NationStates

Autarkheia wrote:

Hammer Britannia wrote:People think extreme socialism can work in this thread

Like Stalinism or anarcho-communism or something? They do ... for a given value of "work".

Like 70% of leftists on this site are either ancoms or hard tankies.

Hammer Britannia wrote:Like 70% of leftists on this site are either ancoms or hard tankies.

What is it with all the tankies on the internet. I guess they have nothing better to do.

Dumb Ideologies wrote:6.5/10: "it's not terrible". A bit too much individualism and parliamentary democracy, but it may still produce a slightly more balanced society than the status quo.

Individualism as in "you can be yourself" is good. It's only individualism as in "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" neoliberal ideology that's bad.

Autarkheia wrote:

Hammer Britannia wrote:Like 70% of leftists on this site are either ancoms or hard tankies.

What is it with all the tankies on the internet. I guess they have nothing better to do.

Dumb Ideologies wrote:6.5/10: "it's not terrible". A bit too much individualism and parliamentary democracy, but it may still produce a slightly more balanced society than the status quo.

Individualism as in "you can be yourself" is good. It's only individualism as in "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" neoliberal ideology that's bad.

The focus on empowering the individual to "Be themselves" to the exclusion of other priorities and a culture of atomized individualism is not great either. Emphasis should be placed on collectives of various kinds too and their importance.

Aren't you a fascist or something.

Autarkheia wrote:Aren't you a fascist or something.

Reset the f-bomb counter.

If it looks like a goose, and it steps like a goose ...

Autarkheia wrote:If it looks like a goose, and it steps like a goose ...

But if all you see is geese it's time to refine your bird-recognition algorithms

Dumb Ideologies wrote:But if all you see is geese it's time to refine your bird-recognition algorithms

I don't though. I just think a self-proclaimed "national syndicalist" talking about the need for social collectivism sounds kinda fashy.

The way the left throws around the word to refer to anyone right of FDR is cringy though.

Autarkheia wrote:

Dumb Ideologies wrote:But if all you see is geese it's time to refine your bird-recognition algorithms

I don't though. I just think a self-proclaimed "national syndicalist" talking about the need for social collectivism sounds kinda fashy.

The way the left throws around the word to refer to anyone right of FDR is cringy though.

Ostro's a good egg and not a proponent of political violence or totalitarianism. So whether he's mildly influenced by any fascist-adjacent ideas or not he's hardly what people imagine when they hear the word "fascist" or deserving of the persona non grata opprobrium that shouting the word usually attracts.

Hand off that panic button, now.

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:

Torrocca wrote:
Compromising with people who, at best, only care about maintaining the status quo rather than extending justice and liberty to those who've been crushed under some kind of oppression and who, at worst, actively wish to ruin life for all but a bullshit idea of an in-group based on race, sex, gender, creed, etc. is fucking stupid.

Thanks for coming to my weekly LWDTedX Talk.

MLK Jr. had it right when he said moderates were a fucking bane to justice for the oppressed.

Compromise is a way to avoid vengeful violence, however.

Compromise with a group of people that unironically believes giving equal rights to others is wrong (and is willing to pick up guns for that opinion) isn't a good way to avoid vengeful violence however.

Liriena wrote:Ewww, no. Fuck "blue" labor and any other left movement that thinks pandering to social conservatism is good.
Seriously, "family, faith and flag"? As if all three of those hadn't been used over the course of the twentieth century as excuses to imprison, torture and slaughter everyone to the left of Pinochet (and, y'know, queer people, religious minorities, secularists, youth activists and pacifists).

Also, totally unrelated, but the amount of "classical liberal" salt in the comments under the Patreon explanation for deplatforming Carl Benjamin is incredible.

Throwing all pretenses of being a libertarian socialist out the window today, aren't you?

Pasong Tirad wrote:Relevant

>Matt Bors
might as well be posting counter-signal memes at this point lol

Autarkheia wrote:

Hammer Britannia wrote:People think extreme socialism can work in this thread

Like Stalinism or anarcho-communism or something? They do ... for a given value of "work".

On a side note I think Titoism was probably the best implementation of Marxist-Leninism. Which isn't saying much, but still.

Titoism was far less successful than the Soviet Union, and only survived due to generous economic aid from the Western countries and the Soviet Union.

Dumb Ideologies wrote:

Autarkheia wrote:Ideally, libertarian socialism; realistically, some kind of market socialism within a liberal democracy.

6.5/10: "it's not terrible". A bit too much individualism and parliamentary democracy, but it may still produce a slightly more balanced society than the status quo.

A bit too much what?

