1. LGBT was only decriminalized because they scrapped the whole legal code during the revolution.

  2. This is not entirely true. It is true that the entire old Tsarist legal code was scrapped in 1918, however a new constitution and penal code was adopted in 1922 which decriminalised homosexuality. So the idea that it was just a side effect of scrapping the old laws is one-sided, since it was replaced with a different set of laws that didn't include a recriminalisation of homosexuality.

  3. What if I the idea involves execution?

  4. I believe Digibro (I believe they came out as trans and changed their name then but I don't know the new one so I'll use the old one) did watch at least two seasons and commented specifically on the quality of those two seasons. It should be noted that at that time, those were the seasons that existed. I also think Mother's Basement is on that same boat, commenting on specifically the first two seasons which they did watch. I can't say I've ever seen any of Trash Taste's content and Abridged content is often made by people who actually like the series they abridging. In fact it's one of the factors that really influences the quality of a parody, and SAO Abridged is one of those that is hallmarked as a great great one so I suspect its creators do actually like SAO, if they aren't even passionate about it.

  5. You're falling into the classic trap of "socialism is when the government does stuff." Socialism does not mean giving all the power to the government, it means putting power directly into the hands of the people. The degeneration of the Soviet Union did not happen due to the faults or evil nature of Stalin, but due to economic and social factors.

  6. This was a very thoughtful and enlightening response; thank you very much. I think you are right; I am falling into some traps like you just outlined. The historical context you outlined is essential, I need to research russias history further and keep this context in mind; also, as I understand it, and I think you basically said it correct me if I am wrong that Russia never truly was socialist because the people never were given control of the means of production. Also, The state and revolution by Lenin is up next on my reading list it's at my college's local library. Maybe with more theory, I would have understood this better.

  7. I am glad you got something out of my answer! Please don't feel bad about falling into these traps, they are incredibly widespread and are what we're taught through the media and schools. Part of becoming politically aware is dismantling these ideas. In that process there are no wrong questions!

  8. This article lays out a Marxist critique of North Korea, and Juche as well

  9. I mean, he literally uses a slur in the video

  10. The video that is from is, going off of the sound-quality, really old. I would count it against him if it was done out of malice, but he was clearly just ignorant. I don't think we can expect cis-guys from 2014 to be aware of all the terms that are harmful.

  11. I'm not a very big follower of game theory, but I gotta say, I don't see how this is transphobic at all. The 600 genders thing was obviously poking fun at people playing with the field to put your gender for the survey. The fact that they even left it as a free-form field, instead of a binary box is way more inclusive than most surveys I take. And he even called out that the attack helicopter meme as repetitive and overdone with over 1600 people using it. Sarcastically poking fun at transphobes' inability to be original is not transphobic.

  12. Before responding to your question, I have to admit that I misstated the section you quoted - workers aren't paid less than what their products will sell for, but what they have to sell for. The entire problem of overproduction is that the products cannot sell. That's my bad.

  13. So I'm assuming you are referring to the welfare state model. It is absolutely a better deal for the working class than say the US model. But it is important to put into context how it is possible:

  14. So it sounds like you define extremist as authoritarian and anti-freedom. In that case, no. Communism is not extremist. Communism is the fight for a state-less, class and oppression-less society, where the people as a whole directly control society and the economy. Communism is anti-authoritarian in its goals.

  15. Overall I really like this comment. But how do you avoid “ends justify the means” thinking?

  16. I don't think there is a 100% solution for this, but the best way I see is two-fold:

  17. We implement the demands that Lenin outlined in The State and Revolution, based on Marx' and Engels' analyses of the Paris Commune:

  18. Any source on Stalin taking power away from the soviets? As far as I understand it the “Stalin constitution” didn’t directly do that. Then again, I don’t know everything about it.

  19. I mean I don't think it is intellectually honest to dismiss someone just for being controversial without looking at their arguments. If we did that, none of us would be socialists, since most of the socialist thinkers are highly controversial.

  20. The lack of solidarity from Western socialists and the silence of their media is fucking sad. Protestors whom mostly Indigenous people have been resisting against the CIA-back neolib regime of Dina Boluarte ever since the coup that seized power from former union organizer Pedro Castillo. 67 people have been murdered in the protest by fascist pigs so far.

  21. The IMT has some good socialist analyses of the struggle of the Peruvian workers:

  22. Hey comrade, How do I find IMT on my own and share in emails. Thank you for keeping us updated on the struggle in Peru.

  23. Sorry for the slow response. I'm not completely sure what you're asking. If you're looking for how to join or get in contact, there is a contact form

  24. I have autism as well, and I've realised that if I outline the important paragraphs in a book with a pencil (making sure the sections aren't too lage) and write a 1 sentence summary of it in the margin, I retain information much better. By doing it my brain makes a connection between the position on the page and the information. It also makes it so when I need the information I can look at the specific part of the page while flipping through the book until I see the section I'm looking for. It might not work for you, but it might inspire you to come up with an idea of your own :)

  25. For learning about billionaires' bad ideas? Yes. For learning about Socialism? No.

  26. Well yes, bur also bonapartism as a political term usually refers to a centrist unity party wich aims to unite both the left and the right, usually later not really accomplishing anything for the left.

