By that I mean no alienating tech like Tiktok and such, strong middle class, normal seasons/no worry of climate crisis, general optimism about the future etc. etc.
By that I mean no alienating tech like Tiktok and such, strong middle class, normal seasons/no worry of climate crisis, general optimism about the future etc. etc.
You can’t. Capitalism has decayed, trying to move the clock backwards is where fascism comes from. That’s why fascism is reactionary, it’s an alliance of the Petite Bourgeoisie and Bourgeoisie against rising leftist sentiment among the Proletariat and Lumpenproletariat.
Trying to struggle backwards against the historical development of the Mode of Production in society is reactionary, Capitalism moves towards large monopolist syndicates which makes itself ripe for siezure and public ownership, ie socialization. Even if you successfully broke up monopolies, they would trend towards the same point we are at now.
Additionally, it was quite terrible for ethnic minority groups (still is), gender/sexual minority groups, women, etc., and this was in the context of trying to prevent a worker revolution similar to what happened in the USSR. The social safety nets were better so it was harder to look at universal free healthcare and education in the USSR and believe they had it better, with the fall of the USSR safety nets quickly eroded in the US.
Now, to escape this hellish landscape, we need to move forward, not backward, and that means progressing to Socialism. The way forward is via revolution, which starts with organizing. Without revolutionary theory, there can be no revolutionary movement.
The 2 best orgs in the US are Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO) and the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL). Pick one you like and is active near you! If you have any theory questions, I can make recommendations for a reading list, or answer directly to the best of my abilities. I’m no theory master or anything, but I consider myself decently well-read, with over 2 dozen books across Marxism and Marxism-Leninism under my belt, so I’m no slouch.
I have two questions.
After the revolution, how to you prevent the people that were influential during the revolution from seizing power for themselves, becoming the new bourgeoisie. This happened time and time again in practice.
Even in the best case scenario, the decisions on what to produce become centralized in the hands of politicians. Political systems that we tried so far don’t work that well in practice. Is this really the best solution?
This hasn’t happened “time and time again in practice.” What do you mean by a “new bourgeoisie?” How familiar are you with Marxism? You may want to read the book Blackshirts and Reds for clarifying and contextualizing the myriad successes and failures of AES states historically.
Again, please elaborate. Centralization is a natural consequence of market-based systems over time, therefore Marxists see central planning of public property to be the next phase in Mode of Production. Marxism isn’t about trying to force a new society, but moving along the natural progression in Mode of Production.
AES states have not been perfect, but they have dramatically improved on previous systems. I think a good intro to the process of historical development would be reading the short essay Why do Marxists fail to bring about the “Worker’s Paradise?” You seem to believe Socialism to be something that can be implemented by decree, by fiat, rather than something that forms over time. The laws of a system depend on the Mode of Production, the capacity for democratization increases alongside centralization and increases in the productive forces. This process is why Marx says the bourgeoisie produces “more than anything, its own gravediggers.”
I’d recommend reading the second link before the first, the second article gets to the heart of your issues and takes around 20 minutes, the first link is a full book and is generally a good read, not as immediately relevant.
Can I ask a doubt?
Bourgeoisie, Petite Bourgeoisie, Proletarait & LumpenproletariatWhat would be simpler terms(or brief 3-5 word plain language explanations) for those?
Ultra rich wealth/land hoarders/exploiters, Their immediate managers, facilitators and upper mid-level wealth/land hoarders, Average workers & Average people who are dissatisfied?
Bourgeoisie - Capital Owners, doesn’t need to labor to survive
Petite Bourgeoisie - Small Capital Owners, must labor to survive
Proletariat - Workers, sell their labor power to survive and own little to no Capital
Lumpenproletariat - criminals, sex workers, the scorned laborers of society
I think the established socialist terms are best, even if they require further explanation because our definition and understanding of “class” is the distinction between us and your average Republican. It’s the definition from which our entire understanding of politics flows. To a Republican “class” is a series of virtues you signal, self reliance by having a pickup truck, being a hard worker by having working man boots and not being college educated. A petit- or bourgeois man born with a silver spoon in his mouth can still be happily brought into the fold of “working class” so long as they get their hands dirty and don’t talk like “the liberal elite”.
To a Marxist, “class” is based on whether you have an exploitative or exploited relationship to production.
Socialist terms are fine for those politically involved but you need more digestible info for the masses. Keep it very simple. “The Working Class” is sometimes even too much. You need to reframe the US vs THEM to be Rich vs everyone else.
Dont say poor either. People dont want to think of themselves as poor even if they are. A lot of poor Americans think theyre middle class or petite bougouise but they arent. So steal the language. The Billionaires are attacking the middle class! Instead of convincing them they are something different than what they think they are just use their language to reshape their perspective.
There will be no revolution, mate.
So you’re certain that revolution is impossible, but you’re also certain that if there is a “strong middle class” in the future, that you would actually be a part of it?
Maybe you don’t understand that there isn’t simply any future to speak of at the moment.
With libs like you? Sadly, you might be right. You’ll whine about the world ending as you refuse to lift a finger to stop it.
In the dark times, should the stars also go out?
That’s like saying you can keep heating up water and have it never boil. Disparity is rising, revolution is already happening around the world. Capitalism is continuing to decay. Revolution is inevitable as long as climate collapse or World War 3 don’t end us first. It is the duty of Leftists to organize so that this revolution can be guided by revolutionary theory and not result in barbarism or fascism.
Something that Westerners would do well to remember is that the revolution may not happen where you are, but it doesn’t have to
Try to examine the absurdity of this statement for a moment. You think the current system of governance and control which has barely existed for a century or 2 is going to continue in perpetuity for the rest of human history? You could argue this version of global capitalism isnt even 100 years old yet if you look at the end of WW2 as the start. So your argument is that a system that is younger than some people still alive today will never end? Or is it that you think we will go extinct in the very near short term and people wont overthrow the government before that happens?
There just isn’t enough will or time.