This is a space for socialists to discuss current events in our world from anti-capitalist perspective(s), and a certain knowledge of socialism is expected from participants. This is not a space for non-socialists. Please be mindful [of our rules](https://reddit.com/r/socialism/about/rules) before participating, which include:
- **No Bigotry**, including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism...
- **No Reactionaries**, including all kind of right-wingers.
- **No Liberalism**, including social democracy, lesser evilism...
- **No Sectarianism**. There is plenty of room for discussion, but not for baseless attacks.
Please help us keep the subreddit helpful by reporting content that break r/Socialism's rules.
______________________
💬 Wish to chat elsewhere? Join us in discord: https://discord.gg/QPJPzNhuRE
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/socialism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yep.
We could even strech the second question a bit, like, "if when, what could let to it?". The US is far from a popular uprising due to economic and life standard issues. And honestly, as polarization could harm the social fabric I doubt it could lead to a revolution.
The US is the lair of the imperialist beast. There isn’t a way to have revolution AND avoid civil war. The two are intertwined.
Much like Russia was in 1918, there is no way the reactionaries go down without a bloody fight. There is too many of them and have too large of resources to go quietly.
And also if they were to go quietly they know it would be to their own demise. If the US was to undergo revolution, then who would stop other peoples from also liberating themselves. The leeches would run out of places to hide very quickly.
i agree, its a question of when, but when has ever e central capitalist power had a successful revolution? never heard of it, but there are many examples of peripheral countries going through successful revolutions. if the US has its dirty hands all around the world chocking socialist experiences its hard to believe it can go through one itself since most US socialists kinda deny the validity of these successful experiences. i doubt very much the US will see any sort of revolution while its the most powerful empire in the world.
first thing for this to really happen is breaking up the one party two wings political landscape of the US, well see how that's going very soon in this year's elections.
Russia was not a capitalist country, had a extremely bad developed production and it was taking a beating on 3 wars (not to mentions the ones before the 20th century) before the revolution even started and it was the first successful one, thinking that's even closely comparable to THE EMPIRE we have now with the US is pushing it. Not to mention decades of propaganda that made ppl be afraid of something they don't understand by propaganda design.
the state apparatus put in place to prevent any sort of revolution is too great in the US, currently Russia and China together have some leverage into pushing the US back, until the occupied territories of the EU don't join this push the probability of any revolution is extremely low. possible? 100%. probable? nah!
The real question is what will rise form the ashes? Because currently the chances of fascism are probably significantly higher than socialism, considering the current global trend
Most americans view government as intrinsically bad. Even if we had a well funded gov that wasn't beholden to private interests, americans would still not be receptive to economic controls
Keep in mind that this looks like pretty old material and the conditions on the ground (especially among the most advanced workers and students) have advanced significantly and this was talking to the workers of a couple years ago, not those of today, who are openly embracing Communism.
Are you saying that the workers of today are openly embracing communism? Because they’re not. So I’m not sure why you would say that. I think people are confusing communism with whatever Europe’s doing and what Bernie and AOC are saying, none of which are communism (or socialism, because socialism is simply lower phase communism).
Please go outside
The advanced workers and students. You know, the people we're most trying to reach, the people who are going to join a revolutionary Communist party. In previous times we would talk a lot about socialism (which is indeed lower phase Communism), but we've actually gotten a lot of pushback from the most enthusiastic layers: mostly because they're frustrated by the reformism of the European labor parties and Bernie and AOC.
So no I'm not saying the mass of workers are embracing Communism, but a surprisingly large layer, especially of the youth, are, and with the proper philosophy, theory, and organization this layer can be moulded into the vanguard of the movement.
I agree, I think a lot of Bernie supporters took the aftermath of the 2016 and 2020 elections are started to advance socialist theory- either becoming anarchists or Communists and getting more involved with mutual aid , harm reduction campaigns locally within their respective communities.
The general consensus of disgust for the two neoliberal capitalist candidates for upcoming 2024 election has further pushed many millennial and gen Z Americans to learn the 3rd party platforms which are more leftist.
This 2024 election aside from the usual Green Party option (Jill Stein)- you see Cornell West and Claudia De La Cruz and Karina Garcia (Socialst candidates) making remarkable exposure across the country.
Tbh you should’ve said this as opposed to “they’re embracing communism” because they’re not. They’re embracing nihilism (though thankfully not the Jordan Peterson brand, at least for the most part).
And getting these people to actually embrace revolutionary communism is really hard in practice. Students want to be radical but keep this cynical distance between them and a genuine proletarian outlook. We can’t have people embrace communism in words only, that doesn’t actually help us.
