Thread: Some contradictions in my mind

Results 21 to 27 of 27

  1. #21
    Join Date Dec 2016
    Posts 139
    Rep Power 1

    Default

    I think that the conditions for communist revolutions to destroy capitalist states and replace them with dictatorships of the workers and poor citizens, exists in most countries of the world. But what I think is happening is that the warrior instincts of people have been maimed, destroyed and weakned by the way people live, by the excess of comfortable sedentary lives. And fighting, violent warrior instintcts are necessary to overthrow capitalism. Because overthrowing capitalism can only be realized in wars, in wars of armed communists against the armies of the capitalist governments. And most people are too anti-war, too anti-fighting, too anti-violence, and what we need is more violent oppressed leftists, but social-democrats who are too anti-violence like Democracy Now, The Green Party, Thom Hartmann, Ralph Nader, brainwash people into the idea that it is possible to destroy capitalism thru elections

    Even if God does not exist, the impact God has on people mostly through religions is real, we can recognize this as atheists, of course simple awareness of religions doesn't make me a atheist by itself.

    edit: on the topic subject, on Reddit some supposed communist said the way communists think and act have no relevance for the communist movement because the solution is in the "material conditions", what the fuck is this?
    I mean, sure, one can't oppose capitalism 2000 years ago because such thing does not exist, you could't even be conscious of it, heck even now revolution is unlikely because there are no conditions for it, no organized workers movements, but if it's not us who create and help create such conditions then who is?
  2. #22
    Join Date Mar 2008
    Location traveling (U.S.)
    Posts 13,049
    Rep Power 61

    Default


    I think that the conditions for communist revolutions to destroy capitalist states and replace them with dictatorships of the workers and poor citizens, exists in most countries of the world. But what I think is happening is that the warrior instincts of people have been maimed, destroyed and weakned by the way people live, by the excess of comfortable sedentary lives. And fighting, violent warrior instintcts are necessary to overthrow capitalism. Because overthrowing capitalism can only be realized in wars, in wars of armed communists against the armies of the capitalist governments. And most people are too anti-war, too anti-fighting, too anti-violence, and what we need is more violent oppressed leftists, but social-democrats who are too anti-violence like Democracy Now, The Green Party, Thom Hartmann, Ralph Nader, brainwash people into the idea that it is possible to destroy capitalism thru elections

    Agreed on the latter portion, but I'll also note that revolutionary violence, while unavoidable, can be somewhat *fetishized* -- even though it *would* demonstrate a mass *break* from capitalist social norms as we're all too-used-to.

    I think this is revolutionary violence's main significance -- that it is something the system cannot *corral* with its usual methods since mass-conscious revolution, if widespread enough, *transcends* the whole capitalist power-structure paradigm and defies the bureaucratic-turf-identity basis / yardstick of social reasoning.

    I, for one, would just like to see more people begin to make tentative plans for how the bourgeoisie *could* potentially be overthrown, and how the world's proletariat could internally self-organize, free of private-property shackles.

    The *problematic* with fetishizing revolutionary violence is that it creates a new, militaristic specialty, so that only those who can participate *violently* are the 'participants', while everyone else has to take a back-seat to those specialized 'violent' revolutionary types. While this kind of 'specialized violence' may be more-expedient in dire times, it is *substitutionist*, by definition, compared to a *broader base* of active participation on a truly *mass* basis.

    Our strength is in our *numbers*, which, if well-coordinated-enough, would *easily* outmaneuver and displace all bourgeois claims to their own paradigm of social operation.
  3. #23
    Join Date Jan 2016
    Posts 40
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    I think that the conditions for communist revolutions to destroy capitalist states and replace them with dictatorships of the workers and poor citizens, exists in most countries of the world. But what I think is happening is that the warrior instincts of people have been maimed, destroyed and weakned by the way people live, by the excess of comfortable sedentary lives. And fighting, violent warrior instintcts are necessary to overthrow capitalism. Because overthrowing capitalism can only be realized in wars, in wars of armed communists against the armies of the capitalist governments. And most people are too anti-war, too anti-fighting, too anti-violence, and what we need is more violent oppressed leftists, but social-democrats who are too anti-violence like Democracy Now, The Green Party, Thom Hartmann, Ralph Nader, brainwash people into the idea that it is possible to destroy capitalism thru elections
    Tell me about the election of Trump, the rise of PEGIDA in Germany, the 5-star movement in Italy, not to mention the impending election of Le Pen for French president. Tell me about how this constitutes the loss of some kind of 'warrior instinct' that you are so keen to talk about.
    Your version of ideology is too simplistic, it simply posits a ruling order which placates it's citizenry through mass media etc.

