Is Neo-Liberalism necessary for revolution?

[Fodman]

The theory for a communistic revolution is that conditions have to be so that the proletariat is massively swelling in size, and is controlled by an extremely small bourgeois elite. If this is the case, should we allow neo-liberalism to continue to push the way it is, in order to change public opinion in favour of ultimately overthrowing it?

[Enragé]

no
neo-liberalism also creates a capitalist mindset. You can see in countries less radically capitalist than the US (France, Greece for instance) that proletarian resistance is much more widespread than in the US.

If what you said was true than it would mean that we should see more resistance in the US than in those countries, not the other way around.

[KC]

You're asking if we should let capitalism continue?

What the fuck? :wacko:

[Enragé]

well basicly he's thinking that reformism leads to a more mellow variety of capitalism which confronts people less with capitalism, thus leading people to think "meh capitalism aint that bad"
point is however that that only happens if there isnt a vibrant movement on the streets.
And, reformism is good, in the sense that its better than total capitalism, as in life is generally better and more laidback.

[Fodman]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2007 10:39 pm
well basicly he's thinking that reformism leads to a more mellow variety of capitalism which confronts people less with capitalism, thus leading people to think "meh capitalism aint that bad"
point is however that that only happens if there isnt a vibrant movement on the streets.
And, reformism is good, in the sense that its better than total capitalism, as in life is generally better and more laidback.
yeah that's what i'm getting at, after all - it was Roosevelt who said:

"Reform is the antidote to revolution"

good point made about the lack of proletariat movements in the most capitalistic country in the world, by the way

[Question everything]

Originally posted by The Weatherman+April 30, 2007 07:25 pm--> (The Weatherman @ April 30, 2007 07:25 pm)
[email protected] 29, 2007 10:39 pm
well basicly he's thinking that reformism leads to a more mellow variety of capitalism which confronts people less with capitalism, thus leading people to think "meh capitalism aint that bad"
point is however that that only happens if there isnt a vibrant movement on the streets.
And, reformism is good, in the sense that its better than total capitalism, as in life is generally better and more laidback.
yeah that's what i'm getting at, after all - it was Roosevelt who said:

"Reform is the antidote to revolution"

good point made about the lack of proletariat movements in the most capitalistic country in the world, by the way [/b]
Roosevelt was an Asshole...

After taking over italy and reappoiting facist leaders Roosevelt said he did that "so that even the Dumbest Wop would know who was in charge" (Racist Fucker.)

[Dóchas]

whats neo-liberalism anyway?

[Sendo]

whats neo-liberalism anyway?

A system by which the powerful nations economically conquer the weaker ones by destroying trade restrictions, protectionism, etc. They take advantage of debt from the IMF and demand privatization, dismantling of labor rights and environmental regulations. They also create more "trade" or really, less trade and much more global transport of goods. It seeks to turn places like Central America to one big highway.

Check out Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine or David Harvey's A Brief History of Neoliberalism
Also: Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins

It's a foreign policy (not the domestic economic policy as they claim) that took off with Pinochet, Nixon, Thatcher, etc. Also with economic hitmen companies and orgs like the WTO, World Bank, and IMF.

It comes from a bastardized version of classical liberalism and emphasizes "Free markets = free democracy".....even when capitalism must be enacted against popular wishes.

[Dóchas]

A system by which the powerful nations economically conquer the weaker ones by destroying trade restrictions, protectionism, etc. They take advantage of debt from the IMF and demand privatization, dismantling of labor rights and environmental regulations. They also create more "trade" or really, less trade and much more global transport of goods. It seeks to turn places like Central America to one big highway.

Check out Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine or David Harvey's A Brief History of Neoliberalism
Also: Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins

It's a foreign policy (not the domestic economic policy as they claim) that took off with Pinochet, Nixon, Thatcher, etc. Also with economic hitmen companies and orgs like the WTO, World Bank, and IMF.

It comes from a bastardized version of classical liberalism and emphasizes "Free markets = free democracy".....even when capitalism must be enacted against popular wishes.


ok thanks its a lot clearer now

[Black Sheep]

I think it was Trotsky's theory of permanent revolution ,which says that a country has to undergo a capitalist 'revolution', and only when the bourgeoisie state and the proletariat's exploitation is sufficiently developed,the workers will have enough power to overthrow it.

Which i fail to see how it can be applied to countries other than the 3rd world ones.