Revolution in the U.S.?

[BIG BROTHER]

Well, after reading the post of "revolutions in the first world" i started to wonder about what would happen to the economy of the U.S. if it went socialist.

Before I use to think that the U.S. as a fully developed capitalist country, would make a much better "socialist" country than the soviet union ever was. But now that I come to think about it, would the U.S. have problems due to the fact that now days almost all the firms in the U.S. have outsourced and of shored their factories, so if the U.S. went socialist it would still have to develop a lot industry, since now days a lot of stuff is made abroad.

On the other side if China returned to socialism I think they wouldn't have to deal with the issues that it faced back when it was a mainly feudal country.

Do you agree or disagree with me? feel free to discuss.

[Hexen]

Keep in mind that the U.S. Government is currently preparing themselves to protect their regime at all costs against Revolution hence why they are passing laws like the Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, and currently the H.R. 1955: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act....

[BIG BROTHER]

I know I know all that. What I'm trying to analyze is that if the U.S. all of the sudden was made socialist, if it would be on an advantegious oposition or not.

btw, i realize i'm not good at explaining myself sometimes, so if you don't understand my point don't hesitate to ask or something.

[gla22]

Damn it is a very complex issue. These two are very basic other people expand please.
1. Nationalize banks, and natural resources.
2. Close down stock markets and move ownership of factories and farms to workers.

[BIG BROTHER]

Damn it is a very complex issue. These two are very basic other people expand please.
1. Nationalize banks, and natural resources.
2. Close down stock markets and move ownership of factories and farms to workers.

I don't think the U.S. would have a lot of trouble with the banks. But frankly it seems to me that there aren't many factories that could be nationalized anymore, because as i said before, firms now have off shored their factories to other countries.

for example the u.s. would have to make a shoe factory since it can't nationalize nike whose most factories are in idonisea(i probably misspelled)

[RedAnarchist]

for example the u.s. would have to make a shoe factory since it can't nationalize nike whose most factories are in idonisea(i probably misspelled)


Indonesia?

[gla22]

U.S actually has more production power than most people realize. And just because we become socialist dosen't mean we have to stop all imports.

[BIG BROTHER]

Indonesia?

YES! that's what i was trying to type!

[BIG BROTHER]

U.S actually has more production power than most people realize. And just because we become socialist dosen't mean we have to stop all imports.

Does it really? What industries does the U.S. currently have?

And yea of course you don't stop all imports, and a socialist country can't be too dependant on them either.

[Psy]

Does it really? What industries does the U.S. currently have?

And yea of course you don't stop all imports, and a socialist country can't be too dependant on them either.
Well there is still General Motors and Ford, though I don't know how long they will still have factories in the US. There is still some steel mills still in operation but not enough to re-industrialize the USA, also not all of the ore and coal mines have closed down, even those that were closed down wouldn't take much to start up again (even without machinary, you can simply throw man power at the task of mining).

There are probably other industries.

[The Douche]

Does it really? What industries does the U.S. currently have?

And yea of course you don't stop all imports, and a socialist country can't be too dependant on them either.

My semi-rural town on an isolated peninsula has like 5 manufacturing companies and a perdue chicken processing plant. And the population of our town is under 30,000.

Plus all the old factories are still here in the US, they're just sitting there empty. The workers will occupy them and begin production on thier own.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Globalization makes the disastrous scenario of complete isolation moot when speaking of the United States and/or Europe. With very few exceptions the rest of the world is reliant on the USA's economy. I don't see that changing for another 30 years.

[BIG BROTHER]

My semi-rural town on an isolated peninsula has like 5 manufacturing companies and a perdue chicken processing plant. And the population of our town is under 30,000.

Plus all the old factories are still here in the US, they're just sitting there empty. The workers will occupy them and begin production on thier own.

are you sure? I've always figured out that, when factories close out they sell the machinery. I remember that in a video called "is walmart good for america" i saw a factory of rubbermaid being closed down, and its machinery was sold.

[trivas7]

Well, after reading the post of "revolutions in the first world" i started to wonder about what would happen to the economy of the U.S. if it went socialist.

Before I use to think that the U.S. as a fully developed capitalist country, would make a much better "socialist" country than the soviet union ever was. But now that I come to think about it, would the U.S. have problems due to the fact that now days almost all the firms in the U.S. have outsourced and of shored their factories, so if the U.S. went socialist it would still have to develop a lot industry, since now days a lot of stuff is made abroad.

On the other side if China returned to socialism I think they wouldn't have to deal with the issues that it faced back when it was a mainly feudal country.

Do you agree or disagree with me? feel free to discuss.

You make a case for the permanent revolution, i.e., social revolution can't happen successfully in only one country.

I think it's the case that the US emphasis on individualism and learning to think collectively is a huge roadblock to socialism in the US. IMO it is the prime obstacle to simple class-consciousness. In these terms, China is way ahead of us.

[High Voltage]

Outsourcing, I think, is moving through a cycle. For some companies, it started in India with phone services such as tech. support. To my knowledge, that same industry is moving to Africa because that is where the cheaper labor is because India has gotten better conditions (but not everyone has benefitted necessarily). Have the cycle return to America then the revolution could occur without any job crisis.

(But I think the opposition to a revolution now, would meet a lot of resistance by current CEOs that would ravage the economy through stagnation. But socialism has built countries up.)

[Svante]

Globalization makes the disastrous scenario of complete isolation moot when speaking of the United States and/or Europe. With very few exceptions the rest of the world is reliant on the USA's economy. I don't see that changing for another 30 years.


dont the euro chainge this? many countrys use th e euro and not USA dollar.

[Die Neue Zeit]

The US may have to resort to "social imperialism" in order to keep the economy going (Mexico's manufacturing base and Canada's natural-resource base). As I said in past threads, "social imperialism" is NOT a dirty word.

[trivas7]

The US may have to resort to "social imperialism" in order to keep the economy going (Mexico's manufacturing base and Canada's natural-resource base). As I said in past threads, "social imperialism" is NOT a dirty word.

I wonder if this has anything to do with recent talks going on behind closed doors that is trying to bring the governments of the North America closer together.

[Mariner's Revenge]

I wonder if this has anything to do with recent talks going on behind closed doors that is trying to bring the governments of the North America closer together.
h ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Union

(close the space between the h and t in http)


Economically, I would not be the least bit surprised, look at NAFTA, but I don't believe many in the United States, Canada, or Mexico would even consider the idea of total unification. All three countries are too nationalistic for it to happen.

[Svante]

I wonder if this has anything to do with recent talks going on behind closed doors that is trying to bring the governments of the North America closer together.

Canada an d USA make militare agrement behind closs doors.nobody know abaou t this but when the norad website.i dont think thi s i s to bring North America closer togethre.

[Q]

You make a case for the permanent revolution, i.e., social revolution can't happen successfully in only one country.

I think it's the case that the US emphasis on individualism and learning to think collectively is a huge roadblock to socialism in the US. IMO it is the prime obstacle to simple class-consciousness. In these terms, China is way ahead of us.
Bingo! Within capitalism, there is no such thing as a "national economy" that is autarkian in nature. Instead, economies fulfill a task within the global web. The Netherlands for example functions as a "gateway" for Europe, with the Rotterdam seaport and all that. A revolution in the Netherlands would mean you can nationalise a cog wheel of the economy, socialise a limb of the capitalist system, not capitalism itself. This is pretty much the situation in every other country.


Globalization makes the disastrous scenario of complete isolation moot when speaking of the United States and/or Europe. With very few exceptions the rest of the world is reliant on the USA's economy. I don't see that changing for another 30 years.
Like Svante already pointed out, this is changing rapidly. The current credit crunch (nice alliteration :P ) is only the beginning of this.

The past few decades the US economy has more or less functioned as the consumer pool of the world; everything that was overproduced could be dumped on the US market where is was made easy for the working class to make huge debts in order to maintain consumer levels. This has all changed now as the huge credit bubble has bursted and the US economy will probably know a big free fall.

You are right when you say this will affect the world economy a lot aswell, but it will also shift the power balance. Look at Japan for example, long seen as a rival to US hegemony, but after the crisis in the nineties, they just muddle along.

If you want to read more on the subject, you can read this article.
Edit: I see links no longer work (wtf??), so here goes: h ttp://socialistworld.net/eng/2008/03/25worlda.html