Cowbee

joined 2 years ago
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 11 months ago (2 children)

No worries! That happened a while ago, I voted to keep federated.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Soviets were "units." Not the same as unions, they were horizontal units that elected delegates from among themselves to participate in soviets of soviets vertically. I have a diagram linked in my other comment.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 6 points 11 months ago

It isn't from within, those are revolutionary orgs.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 11 months ago (4 children)

Both Unruffled and dbzer0 are admins, I think both got banned but the instance remained federated because the problem wasn't with the users.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 months ago

That's a fair point.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I'm not going to spend too much time debating a tankie, but I think most of these regimes kinda by definition are not socialist given how little power the workers had.

Using the USSR as an example, the workers had far more power and democratic participation in the economy. They couldn't have had much more, unfortunately, because democratic participation requires planning, and planning requires development. The USSR was underdeveloped, so it could not have been more democratized than it was.

When unions are suppressed and the military and the dictatorship are essentially the same thing, how could they be socialist?

They had a publicly owned and planned economy, drastically reduced wealth disparity, centralized production, and had universal free healthcare and education.

Socialism requires that workers own their workplaces, that they run them.

Incorrect. You are referring to cooperatives, which is not the same as Marxism. Engels actually wrote against such a system in Anti-Duhring, as cooperatives without central planning and ownership begets accumulation and competition, serving as a breeding ground for Capitalism. Cooperatives are not Marxist, because it transforms the proletarians into petite bourgeoisie.

This was not the case in the soviet union nor is it the case in china today, where businesses are either organized by the state (like in the soviet union) or mixed (CCP).

You're describing Marxism and saying it isn't Socialist, I am not sure what your point is. State planning is Marxist.

The state organizing businesses or whatever you want to call them would be fine if the people owned the state, but again these were/are dictatorships.

They were and are not dictatorships, from Soviet Democracy to whole-process people's democracy, there are democratic structures in place. It isn't liberal democracy, but it is democratic.

The people don't control anything at all in your so called marxist states, and so therefore they are not marxist.

Oh, but they did. You can read the linked sources.

Centralization is not something that I'm opposed to, but what does it matter how decentralized or centralized something is if it's not also democratically owned?

They were and are, though, this is a point you just assert over and over again without anything backing it up.

I would probably call myself a marxist if tankies hadn't so thoroughly stained the term.

I encourage you to read Marx. I understand that you likely won't agree with what I am saying in this comment, but if you want reading recommendations I can give suggestions. In particular, I think you should study Historical and Dialectical Materialism, a thorough understanding of each helps place AES countries and their successes and failures into context.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 11 months ago (7 children)

The Socialist instances regularly advocate that Leftists join an org like PSL or FRSO.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 11 months ago (2 children)

MLs don't downplay the participation of Anarchists in the Russian Revolution, at least not from what I have seen.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 months ago (9 children)

You're using them synonymously, you denied the Marxist states as "not Socialist," and have claimed the Marxists on Hexbear are "tankies." Can you meaningfully explain the difference between Marxism and "tankies?" Engels himself even wrote On Authority because Anarchists constantly accused him and Marx of being authoritarian, it isn't a new concept, because Marx advocated for centralization of the Means of Production Anarchists stood firmly opposed.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 6 points 11 months ago (6 children)

Thought it was Unruffled who got banned, did dbzer0 also get banned?

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 17 points 11 months ago

You also mald for days on end and get banned even from liberals for it.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 11 points 11 months ago

Exploding Heads is a literal Nazi instance, defederated by pretty much everyone.

view more: ‹ prev next ›