    No, the issue is not that people are too sedate, or even that they are pro-capitalist. The issue is that their anti-capitalist rage and discontent is channeled through voices, ideologies which are reactionary, backward in character, for a variety of reasons which should be obvious to everyone here.

    You want an independent working class political opposition to the capitalist world order? Too fucking bad for you, it doesn't presently exist.
    What does exist is a mass discontent and de-legitimization of the existing order, which is directed through reactionary channels. A simple look at right-wing narration is enough, 'make america great again', 'defend france from the muslims', 'depose the leftist traitors stabbing our country in the back' etc,etc.

    There are simple messages that we can throw back into the faces of these scum, which can turn the tide away from fascism and bring ordinary people back into our camp. But presently the Left seems to be split between useless ultra-leftists who preach the 'warrior virtues' of political eras long-dead, and identity politics obsessives who splinter every argument into a thousand equally viable truths. based on any number of specific subjective positions.

    You say that overthrowing capitalism can only happen in wars. Really what are you talking about? We are not even close to the merest beginnings of any kind of international class-war. And even if we were, you think your stupid 'warrior virtues' have any meaning when modern wars will be conducted with fleets of drones, anti-air/missile corridors hundreds of miles in length/width, missiles that jam radios, radios that jam missiles, missile that shoot down other missiles. Not to mention the completely and utterly privatized military machines of most modern countries. We do not live in the fucking days of student Academic Legions, civilian National Guards and peasant militias conscripted by feudal obligation, where militaries were subject to the revolutionary invectives of the day. Really this is the stuff of juvenile Leftist fantasy.

    You're utterly wrong. What we need now really IS radical MPs/congress-people elected, to turn the electoral tide in the liberal favour. Yes, liberal favour. Liberalism hangs in the balance today, not just what remains of socialism but liberalism itself. What's worth defending in liberalism, the legacy of 1789, of 1848 etc., this is what's at stake today. But we won't get anywhere if we simply put ourselves forward as a para-military of a particular niche or tendency. We just look like a bunch of anoraks going to our favourite English civil-war re-enactment society.

    Fuck! Let's forget this bullshit of crafting a Leftist identity from Chartism, Peterloo, Paris Commune etc. ad infinitum. The revolution will begin parliamentary! It will wear addidas hoodies and primark t-shirts and not give a shit about the 'virtuous consumerism', which is the flip-side of the so-called 'excessive consumerism'! It will concentrate on wresting power from the Right where they are weak, as the cracks in their bluster expose them as the blood-suckers they are, and ordinary people are compelled by the simplicity and power of our argument.

    Nobody is brainwashing anybody to believe that capitalism can be overthrown through election. But we don't live in 1917! Leftists disavowing parliamentary struggle is tantamount to political suicide today. Don't chat shit about dual-power when there isn't even the hint of an independent worker's movement. Let alone one that can afford to ask the question 'hmmm, should we do an armed rebellion against capital today or should we wait until a few more of the stupid masses are awakened like Neo from the fucking Matrix, from his placid cow-like slumber.
    Last edited by wehbolno; 25th April 2017 at 19:27.
  4. #24
    Join Date Aug 2016
    Location Israel unfortunately
    Posts 73
    Rep Power 1

    Default

    Marx wrote it in the context of discussing the base-superstructure dichotomy, but I've always interpreted that famous saying not in the wide societal scale, but in the personal one, i.e. "The psychological (such as people's mentalities) is shaped by the social (such as their social status), not vice versa." Kind of reminiscent of the nature-versus-nurture debate, but different.

    It's actually quite sad when you consider that there is a near perfect correlation between childhood socioeconomic status groups and performance on college admission tests in Israel (the PET).

    Yes, "determines" is a poor choice of words. One merely influences the other. Actually, both the base and the superstructure influence each other, but the base does to a greater degree. While the base shapes the superstructure, the superstructure maintains the base more than it shapes it.

    From your birth you are copying the actions, language of other people, most importantly your immediate mother-figure etc.
    Parent-figure. The gender of the caretaker(s) is irrelevant.

    Sorry, a personal pet peeve of mine.

    This is where we approached to the point where it's up to the particular tendency from now on. So you can have [...] the people who say "educate, agitate, organize"
    What tendencies would that be?
    “I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible…” —Peter Thiel, VC-ist, PYPL, FB, $2.7B. “[T]he notion of ‘capitalist democracy’ … ha[s been] rendered … into an oxymoron.” —Ibid.
    I don't care who does the electing, so long as I get to do the nominating.” —Boss Tweed
  5. #25
    Join Date Jul 2016
    Posts 95
    Rep Power 1

    Default

    What tendencies would that be?
    From my experience? Various trotskyite and ML groups, some radical union members, very angry social democrats, etc.
  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Ale Brider For This Useful Post:


  7. #26
    Join Date Jan 2016
    Posts 40
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    I, for one, would just like to see more people begin to make tentative plans for how the bourgeoisie *could* potentially be overthrown, and how the world's proletariat could internally self-organize, free of private-property shackles.
    That's because, ckaihatsu, you are an obsessive, who himself fetishises over post-capitalist fantasies. We are not even close to the stage where an independent working class organisation can legitimately deal with questions like these. Yet in your mind the revolution is like a game of Civilization, or like a 'perfect' version of capitalism, without any of it's constitutive antagonisms, free flow from producer to consumer.

