Results 21 to 28 of 28
Why don't we have global socialism?
-Because modern western "Marxists" take perverse pride in their ignorance when it comes to competing ideologies, mass psychology, statistical analysis, tax incidence, direct democracy and institutional design; them being so full of themselves and their "scientific understanding" of some deeper truth makes them easy prey for charlatans like Freud or Lacan and faux economists and that whole dialectial BS as long as these frauds use some jargon that can appear radical only to the most ignorant observers; they claim to speak to and for the working class while having a petit-bourgeois background and using the most tortured language ever, they mock and undermine actual attempts by workers to improve their lot themselves as labour-aristocratic corruption, and are more interested in student "politics" and other shit nobody cares about — and because of all that ultimately fail to come up with a coherent alternative, to come up with at least a bare-bones framework how to do things differently; which means when push comes to shove and the old order crumbles they have no idea which basic principles should be adhered to no matter what, which makes them enablers of power-grabbing psychopaths who torture more than just language.
PS
"Austrian Economics" is still dumber :P
WTF? How is mine irrelevant and yours isn't? It's the same fucking question?! Don't be charlatan.
I cannot provide a marxian analysis, as I'm not really a marxist.
The problem is, you're comparing a country that was literally under siege from wealthier and more powerful enemies in one way or another since it was formed up until it's collapse, and thus acted accordingly, with a country whose high standard of living is derived from the same economic hegemony that repressed the former.
Listen, maybe you don't like historical context or something, but comparing the standard of living in the US with the standard of living in the USSR at any point as if it was ever a fair playing field is just patently absurd.
The fact is, the Soviet Union had to basically conjure industry out of it's ass in one of the more backwards countries on the planet at the time, and throughout it's history dedicate the better part of it's industry to staving off invasion through military buildup. The fact that they held up as long as they did while having to fuel an arms race against an opponent with vastly more resources is remarkable in and of itself. Had the Soviet Union been able to divert more of it's resources to consumer-end goods rather than heavy industry and military production, who's to say what would have happened?
I hate this shit, this is the same kind of argument from the people that say "well look at Cuba, they have to use toilet paper rolls for air filters in their cars, it's an obvious failure" without any thought to the fact that the embargo is the problem.
There is literally no socialist nation that has ever existed that has not had it's history shaped in large part from aggressive economic/military coercion, yet you pretend like every shortcoming in the USSR or elsewhere is simply the result of ideological shortcoming.
It's pretty simple, if you're a weak/small/underdeveloped country and you have a revolution, you're going to suffer heavy tampering and sabotage by a giant fucking capitalist empire that cannot and will not allow nations to have any right to self determination in a real sense. Waving a red flag in your capital is like painting a big target on your back. National security concerns are going to guide everything you do and warp your original goals.
I'm not saying that there were no real issues with the Soviet system, this is obvious to almost everyone, but you're just fucking delusional if you think that socialists have ever had a fair shake to try their system in any kind of meaningful peace.
Last edited by Blackscare; 21st January 2011 at 09:33.
Most of those "best ways of life ever produced" were created by the constant struggles and agitations of socialists anyway... People act like capitalism created the modern standard of living.... in reality it was socialists attacking bourgie conceptions of democracy.
If you're saying that it was socialists who created modern standards of living you truly are delusional.
Eppur si muove -- Galileo Galilei
[FONT=Tahoma]
[/FONT]
Stop whining, we're not that important.
Actually lots of the innovation we have today was from public institutions.
Except it was. Universal suffrage was pushed mainly by socialist women. Labor protections (unemployment, etc) were almost exclusively supported by socialists. Jim Crow was ended largely through the work of socialists. Martin Luther King Jr was a socialist. Einstein was a socialist. Also as Gacky said, almost all of our research comes from public institutions. I could go on.
The fact is, Triv... (real) Freedom is the ability to say (to yourself) 1+1=2