  27. I think it is a little bit more nuanced than this. From my understanding, Bonapartism is less about claiming to unite the left and the right political tendencies, and more about trying to balance between two social classes. So instead of being a representative of a ruling class, Bonapartists come to power when no class is powerful enough to establish authority. They are strong-men appearing to rise above class struggle, but destined to get swept aside as it rises to the top again.

  28. Yes, absolutely. But this isn't necessarily as big of a problem as it might seem. Capital investment isn't exactly the biggest priority for a socialist government, to say the least. The wealth of society would belong to the people as a whole, instead of a tiny minority of capitalists, so investment too would be decided upon democratically. And as long as the revolution spreads, and doesn't become isolated as has happened historically, this won't affect the amount of wealth in the nation negatively.

  29. This is the mechanical "stagist" understanding of historical materialism, and is not the actual Marxist position. There isn't for every country a certain order of "stages" that they have to go through, this is confusing the general with the particular. In general, it is true that capitalism has been necessary in order to build the material basis for socialism, however that is not true for every single particular country.

  30. I've been seeing your answers on these threads recently and I just wanna say they're incredibly well-written. Good job!

  31. Haha, thank you! I'm really happy that people get something out of my comments!

  32. Why though? Wouldn’t retention be more important as hiring a new employee is a risk and would require you to spend time and resources training them, while the employee already working there has experience and a proven track record? I’ve never really understood this.

  33. I think this contradiction results from the fact that management has realised that a lot of workers are unwilling to quit if things are still somewhat working for them. It is a lot more scary to go from having work to not having work, so many workers will only job-hop if they have something else lined up. So retention is seen as cheaper because there is more friction when it comes to job-hopping.

  34. Could you elaborate what of each government you support or criticise? As the username implies, I´m kinda deep on the other side of the spectrum, therefore it would be interesting to see them through the eyes of a supporter, if you don´t mind.

  35. I am not personally very familiar with the Zapatistas, but I can share my criticism of the Cuban government. It should be noted that a huge part of the problems Cuban society is faced with are either influenced in a major way or caused by the imperialist US blockade, which doesn't just affect US trade, but actually affects all international trade with the island, since the US has a history of blocking trade with companies that trade with Cuba.

  36. One of Marx's primary points was that capitalism like it's forebears had a "job" to do. In part it was supposed to root up the old order, dismantle many social norms, and provide industry a foothold that workers could then takeover.

  37. Thank you. This is really helpful. So is there any kind of standard Marxist account as to how/why Communist societies have “failed”, specifically through the lens of internal contradiction?

  38. Yes, this is the core of Trotsky's analysis of the problems of the USSR. Very basically he pointed out that while the bureaucratic caste in the top of society wasn't a class in the Marxist sense, since it didn't own the means of production (i.e. bureaucrats couldn't personally profit off of it, they couldn't pass their privileges on through inheritance, etc.), they did have material interests that were opposed to those of the rest of the working class. They had an interest in reintroducing private property, so that they could themselves become the new owners.

  39. The following two-part analysis discusses the economic basis for the reforms, from a Marxist perspective. The first part lays the ground-work by discussing the experience of the Russian revolution and economy, which is important because the Chinese economy was heavily inspired by it. Which is also why the bureaucracy was afraid of the economy stagnating like it did in the later USSR-years, and therefore felt that big reforms were necessary to protect their own positions of privilege.

  40. I might be able to explain the fictional crush thing from a demi perspective. I have had quite a lot of crushes on fictional characters. For me, the connection turns out to not have to be a two-way one - at least not when it comes to fictional characters. Because I get to know fictional characters much more closely than I do most real people, I get to hear their thoughts, see them deal with emotions and hard-ships, see them happy and sad, know their little quirks and interests, I end up forming quite a strong connection with a lot of them.

  41. Isn’t this ‘neo-feudalism’ just capitalism with more monopolies and less liberalism or something? Unless civilisation collapses back to a preindustrial state where a feudal order returns. I think that a futuristic high tech slavery is unlikely because the capitalist economy is now in the beginning of its deepest crisis. The coming technological revolution with AI, robots, nanotech, biotech and stuff probably needs socialism first.

  42. Marx's argument around the development of modes of production was about the general development. So yes, the particular systems might (and have) regressed before, but the general system will always progress towards higher productivity. We have seen a regression with the USSR collapsing from a worker's state to a capitalist one. But there is a limit. Trotsky explained that the counter-revolution always throws society back, but never as far back as the starting point of the revolution.

  43. Make a new character and put it in the FC. Incase anyone ever comes back. And take your main elsewhere.

  44. Thank you for this suggestion! The idea had never crossed my mind, and I've been sitting in my old dead FC for almost two years. You just freed my from it!

  45. Who built the store? Who produces the value which the capitalist lives off? At all levels along the chain it is the workers. The capitalist just had the capital to pay for it to happen and based on that they skim most of the value off the top.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News Reporter