Quote:
The pro Confederacy southerners say " The South Shall Rise Again!"... Some of you "revolutionary leftists" seem to think "The Red Will Rise Again!" In whatever form of socialism/communism you happen to be in favor of.
You mean people who advocate something want that something to be achieved. Quite an insight. I guess we are like Wall Street too: "the economy shall rise again!".
Quote:
Everywhere where socialism is tried, failure is sure to follow. When the left promotes "mixed economies", it's basically corporatism and fascism that they're advocating.. I sometimes wonder if you all even understand how fascism/corporatism works as an economic system?
By "mixed economy" you mean capitalism with some reforms. While some of us may think that some reforms can play a benifical role in class struggle (like the fight for the 8 hour day or fights against jim-crow or whatnot) we do not seek a reformed capitalism but something else - not a policy or plan, but a whole new power in society - democratic working class rule over all of society.
If you want to talk about historical economic systems, then FDR New Dealism, NAZI german military-keynsianism, or Itiallian corporatism all have overlaps. The whole trend of worldwide capitalism at that point was towards more state involvement in the economy because of the pressures of international competition at that time. "Fascism" is not really distinguished as an economic policy, in fact Hitler often said he was not interested in economic matters. What differentiates fascism is the way the state intervines on all levels into managing social relations: in practice this means the use of extra-legal means to enforce order in the streets and workplaces.
Quote:
I don't claim to be an expert on communism or socialism.. but I have done quite a bit of reading up on the topics. If I remember correctly, Many Socialists viewed fascism as a stepping stone to the end of capitalism that would eventually lead to the rise of socialism, then ultimately anarcho-communism. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong there in your opinion.
No. Some German socialists infamously said "first Hitler, then us" but they meant it in a way as if someone said, "Let' Romney win and expose how bad his policies are and then we will sweep the next election". They saw the support for fascism by eliete conservatives and regualr middle-class types as a symptom of a desperate system - they were underestimating the threat, but they did not see fascism as a "step" inheretly towards socialism of any kind.
What many revolutionary socialists believe however is that workers can overthrow capitalism and put themselves in charge of both the economy and any necissary governance and this would be considered "socialism". Since a system where the economy is run democratically and decisions made by the labers doesn't need to exploit others in order to produce this wealth from labor then once there is no threat of a return to capitalist rule or some other minority exploitation of the majority (which I would include USSR-style "state-capitalist" countries in) then a state becomes increasingly redundant as there is less and less need for one particular group to organize production and society, these decisions then become general decisions, not of one particular class. This would then be something like the classic marxist definition of communism, a society where everyone has the same power as everyone else and so there are no classes and no need for a state to hold society to a particular model or organization.
Quote:
Is it possible some of the people in your camp, like Obama and the Democratic Party are actually trying to make that old socialist prophecy a reality? I'm looking forward to your replies.
Really get beyond the hysterical right-wing rhetoric - the Democrats and Republicans mearly play good-cop, bad-cop with the population: they both have the same goal, preservation of the capitalist system, even if they sometimes have different views of how to accomplish this.
Obama has done a lot to transfer wealth - but it's been to the top, not to the population in even a moderate social-democratic way. While Romney evoked anger in large parts of the population for his positions, Obama has been able to sell these same positions to that same group of people: Romeny couldn't dream to touch Social Security, but Obama can sell it to his supporters as the "only option" and that's the role of the Democratic party for the rulers of the US and that is the usefulness of Obama particularly for them. He can make austerity seem "liberal" to his supporters, he can bomb people in Afganistan and do things that would have caused marches in the streets if Bush tried to do the same thing.