Marxist-leninist nations.

[Bee]

I'm having trouble coming to a understanding of the economic systems (and for that matter political systems) of Marxist-Leninist countries such as the Soviet union and the People's Republic of China: State Capitalism? State Socialism? Socialism I have distorted views on because of anti-communist propaganda? Economic aberrations due to famine and warfare?

I'm welcoming any analysis from any tendency of socialism regarding these nations (Marxism-Leninism, Trotskyism, Anarchism, left-communism, eurocommunism, Democratic socialism etc etc).


(I had trouble deciding which forum or sub-forum to put this in so a admin may feel free to move this to a more appropriate place).

[lutraphile]

I'd say state capitalism. And three of the four nominally Marxist-Leninist countries have regressed from even that- Cuba being the exception.

Recent article I liked on the subject http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/31567-socialism-means-abolishing-the-distinction-between-bosses-and-employees

[Zanters]

No clue, since I never studied the economic systems of those countries, all I know is that people from multiple tendencies shove these words at me, like I am going to accept one someday without finding out myself.

But ya, they're state capitalist :rolleyes:

[Blake's Baby]

Yup, state-capitalist from me, but that doesn't actually explain anything.

In my view, capitalism is the generalisation of commodity production through wage labour. In which case, it's probably easiest to call those regimes 'capitalist'.

[Os Cangaceiros]

You may be interested in this:

https://libcom.org/library/what-was-ussr-aufheben

[Bee]

Thanks everyone!

[swims with the fishes]

not state capitalist. labour was not a commodity. prices of ussr commodities on world market determined by values in capitalist countries. i believe this is a source of confusion

[QueerVanguard]

I'm having trouble coming to a understanding of the economic systems (and for that matter political systems) of Marxist-Leninist countries such as the Soviet union and the People's Republic of China: State Capitalism? State Socialism? Socialism I have distorted views on because of anti-communist propaganda? Economic aberrations due to famine and warfare?

I'm welcoming any analysis from any tendency of socialism regarding these nations (Marxism-Leninism, Trotskyism, Anarchism, left-communism, eurocommunism, Democratic socialism etc etc).


(I had trouble deciding which forum or sub-forum to put this in so a admin may feel free to move this to a more appropriate place).

Where there are "nations" there is no socialism. Lesson #1

[Slippers]

Ignore the anarchist tendency and flag I literlaly don't know what I am anymore and it's not important.


Where there are "nations" there is no socialism. Lesson #1

For me "socialism" entails public (not state but literally public) control of the means of production and places of work.

I don't think that requires statelessness.

I advocate statelessness but don't think that saying anything that exists in a nationstate isn't socialism because states still exist. That never seems to me to be a very nuanced or useful definition.

In my (admittedly limited) understanding, the statelessness is an aspect of full communism? Though I don't know maybe that's a ML point of view I do not know.

Or in this context do you take communism and socialism to be the same thing?

[QueerVanguard]

Ignore the anarchist tendency and flag I literlaly don't know what I am anymore and it's not important.



For me "socialism" entails public (not state but literally public) control of the means of production and places of work.

I don't think that requires statelessness.

I advocate statelessness but don't think that saying anything that exists in a nationstate isn't socialism because states still exist. That never seems to me to be a very nuanced or useful definition.

In my (admittedly limited) understanding, the statelessness is an aspect of full communism? Though I don't know maybe that's a ML point of view I do not know.

Or in this context do you take communism and socialism to be the same thing?

as long as you have a state you can't have communism. to me there is no difference between socialism and communism. as long as there is a state you have classes

[Slippers]

Well there I disagree with you. At least; I think socialism and communism are different things. And it's useful linguistically to have them be different things (to have socialism mean a specific mode of production and system that is not capitalism) or else I feel like you're going to sound utopian - always saying that "this isn't socialist because nationstates still exist somewhere".

I don't think a worldwide revolution is going to take any short amount of time.

[QueerVanguard]

Well there I disagree with you. At least; I think socialism and communism are different things. And it's useful linguistically to have them be different things (to have socialism mean a specific mode of production and system that is not capitalism) or else I feel like you're going to sound utopian - always saying that "this isn't socialist because nationstates still exist somewhere".

I don't think a worldwide revolution is going to take any short amount of time.

skeptical of world revolution, belief socialism is different from communism. makes sense why anarchism appeals to you.

[Slippers]

skeptical of world revolution, belief socialism is different from communism. makes sense why anarchism appeals to you.

I said it'd take no short amount of time. But by all means; do resort to personal attacks rather than try to answer my questions.

[QueerVanguard]

I said it'd take no short amount of time. But by all means; do resort to personal attacks rather than try to answer my questions.

so you follow conservative logic of gradualism instead of the dialectic which is rapid? Crapot-kin would be proud, That was my point.

[Sewer Socialist]

Well, Marxists (excluding MLs / Stalinists) would say: Socialism begins when capitalism is defeated - they do not coexist. The state is an apparatus for class rule; this includes a revolutionary state, where proletarians rule, as well as a liberal state, where the bourgeoisie rules.

Only with the defeat of capitalism do we have the possibility of eliminating class, including the proletariat. Socialism is the abolition of class, the market, etc. Maintaining the usage of markets and money provides the framework for capital accumulation, economic antagonisms (aka class), etc.

If I understand it correctly, Stalin's justification for the USSR being "socialist" was that it was moving towards socialism, that is was in the process of eliminating class and all that. I disagree with this assessment (as well as the idea that it was moving towards socialism at all), which I think was a necessity to maintain a sense of legitimacy and continued rule by the party, but that is how he attempted to reconcile it with Marxism. MLs also consider the USSR to have ceased being socialist after Stalin's death, since it no longer was moving towards socialism.

I'm not sure what the Marxist-Leninist assessment of the USSR's mode of production after Stalin's death is.

[Slippers]

Thank you for explaining that to me.

[mushroompizza]

State capitalism, the people did not own the means of production the party did.