin a bad name. The USA is in no way a "Stalinist" state.

Ocean Seal
25th March 2012, 05:27
Can we please stop using the word Stalinist to describe everything we dislike. Its like when Lenin said the words petit-bourgeois, Kaustyan, and Menshevik, its gets tiring.