The Xenopolis Confederation wrote:

Dumb Ideologies wrote:
6.5/10: "it's not terrible". A bit too much individualism and parliamentary democracy, but it may still produce a slightly more balanced society than the status quo.

A bit too much what?

*clears throat*

A BIT TOO MUCH INDIVIDUALISM AND PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY

Is that better? :^)

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Autarkheia wrote:Like Stalinism or anarcho-communism or something? They do ... for a given value of "work".

On a side note I think Titoism was probably the best implementation of Marxist-Leninism. Which isn't saying much, but still.

Titoism was far less successful than the Soviet Union, and only survived due to generous economic aid from the Western countries and the Soviet Union.

no u

Hammer Britannia wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:Titoism was far less successful than the Soviet Union, and only survived due to generous economic aid from the Western countries and the Soviet Union.

no u

Not sure how serious this is, but the data is pretty easy to find. Yugoslavia always had massive unemployment and racked up a massive amount of debt. Their economy had essentially imploded by 1970 and was only kept alive by loans until the 1990's when the political situation became untenable.

Hammer Britannia wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:Titoism was far less successful than the Soviet Union, and only survived due to generous economic aid from the Western countries and the Soviet Union.

no u

that's a gulagging

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Hammer Britannia wrote:no u

Not sure how serious this is, but the data is pretty easy to find. Yugoslavia always had massive unemployment and racked up a massive amount of debt. Their economy had essentially imploded by 1970 and was only kept alive by loans until the 1990's when the political situation became untenable.

True, but some of that difference will be down to less preferential access to either capitalist or socialist markets and lack of a lot of the propping up economies got in those days. It's a difficult time to go your own way. Obligatory mention of the Soviets' habit of inflating their own economic numbers somewhat.

Dumb Ideologies wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:Not sure how serious this is, but the data is pretty easy to find. Yugoslavia always had massive unemployment and racked up a massive amount of debt. Their economy had essentially imploded by 1970 and was only kept alive by loans until the 1990's when the political situation became untenable.

True, but some of that difference will be down to less preferential access to either capitalist or socialist markets and lack of a lot of the propping up economies got in those days. It's a difficult time to go your own way. Obligatory mention of the Soviets' habit of inflating their own economic numbers somewhat.

That is true, but even post-cold war assessments of the Soviet economy maintain it was far more successful than the Yugoslav counterpart.

Pasong Tirad wrote:We can't really compromise with people who think certain kinds of people are less-than-human.

Yes, like I could never compromise with Donald Trump and his Trumpeteers.

Autarkheia wrote:Ideally, libertarian socialism; realistically, some kind of market socialism within a liberal democracy.

Not if the capitalist world-system literally demolishes itself.

Hammer Britannia wrote:People think extreme socialism can work in this thread

I would amend that. Only extreme socialism can work.

Proctopeo wrote:

Liriena wrote:Ewww, no. Fuck "blue" labor and any other left movement that thinks pandering to social conservatism is good.
Seriously, "family, faith and flag"? As if all three of those hadn't been used over the course of the twentieth century as excuses to imprison, torture and slaughter everyone to the left of Pinochet (and, y'know, queer people, religious minorities, secularists, youth activists and pacifists).

Also, totally unrelated, but the amount of "classical liberal" salt in the comments under the Patreon explanation for deplatforming Carl Benjamin is incredible.

Throwing all pretenses of being a libertarian socialist out the window today, aren't you?

You mean because of my schadenfreude over Carl and his fans vs Patreon?

Gonna be square with you here: I'm not going to lay down my life in defense of whichever techbros are running Patreon. I don't believe for a second that their deplatforming of Carl is because they have some sort of commitment to confronting the toxicity of "alt lite" propaganda, specially given their main argument for deplatforming him. Yeah, Carl the dipshit used the n-word. It was a stupid stunt, even in context, because trying to beat actual nazis through a "by your own logic" tactic with racist slurs is about as clever as texting a bunch of BDSM gay porn at religious conservatives. But stupid though it was, I wouldn't have placed it anywhere near any top reasons for deplatforming him.

Liriena wrote:Ewww, no. Fuck "blue" labor and any other left movement that thinks pandering to social conservatism is good.
Seriously, "family, faith and flag"? As if all three of those hadn't been used over the course of the twentieth century as excuses to imprison, torture and slaughter everyone to the left of Pinochet (and, y'know, queer people, religious minorities, secularists, youth activists and pacifists).

This is why today's left has lost the workers.
The bourgeois values it advocates nowadays are a far cry from the proletarian morality of old.

Democratic Communist Federation wrote:

Hammer Britannia wrote:People think extreme socialism can work in this thread

I would amend that. Only extreme mixed economy socialism can work.

Further amended.