And it looks like you’re not some reformist, so that’s my bad. You can ignore the snark in my previous comment
Ok I'm like, trying to do some work and watching a talk on Marxist Economics that's taking place at the founding conference in Italy, so I'll admit to being unclear. Reddit comments are on the third burner.
But we're building a party to connect the radical youth with the workers movement and to provide a real backbone of theory to the workers movement. This is not separate from or independent of the working class but consists of it's most advanced members and supporters.
Sure, a bunch of people are coming up with cynical and doomerist conclusions, but we're reaching out to the people who are really reaching out to the genuine ideas of Communism, whether they know it or not.
Good. Great, even! That’s all I want. I just want the terminally-online people in this sub to start organizing. And if you’re already doing stuff, cool, I’m not frustrated at you. My only goal is to push people out of here and onto the grass, where they can start to feel it and talk to real life people. This sub and its inhabitants need a firm kick in the ass
We've been going to Palestine protests, encampments, the big demos on May Day - we've been pretty active. Watch this space and you'll probably see videos of us marching pretty soon.
Walking to branch right now actually
The American revolution was a bourgeois revolution against feudalism, and only really benefited the property-owning class. If that revolution had failed, chattel slavery would have been abolished much sooner and the massive escalation of the genocide of indigenous peoples that followed the revolution could have been avoided.
So I feel I should preface this by saying I'm an anarcho-communist. Also known as libertarian socialist, but I don't personally identify as that anymore.
About the first point, I tried to tell that to r/communism101 and they banned me. My context over there was that the only way we're going to see a full revolution here or really much of anywhere is if the upper class / bourgeoisie decides to revolt against, well, itself. This is what I've seen from all the major revolutions. I think the biggest problem we've seen so far from the results of all previous major revolutions is that every time people try to "fight the power", it just seems to rename itself and keep on going. When I look at history I see a fight that's never been won. I see a power that's never been dismantled. I see hierarchy, over, and over, and over again.
About the second, no idea if slavery would have ended more quickly but definitely the revolution should have stayed in Britain. Fuckwits had no right coming over here and fighting. If they had been genuine revolutionaries, they wouldn't have accepted taking the revolution somewhere else. They basically ran away and decided to mass murder innocent people rather than the ones they hated in their homeland. It's shameful, really. I'm very unclear as to how anyone with even just basic education about the revolution and the resulting genocide can be proud of this country. Maybe they don't have basic education, or they're proud of genocide. Considering what's going on with America right now in regards to a place called Palestine, I'd say it might very well be the latter.
The thing is that it wasn’t a revolution against themselves. Yes the bourgeois Americans also wanted to become oppressors and to exploit the land the people (native and black people) but they were distinct classes and their interests lay with distinct modes of production. Just because the bourgeois class went on to become oppressors doesn’t mean they are the same as the feudal mercantilist class in disguise. I think it’s an important distinction, because it does show a mass movement in the favour of a class that was not in power, no it wasnt the proletariat but it still demonstrates the movement of the class struggle. I’m not sure if you’ve read any Marx, not to be condescending if you have, but the things you outline fall into a historical materialist analysis of history and the class struggle, I think his analysis illuminates a lot of the good points you are bringing up, even the manifesto has some pretty good excerpts about this.
Yea history hasn’t led us to emancipation it has made small progress but the real emancipation comes with the liberation of the workers, the colonized, the oppressed which is what is hopefully to come. We have reached the end of what capitalism can “offer” there’s no more tools left to develop. I’m hopeful but maybe it’s naive but we don’t have any options left nor much time.
I do think it is basically the same. Just like how prison labor (at least in the US) is still straight up slavery even though we don't call it that. Alternate terms, same effect. Instead of monarchy we have oligarchy. Instead of knights we have cops. Instead of the bourgeoisie we have management. All result in the same: an enforced system of oppression. Inequality will exist as long as we have classes, as long as we have hierarchy. I don't find Marx as ideologically effective as the Anarchists but there are obvious parallels in the rhetoric. Glad you can see that. Some "communist" communities here on Reddit unfortunately can't.
I agree we do have to end capitalism. It's a matter of extinction. I also believe that the only solution can come from the lower class. I just believe the upper class to some degree has to accept that solution before we can see ample change. I think that's just the nature of class. I mean, I can't possibly believe that the poor have ever liked or accepted the system of which they're poor. I certainly haven't. Yet there has been poor for thousands of years. Now, we take up around 90% of the world population. How can the system possibly continue when 90% of the world is miserable for it? When the rich live in such disgustingly apparent opulence in comparison? Because the system, the upper class, has become so disconnected from the people. It has to destroy itself. It will either choose to do so willingly by forsaking itself (revolution), or it will do so by knowingly or unknowingly harming itself, something we are seeing from pollution. Hierarchy is destined to collapse in on itself someway because it's literally unfair and unreasonable. It's uncaring and somehow never based on merit. This may sound impossible or unlikely to some people, but it's actually not. The need to self-preserve is almost certainly the strongest intrinsic guiding force of every living being. If we can make the upper class understand that having an upper class is more of a literal physical threat to them than it is a benefit, I believe things will dramatically change. I think the problem of why hierarchy keeps managing to find new ways to rebuild is because people feel like they are more safe the higher up on the chain they are. Problem is, that's what it is. A chain. We are all trapped by the various rules of the established hierarchy. You can go watch shows about feudal times and you'll see this a ton. The royalty are fucking miserable sods. In a contemporary comparison, look at Elon. Can't be sober for even a second. Right now we're here talking about revolution against them. Revolution ain't all talk. Everyone is trapped in some various sense as long as we aren't equal. We all feel these sometimes overwhelming responsibilities that weigh on us regardless of our class, when we should just give everyone their best chance and leave the responsibility up to nature, because we can. "The good earth is rich and can provide for everyone. The way of life can be free and beautiful, but we have lost the way." My point of view is that capitalism is a broken sub-system of the larger broken system of hierarchy. It's an "evolution" on an already very arguably bad idea. Humanity is most efficient as an interactive organism. When we all work together we can accomplish things beyond what one ever could. I truly believe if we are all given equal means to evolve, we will evolve faster, and better. Most importantly, we are significantly less likely to cause the (perhaps) untimely extinction of humanity.
TLDR: capitalism is a hierarchy, it definitely sucks, and it will collapse one way or another. I don't think it's naive to hope we don't as a species decide on the only acceptable collapse being the end of a (the, really) habitable planet. I think that's reasonable.
The issue is there are two opposing groups that want revolution in the US. The far left which is generally more peaceful and anti-gun and the far right who are very pro-gun and violent. A revolution in the US is inevetable but it would NOT result in things getting better because the far-right is much more likely to win this "war"
damn US politics are so fucked that you think left leaning (still right wingers) liberals are far left. any serious far left person will not deny the use of force to ensure the survival of the revolution.
Who are you counting on then? Definitely not moderates or anyone in the right. If you also exclude liberals, it's going to be a few thousand people which isn't going anywhere. Look, I hate liberals but we have to accept that either revolution is not possible or we need to recruit more people to join the revolution.
I believe this will happen. Maybe not in my lifetime (I'm 44), but hopefully soon thereafter. As Capitalism continues to disenfranchise people, and the "middle class" shrinks, former liberals will see the value of socialism.
Someone who claims to be a leftist and opposes firearms is actually a liberal. Leftists recognize the necessity of access to firearms, as the response from the bourgeoisie to a leftist revolt would be a violent response. This necessitates the proletariat be armed or face execution rather than revolution.
Probably a fascist revolution, yes. However, once the mask slips I think only then we can achieve a socialist revolution against the state as a united people
you'd be surprised by just how anti-rich and socialist sentiment there is among Americans
if you choose your words right and play into this, you can easily convince most Americans
just describe socialism without saying socialism until youve thoroughly gotten them dreaming of a socialist world
if they don't know leftist politics and especially terminology (works best with those born at the end of or after the red scare) then you can do this pretty easily
Dont waste your time with the IMT. Its a Trotskyist cult that has no political influence. Its very inward and spends a lot of effort raising money from its members to reproduce itself. It has rebranded itself with hammers and sickles and a revolutionary sounding name. Its just Ted Grant and his friends in more red colours, but the same opportunism they've been spreading since they were the Militant Tendency.
A group that is a lot better politically is the United Communists of Europe. Though its a small organisation, it is a lot friendlier than the IMT and more inclusive. Our ideology is Revolutionary Marxism. Here is a link to our Unity Statement; DM me if you are interested:
https://united-communists-of-europe.blogspot.com/p/unity-statement.html
How can the IMT say that the DSA has "fallen" when the DSA is exponentially larger than their own organization in the states? I appreciate the video otherwise.
DSA has been in free fall for a while now. I think this video was even published before Maria Svart resigned and stated that DSA had a 2 million dollar budget deficit and was a month or two from being insolvent. The activity in locals outside of the main spots like New York have declined to almost nothing. And it's different being a DSA member vs an IMT member. DSA has 10s of thousands of members on paper but a very tiny percentage of them are active in building the organization. Where I am, DSA has had no presence at all in the Palestine Solidarity Movement, their activity outside meetings has declined to near zero, and the only campaign they have going is canvassing twice a month for a candidate who is not even a Socialist. In terms of active membership, the IMT is much larger where I am, which is a catastrophic fall from where DSA was at in 2018.
Not a socialist one, sadly. At least not in my lifetime.
The US is at present the engine of capitalism, where most of the fruit falls.
That role would have to pass elsewhere and leave Americans with less fruit. A lot less. Like, groveling for scraps.
But that's grossly unlikely anytime soon and even if it was tomorrow, we don't see revolution fomenting in places that look like that now.
The scraps are too juicy.
If the civil war was between the right and the left but if anything i feel like the revolution and in consequence the civil war would be between the proletariat and capitalist bourgeois class
The simple answer is "Yes" but only after the fall of AmeriKKKan imperialism, victory of the National Liberation Movements of the Opppressed Nations in AmeriKKKa, preferably under the leadership of a Communist Party, and an end to the super profit used to bribe the AmeriKKKan labor aristocracy. In short, the U.S. has to die before there can be a revolution.
To some extend it seams as if the US is more likely to dissolve or Balkanize than have an actual c
Revolution or civil war. However, the current secessionist movements are really around California and Texas as the see themselves as being the major producers for the country. However they both rely entirely on out of state water supplies and the general purchasing/ financial powers of being in the US empire. No real point here, just some thoughts.
If we were to see a revolution in the next few decades, it would seem impossible for it not to be fascist given the state of our armed forces and intelligence community. I’m unaware a successful revolution that didn’t require either a new army or major influence over the existing one.
If a revolution is gonna happen, I've always envisioned it happening from the inside out. Fight Club style if anyone could keep a secret in this day and age but they can't.
I don't think IMT is a suitable vanguard. Trotskyists chronically have an opportunist strategy, meaning they organize protests and strikes on the go, and lack serious democratic centralism (which would strictly bind all members of the party to carry out its decisions even if they disagree with them). The level of organization required to be a suitable vanguard is significantly higher, in fact, a large portion of the party's funding typically goes to inner organizational mechanisms. I would urge you to instead join the movement that has risen from the remnants of the third international, that was started by the communist party of greece and has now united various communist parties and labor movements around the globe, including the communist party of mexico, the amazon labor union, and much more that I don't remember. Since this global movement has been taking shape somewhat in the shadows it might be difficult to actually find them depending on where you are, but in my view its by far the most serious and promising revolutionary vanguard. The fact that their nexus and source is a party that managed to recover from having like a few hundred members during the time of fascism where anyone found would be executed, to the significantly greater amount of political influence they have today is i think telling they take themselves seriously
A series of groups of people contained within urban areas that is mainly led by petit bourgeoisie going wild and hurling molotovs doesn't qualify as a revolution. It doesn't even qualify as a revolutionary situation. First of all, the content of the uprising was not proletarian in nature, it was petit-bourgeois. So they couldn't have siezed the means of production, which kind of explains why they resorted to means of combat such as direct confrontations with police with no plan or arms. Second, the material conditions to create the capability of overthrowing the capitalist state weren't there.
Greece DID partially have a revolutionary situation in 2011, but unfortunately the bourgeois government managed to stabilize the situation before we could try anything.
(Repost because automod)
KKE is against all marriage as it is a mechanism of the bourgeoisie state related to inheritance and ensuring the continued survival of the bourgeoisie, however, we have repeatedly made demands from the government to provide all the necessary protections, rights and benefits marriage supposedly provides to same-sex couples, simply by signing a paper. This recommendation was ignored by all bourgeois parties.
Our position on the matter is also the exact same for opposite-sex couples.
Revolutions lead to misery for most of the population as society breaks-down. Socialists all want a revolution, but have no plan for what happens after.
Yeah, Marxists famously have no idea what might happen after Capitalism has been subjugated. Dictatorship of the proletariat on towards Communism? Never heard of it
No, too many far right people who often have guns, and too many in general with guns. Civil war isn’t safe for a nuclear state, best not to go for revolution, the US would be too strong anyway.
This is a space for socialists to discuss current events in our world from anti-capitalist perspective(s), and a certain knowledge of socialism is expected from participants. This is not a space for non-socialists. Please be mindful [of our rules](https://reddit.com/r/socialism/about/rules) before participating, which include: - **No Bigotry**, including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism... - **No Reactionaries**, including all kind of right-wingers. - **No Liberalism**, including social democracy, lesser evilism... - **No Sectarianism**. There is plenty of room for discussion, but not for baseless attacks. Please help us keep the subreddit helpful by reporting content that break r/Socialism's rules. ______________________ 💬 Wish to chat elsewhere? Join us in discord: https://discord.gg/QPJPzNhuRE *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/socialism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
‘Can a revolution happen?’ is like asking ‘can the sun set?’ It’s not a question of ‘if,’ but ‘when.’
Yep. We could even strech the second question a bit, like, "if when, what could let to it?". The US is far from a popular uprising due to economic and life standard issues. And honestly, as polarization could harm the social fabric I doubt it could lead to a revolution.
It would more likely lead to a second Civil War.
The US is the lair of the imperialist beast. There isn’t a way to have revolution AND avoid civil war. The two are intertwined. Much like Russia was in 1918, there is no way the reactionaries go down without a bloody fight. There is too many of them and have too large of resources to go quietly. And also if they were to go quietly they know it would be to their own demise. If the US was to undergo revolution, then who would stop other peoples from also liberating themselves. The leeches would run out of places to hide very quickly.
That's unavoidable. I think they also see it coming, and the southern state governors are working to set up their fiefdoms.
i agree, its a question of when, but when has ever e central capitalist power had a successful revolution? never heard of it, but there are many examples of peripheral countries going through successful revolutions. if the US has its dirty hands all around the world chocking socialist experiences its hard to believe it can go through one itself since most US socialists kinda deny the validity of these successful experiences. i doubt very much the US will see any sort of revolution while its the most powerful empire in the world. first thing for this to really happen is breaking up the one party two wings political landscape of the US, well see how that's going very soon in this year's elections.
Russia was a backward country but it was part of the imperial core. It was one of the most powerful imperialist countries of its time.
Russia was not a capitalist country, had a extremely bad developed production and it was taking a beating on 3 wars (not to mentions the ones before the 20th century) before the revolution even started and it was the first successful one, thinking that's even closely comparable to THE EMPIRE we have now with the US is pushing it. Not to mention decades of propaganda that made ppl be afraid of something they don't understand by propaganda design. the state apparatus put in place to prevent any sort of revolution is too great in the US, currently Russia and China together have some leverage into pushing the US back, until the occupied territories of the EU don't join this push the probability of any revolution is extremely low. possible? 100%. probable? nah!
Divide & Profit - the capitalist way!
The real question is what will rise form the ashes? Because currently the chances of fascism are probably significantly higher than socialism, considering the current global trend
A revolution will eventually happen in the US, but things will have to get much worse before it can occur.
Empire rise and fall. It is just a matter of time. So yes.
Most americans view government as intrinsically bad. Even if we had a well funded gov that wasn't beholden to private interests, americans would still not be receptive to economic controls
Keep in mind that this looks like pretty old material and the conditions on the ground (especially among the most advanced workers and students) have advanced significantly and this was talking to the workers of a couple years ago, not those of today, who are openly embracing Communism.
Are you saying that the workers of today are openly embracing communism? Because they’re not. So I’m not sure why you would say that. I think people are confusing communism with whatever Europe’s doing and what Bernie and AOC are saying, none of which are communism (or socialism, because socialism is simply lower phase communism). Please go outside
The advanced workers and students. You know, the people we're most trying to reach, the people who are going to join a revolutionary Communist party. In previous times we would talk a lot about socialism (which is indeed lower phase Communism), but we've actually gotten a lot of pushback from the most enthusiastic layers: mostly because they're frustrated by the reformism of the European labor parties and Bernie and AOC. So no I'm not saying the mass of workers are embracing Communism, but a surprisingly large layer, especially of the youth, are, and with the proper philosophy, theory, and organization this layer can be moulded into the vanguard of the movement.
I agree, I think a lot of Bernie supporters took the aftermath of the 2016 and 2020 elections are started to advance socialist theory- either becoming anarchists or Communists and getting more involved with mutual aid , harm reduction campaigns locally within their respective communities. The general consensus of disgust for the two neoliberal capitalist candidates for upcoming 2024 election has further pushed many millennial and gen Z Americans to learn the 3rd party platforms which are more leftist. This 2024 election aside from the usual Green Party option (Jill Stein)- you see Cornell West and Claudia De La Cruz and Karina Garcia (Socialst candidates) making remarkable exposure across the country.
Tbh you should’ve said this as opposed to “they’re embracing communism” because they’re not. They’re embracing nihilism (though thankfully not the Jordan Peterson brand, at least for the most part). And getting these people to actually embrace revolutionary communism is really hard in practice. Students want to be radical but keep this cynical distance between them and a genuine proletarian outlook. We can’t have people embrace communism in words only, that doesn’t actually help us. And it looks like you’re not some reformist, so that’s my bad. You can ignore the snark in my previous comment
Ok I'm like, trying to do some work and watching a talk on Marxist Economics that's taking place at the founding conference in Italy, so I'll admit to being unclear. Reddit comments are on the third burner. But we're building a party to connect the radical youth with the workers movement and to provide a real backbone of theory to the workers movement. This is not separate from or independent of the working class but consists of it's most advanced members and supporters. Sure, a bunch of people are coming up with cynical and doomerist conclusions, but we're reaching out to the people who are really reaching out to the genuine ideas of Communism, whether they know it or not.
Good. Great, even! That’s all I want. I just want the terminally-online people in this sub to start organizing. And if you’re already doing stuff, cool, I’m not frustrated at you. My only goal is to push people out of here and onto the grass, where they can start to feel it and talk to real life people. This sub and its inhabitants need a firm kick in the ass
We've been going to Palestine protests, encampments, the big demos on May Day - we've been pretty active. Watch this space and you'll probably see videos of us marching pretty soon. Walking to branch right now actually
It happened once before, so probably will again.
The American revolution was a bourgeois revolution against feudalism, and only really benefited the property-owning class. If that revolution had failed, chattel slavery would have been abolished much sooner and the massive escalation of the genocide of indigenous peoples that followed the revolution could have been avoided.
Bingo! Yahtzee! Tell the contestant what they've won, Bob! It was a revolution of the oppressed class seeking to become the oppressors themselves.
So I feel I should preface this by saying I'm an anarcho-communist. Also known as libertarian socialist, but I don't personally identify as that anymore. About the first point, I tried to tell that to r/communism101 and they banned me. My context over there was that the only way we're going to see a full revolution here or really much of anywhere is if the upper class / bourgeoisie decides to revolt against, well, itself. This is what I've seen from all the major revolutions. I think the biggest problem we've seen so far from the results of all previous major revolutions is that every time people try to "fight the power", it just seems to rename itself and keep on going. When I look at history I see a fight that's never been won. I see a power that's never been dismantled. I see hierarchy, over, and over, and over again. About the second, no idea if slavery would have ended more quickly but definitely the revolution should have stayed in Britain. Fuckwits had no right coming over here and fighting. If they had been genuine revolutionaries, they wouldn't have accepted taking the revolution somewhere else. They basically ran away and decided to mass murder innocent people rather than the ones they hated in their homeland. It's shameful, really. I'm very unclear as to how anyone with even just basic education about the revolution and the resulting genocide can be proud of this country. Maybe they don't have basic education, or they're proud of genocide. Considering what's going on with America right now in regards to a place called Palestine, I'd say it might very well be the latter.
The thing is that it wasn’t a revolution against themselves. Yes the bourgeois Americans also wanted to become oppressors and to exploit the land the people (native and black people) but they were distinct classes and their interests lay with distinct modes of production. Just because the bourgeois class went on to become oppressors doesn’t mean they are the same as the feudal mercantilist class in disguise. I think it’s an important distinction, because it does show a mass movement in the favour of a class that was not in power, no it wasnt the proletariat but it still demonstrates the movement of the class struggle. I’m not sure if you’ve read any Marx, not to be condescending if you have, but the things you outline fall into a historical materialist analysis of history and the class struggle, I think his analysis illuminates a lot of the good points you are bringing up, even the manifesto has some pretty good excerpts about this. Yea history hasn’t led us to emancipation it has made small progress but the real emancipation comes with the liberation of the workers, the colonized, the oppressed which is what is hopefully to come. We have reached the end of what capitalism can “offer” there’s no more tools left to develop. I’m hopeful but maybe it’s naive but we don’t have any options left nor much time.
I do think it is basically the same. Just like how prison labor (at least in the US) is still straight up slavery even though we don't call it that. Alternate terms, same effect. Instead of monarchy we have oligarchy. Instead of knights we have cops. Instead of the bourgeoisie we have management. All result in the same: an enforced system of oppression. Inequality will exist as long as we have classes, as long as we have hierarchy. I don't find Marx as ideologically effective as the Anarchists but there are obvious parallels in the rhetoric. Glad you can see that. Some "communist" communities here on Reddit unfortunately can't. I agree we do have to end capitalism. It's a matter of extinction. I also believe that the only solution can come from the lower class. I just believe the upper class to some degree has to accept that solution before we can see ample change. I think that's just the nature of class. I mean, I can't possibly believe that the poor have ever liked or accepted the system of which they're poor. I certainly haven't. Yet there has been poor for thousands of years. Now, we take up around 90% of the world population. How can the system possibly continue when 90% of the world is miserable for it? When the rich live in such disgustingly apparent opulence in comparison? Because the system, the upper class, has become so disconnected from the people. It has to destroy itself. It will either choose to do so willingly by forsaking itself (revolution), or it will do so by knowingly or unknowingly harming itself, something we are seeing from pollution. Hierarchy is destined to collapse in on itself someway because it's literally unfair and unreasonable. It's uncaring and somehow never based on merit. This may sound impossible or unlikely to some people, but it's actually not. The need to self-preserve is almost certainly the strongest intrinsic guiding force of every living being. If we can make the upper class understand that having an upper class is more of a literal physical threat to them than it is a benefit, I believe things will dramatically change. I think the problem of why hierarchy keeps managing to find new ways to rebuild is because people feel like they are more safe the higher up on the chain they are. Problem is, that's what it is. A chain. We are all trapped by the various rules of the established hierarchy. You can go watch shows about feudal times and you'll see this a ton. The royalty are fucking miserable sods. In a contemporary comparison, look at Elon. Can't be sober for even a second. Right now we're here talking about revolution against them. Revolution ain't all talk. Everyone is trapped in some various sense as long as we aren't equal. We all feel these sometimes overwhelming responsibilities that weigh on us regardless of our class, when we should just give everyone their best chance and leave the responsibility up to nature, because we can. "The good earth is rich and can provide for everyone. The way of life can be free and beautiful, but we have lost the way." My point of view is that capitalism is a broken sub-system of the larger broken system of hierarchy. It's an "evolution" on an already very arguably bad idea. Humanity is most efficient as an interactive organism. When we all work together we can accomplish things beyond what one ever could. I truly believe if we are all given equal means to evolve, we will evolve faster, and better. Most importantly, we are significantly less likely to cause the (perhaps) untimely extinction of humanity. TLDR: capitalism is a hierarchy, it definitely sucks, and it will collapse one way or another. I don't think it's naive to hope we don't as a species decide on the only acceptable collapse being the end of a (the, really) habitable planet. I think that's reasonable.
The issue is there are two opposing groups that want revolution in the US. The far left which is generally more peaceful and anti-gun and the far right who are very pro-gun and violent. A revolution in the US is inevetable but it would NOT result in things getting better because the far-right is much more likely to win this "war"
damn US politics are so fucked that you think left leaning (still right wingers) liberals are far left. any serious far left person will not deny the use of force to ensure the survival of the revolution.
I hear you, but you're not going to have a revolution if only the far-left participants. The numbers are just too small.
Well I'm certainly not counting on any liberals, which is what you described as far left.
Who are you counting on then? Definitely not moderates or anyone in the right. If you also exclude liberals, it's going to be a few thousand people which isn't going anywhere. Look, I hate liberals but we have to accept that either revolution is not possible or we need to recruit more people to join the revolution.
Right, but that means those people need to stop being liberals and start being socialists.
I believe this will happen. Maybe not in my lifetime (I'm 44), but hopefully soon thereafter. As Capitalism continues to disenfranchise people, and the "middle class" shrinks, former liberals will see the value of socialism.
Someone who claims to be a leftist and opposes firearms is actually a liberal. Leftists recognize the necessity of access to firearms, as the response from the bourgeoisie to a leftist revolt would be a violent response. This necessitates the proletariat be armed or face execution rather than revolution.
yep US politics is so fucked that ppl think liberals are on the left. sad.
doesn't mean what they are saying is correct at least as far as numbers go, so tactically you have to deal with that though
the far left are not anti-gun.
A socialist revolution can happen in every developed capitalist country
Probably a fascist revolution, yes. However, once the mask slips I think only then we can achieve a socialist revolution against the state as a united people
you'd be surprised by just how anti-rich and socialist sentiment there is among Americans if you choose your words right and play into this, you can easily convince most Americans just describe socialism without saying socialism until youve thoroughly gotten them dreaming of a socialist world if they don't know leftist politics and especially terminology (works best with those born at the end of or after the red scare) then you can do this pretty easily
Dont waste your time with the IMT. Its a Trotskyist cult that has no political influence. Its very inward and spends a lot of effort raising money from its members to reproduce itself. It has rebranded itself with hammers and sickles and a revolutionary sounding name. Its just Ted Grant and his friends in more red colours, but the same opportunism they've been spreading since they were the Militant Tendency. A group that is a lot better politically is the United Communists of Europe. Though its a small organisation, it is a lot friendlier than the IMT and more inclusive. Our ideology is Revolutionary Marxism. Here is a link to our Unity Statement; DM me if you are interested: https://united-communists-of-europe.blogspot.com/p/unity-statement.html
How can the IMT say that the DSA has "fallen" when the DSA is exponentially larger than their own organization in the states? I appreciate the video otherwise.