    We can't fast-forward ourselves 50 years into the future. The overthrow of the bourgeoisie is not on the cards right now. What IS on the cards is the rejuvenation of Leftist politics through parliamentary struggle and hard work, and the repudiation of right-wing filth. Nobody gives a single fuck how the world's proletariat will organise themselves post-revolution. It wouldn't even make for compelling sci-fi reading.

    The future is an uncertain horizon, we are at the gates of a vast and unprecedented crisis and we cannot skip past the fundamentals.
  8. #27
    Join Date Mar 2008
    Location traveling (U.S.)
    Posts 13,049
    Rep Power 61

    Default


    That's because, ckaihatsu, you are an obsessive,

    No, I'm *regular* in my participation here, but hardly an obsessive. The state of the world / humanity *is* important to me, so it's worth putting in the time on (revolutionary) political matters.



    who himself fetishises over post-capitalist fantasies.

    This is really an overextension on your part -- you should be able to find one example of what you're claiming, but you won't be able to. I don't indulge in a world of make-believe, unlike many religionists.


    ---



    I, for one, would just like to see more people begin to make tentative plans for how the bourgeoisie *could* potentially be overthrown, and how the world's proletariat could internally self-organize, free of private-property shackles.


    We are not even close to the stage where an independent working class organisation can legitimately deal with questions like these.

    We don't *have* to be 'close to the stage where an independent working class organization [would] deal with questions like these' -- there's no reason to *not* discuss revolution itself and what it might take to make it happen, and what society could possibly look like as a result of successful (proletarian) revolution.



    Yet in your mind the revolution is like a game of Civilization, or like a 'perfect' version of capitalism, without any of it's constitutive antagonisms, free flow from producer to consumer.

    Incorrect again -- you won't find me defending or praising capitalism anywhere.

    Only a post-capitalist communism can possibly implement 'direct distribution' (and 'free access'), which *would* enable a free-flow of socially necessary materials from liberated-laborers to the rest of the world's population ('consumers').

    There wouldn't *be* any constitutive antagonisms once the world's working class has successfully freed itself from the grip of bourgeois political-economic norms, and has begun to produce for its own humane needs on a collective basis.



    We can't fast-forward ourselves 50 years into the future. The overthrow of the bourgeoisie is not on the cards right now.

    I *still* don't know why some RLers -- like yourself -- sometimes make these sweeping, blanket predictions of revolution-is-off-the-table for decades into the future. It's spurious and even reckless considering that the world situation itself can often radicalize masses through its own, capitalist crises.



    What IS on the cards is the rejuvenation of Leftist politics through parliamentary struggle and hard work, and the repudiation of right-wing filth.

    You're sounding like a *liberal* here, and I'll counterpose *accelerationism* to your 'rebuilding of liberal bourgeois political institutions'. I agree with the latter part of what you're saying.



    Nobody gives a single fuck how the world's proletariat will organise themselves post-revolution. It wouldn't even make for compelling sci-fi reading.

    You're being strangely *dismissive* of the task of revolution. Certainly part of the project (if-you-will) is to get humanity to *make plans*, collectively consciously, instead of leaving societal matters to the default hands-off market mechanism -- or even to revolutionary spontaneity, for that matter.

    You offhandedly dismiss proletarian revolution as 'science *fiction*', which, again, is simply *smearing* a realistic and objectively needed movement, making it seem on par with a fairy-tale.



    The future is an uncertain horizon, we are at the gates of a vast and unprecedented crisis and we cannot skip past the fundamentals.

    Sure, I appreciate the too-tenuous and uncertain world situation at the present -- what, then, do you consider to be 'the fundamentals' that we happen to be missing right now -- ?

    I think you're also being dismissive of the *subjective* factor -- workers self-organization -- in this line of yours that rebuffs potentials for worldwide proletarian revolution.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 34
    Last Post: 19th December 2015, 18:09
  2. Replies: 115
    Last Post: 8th July 2012, 01:48
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 17th August 2011, 18:18
  4. Contradictions in the society
    By Hiero in forum Theory
    Replies: 92
    Last Post: 9th September 2008, 23:53
  5. Replies: 183
    Last Post: 10th April 2006, 20:23

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts