My economics professor's cope(hexbear.net)

The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands of the State, i.e., of the proletariat organised as the ruling class; and to increase the total productive forces as rapidly as possible.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

ucanbcarer [none/use name]@hexbear.net

1 point

4 years ago

Deleted by creator

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

RedDawn [he/him]@hexbear.net

3 points

4 years ago

The quotation I gave you was, first of all, not one of the numbered demands like a graduated income tax schedule but in fact one of the “general principles” which are “as correct today as ever”, and the Communist Party of China seems to be well aware of the fact that the practical application in China depends on the historical conditions existing in China, they’ve formulated their entire approach to implementing socialism on that very idea. That’s why they call their economic system Socialism with Chinese Characteristics. Calling their system just “capitalist” kind of ignores some fundamental questions about how an economy operates. Who is making the decisions in the economy, for the benefit of whom and at the expense of whom?

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

ucanbcarer [none/use name]@hexbear.net

2 points

4 years ago

Deleted by creator

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

RedDawn [he/him]@hexbear.net

3 points

4 years ago

Is the Norwegian state a tool of the Norwegian proletariat or of the bourgeoisie? Your problem is you’re trying to remove class from the analysis of how the state functions. That’s especially apparent with the dim-witted comparison to Nazism which operated the economy in favor of the bourgeoisie at the expense of the working class, it’s literally the opposite thing. but when you have no class analysis all you see is “authoritarianism, theyre literally the same as Nazis”.

Funny how you literally quote Marx saying that the implementation of socialism will depend on the historical conditions of the country, then in the very next comment hand wave away “talk of material conditions” as if it doesn’t matter, as if the material conditions of the working class haven’t improved at a nearly miraculous pace in China, in stark contrast of the conditions in capitalist countries over the same time. Like sorry Xi, it doesnt matter that you’re eliminating poverty, you haven’t dissolved the state after abolishing the commodity form, therefore you’re a dirty capitalist.

The good thing is that it doesn’t really matter how many western leftists keep spouting this nonsense, the tens of millions of Chinese communists will continue building socialism without even knowing or caring about these internet leftists seething about it.

permalink

report

parent

Show more comments

[ - ]

CyborgMarx [any, any]@hexbear.net

9 points

4 years ago

Also how would you decide what is “genuinely transitional” and what is it transitioning to?

Organizational structures that undermine the modern logic of private capital accumulation and elevates worker and community ownership of the means of productions either thru local representative bodies or direct control, eventually leading to the abolition of commodity form, that’s what I mean by transitional

China’s regional devolution policies toward local municipal representative party control of state owned enterprises points to an outline of a transitional state in its early stages

Between capitalist and communist society there lies the period of the revolutionary transformation of the one into the other. Corresponding to this is also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat.

Marx, Critique of the Gotha Program (1875)

Not saying this is what China is, but if a vague outline of this transformation does develop because of Chinese regional devolution, well bucko we’re in business

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

invalidusernamelol [he/him]@hexbear.net

10 points

4 years ago

As much as it’s memed on, one of the primary contradictions of socialism/communism and command economies built on those principles (USSR) is literally “communism no iPhone”. We as workers under bourgeois dictatorship and exploitation can see that it’s all a lie, but those living in the USSR genuinely wanted Western consumer goods.

The productive forces of the Soviet states weren’t really designed for that sort of consumer production though as they were developed for war and siege. This led to a massive lack of consumer goods and the formation of huge black markets to fulfill the demand that the state couldn’t.

China saw this and attempted to solve it by just getting all the western companies to build their consumer goods factories there. Which so far seems to have worked really fucking well…

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

ucanbcarer [none/use name]@hexbear.net

1 point

4 years ago

Deleted by creator

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

invalidusernamelol [he/him]@hexbear.net

7 points

4 years ago

Marx was fucking wrong about so much lol, especially when it comes to actually running a socialist society against capitalist encirclement. His theories of revolution never panned out, as he saw revolution as starting in the industrialized core and propogating outward (which would have prevented imperial intervention in burgeoning revolution in the colonized world).

Maybe don’t treat the writings of a 200 year old theorist who never saw socialism so dogmatically. Also once again, I’m asking ultras to please look at living conditions for once in their lives. Maybe even talk to some fucking working class people or the 95% of Chinese citizens who support the decisions of the Communist party.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

ucanbcarer [none/use name]@hexbear.net

1 point

4 years ago

Deleted by creator

permalink

report

parent

Show more comments

[ - ]

ucanbcarer [none/use name]@hexbear.net

1 point

4 years ago

Deleted by creator

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

CyborgMarx [any, any]@hexbear.net

3 points

4 years ago

far from undermining “modern logic of private capital accumulation” has helped capitalism by providing a huge new market for labor and commodities

It’s also provided the Chinese Communist Party with enormous economic leverage and industrial capacity, you really can’t see any advantages to this arrangement?

Why? Because Huawei is a co-op? Or because some Chinese factories are state owned?

You’re describing the tail end of the devolution strategy, which capitalists in China take advantage of on the national scale, I’m specifically referring to the regional and municipal scale of organization which the Chinese state takes advantage of to guide national level industrial/infrastructure policy, if the transition happens, it’s gonna happen on the local level not the national/state level

even this is not true, as the level of state ownership is declining in terms of assets, employment and profits

What did you think I meant when I said devolution?

Once again, transition towards what?

I already told you, theoretically towards DotP, like I literally said that

and even if they were growing, what would they transition to?

DEVOLVED MUNICIPAL WORKER LEAD COOPERATIVES OR INDUSTRIAL COMBINES…that would eventually lead to DotP

or do Marxists call that rank opportunism and have railed against it for 150 years?

They also correctly railed against idealistic utopianism

Socialism is when the state delegates control of capitalist firms to smaller authorities.

If those smaller authorities directly represent the workers then yes, again that’s where the debate lays, it’s not about having fAitH it’s literally just me laying out the framework of THE DEBATE, it could go either way

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

ucanbcarer [none/use name]@hexbear.net

1 point

4 years ago

Deleted by creator

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

CyborgMarx [any, any]@hexbear.net

4 points

4 years ago

Use those last “IQ” points to read theory, specifically Marx’s critiques of the Paris Commune, you’ll understand where I’m coming from then, you almost got it keep it up :cool-dad:

permalink

report

parent

Show more comments

the_dunk_tank

!the_dunk_tank@hexbear.net

Create post

It’s the dunk tank.

This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances’ admins or moderators.

Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml

Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again

Community stats

1
Monthly active users
20K
Posts
432K
Comments

Community stats

Community moderators