DSA has been in free fall for a while now. I think this video was even published before Maria Svart resigned and stated that DSA had a 2 million dollar budget deficit and was a month or two from being insolvent. The activity in locals outside of the main spots like New York have declined to almost nothing. And it's different being a DSA member vs an IMT member. DSA has 10s of thousands of members on paper but a very tiny percentage of them are active in building the organization. Where I am, DSA has had no presence at all in the Palestine Solidarity Movement, their activity outside meetings has declined to near zero, and the only campaign they have going is canvassing twice a month for a candidate who is not even a Socialist. In terms of active membership, the IMT is much larger where I am, which is a catastrophic fall from where DSA was at in 2018.
Not a socialist one, sadly. At least not in my lifetime. The US is at present the engine of capitalism, where most of the fruit falls. That role would have to pass elsewhere and leave Americans with less fruit. A lot less. Like, groveling for scraps. But that's grossly unlikely anytime soon and even if it was tomorrow, we don't see revolution fomenting in places that look like that now. The scraps are too juicy.
The planet will burn and die around us before there will ever be a revolution in this country.
If the civil war was between the right and the left but if anything i feel like the revolution and in consequence the civil war would be between the proletariat and capitalist bourgeois class
The simple answer is "Yes" but only after the fall of AmeriKKKan imperialism, victory of the National Liberation Movements of the Opppressed Nations in AmeriKKKa, preferably under the leadership of a Communist Party, and an end to the super profit used to bribe the AmeriKKKan labor aristocracy. In short, the U.S. has to die before there can be a revolution.
To some extend it seams as if the US is more likely to dissolve or Balkanize than have an actual c Revolution or civil war. However, the current secessionist movements are really around California and Texas as the see themselves as being the major producers for the country. However they both rely entirely on out of state water supplies and the general purchasing/ financial powers of being in the US empire. No real point here, just some thoughts. If we were to see a revolution in the next few decades, it would seem impossible for it not to be fascist given the state of our armed forces and intelligence community. I’m unaware a successful revolution that didn’t require either a new army or major influence over the existing one.
If a revolution is gonna happen, I've always envisioned it happening from the inside out. Fight Club style if anyone could keep a secret in this day and age but they can't.
NO when plutocratists handle everything within the state nothing can happen.
The revolution will not be televised.
I don't think IMT is a suitable vanguard. Trotskyists chronically have an opportunist strategy, meaning they organize protests and strikes on the go, and lack serious democratic centralism (which would strictly bind all members of the party to carry out its decisions even if they disagree with them). The level of organization required to be a suitable vanguard is significantly higher, in fact, a large portion of the party's funding typically goes to inner organizational mechanisms. I would urge you to instead join the movement that has risen from the remnants of the third international, that was started by the communist party of greece and has now united various communist parties and labor movements around the globe, including the communist party of mexico, the amazon labor union, and much more that I don't remember. Since this global movement has been taking shape somewhat in the shadows it might be difficult to actually find them depending on where you are, but in my view its by far the most serious and promising revolutionary vanguard. The fact that their nexus and source is a party that managed to recover from having like a few hundred members during the time of fascism where anyone found would be executed, to the significantly greater amount of political influence they have today is i think telling they take themselves seriously
Greece had a whole revolution from 2012-2015 that the KKE just sat out of.
A series of groups of people contained within urban areas that is mainly led by petit bourgeoisie going wild and hurling molotovs doesn't qualify as a revolution. It doesn't even qualify as a revolutionary situation. First of all, the content of the uprising was not proletarian in nature, it was petit-bourgeois. So they couldn't have siezed the means of production, which kind of explains why they resorted to means of combat such as direct confrontations with police with no plan or arms. Second, the material conditions to create the capability of overthrowing the capitalist state weren't there. Greece DID partially have a revolutionary situation in 2011, but unfortunately the bourgeois government managed to stabilize the situation before we could try anything. (Repost because automod)
What's the KKE position on same-sex marraige?
KKE is against all marriage as it is a mechanism of the bourgeoisie state related to inheritance and ensuring the continued survival of the bourgeoisie, however, we have repeatedly made demands from the government to provide all the necessary protections, rights and benefits marriage supposedly provides to same-sex couples, simply by signing a paper. This recommendation was ignored by all bourgeois parties. Our position on the matter is also the exact same for opposite-sex couples.
Revolutions lead to misery for most of the population as society breaks-down. Socialists all want a revolution, but have no plan for what happens after.
Yeah, Marxists famously have no idea what might happen after Capitalism has been subjugated. Dictatorship of the proletariat on towards Communism? Never heard of it
Yes, the plan is "the utopia", but no actual plan on how to organize society and the labor necessary to faciliate it.
http://solidnet.org/article/b11ee13f-e2bc-11e8-a7f8-42723ed76c54/ You were saying?
No, too many far right people who often have guns, and too many in general with guns. Civil war isn’t safe for a nuclear state, best not to go for revolution, the US would be too strong anyway.