Quote:
If your first instinct as a westerner is to criticize and lecture 3rd world communist movements, instead of learning from their successes, then you have internalized the patronizing arrogance of the colonial system you claim to oppose.
Quote:
If your first instinct as a westerner is to criticize and lecture 3rd world communist movements, instead of learning from their successes, then you have internalized the patronizing arrogance of the colonial system you claim to oppose.
These were your words from the previous comment. Are you against class war or not?
And when I say there’s no beneficial policy I mean you won’t ever get lasting reforms by electing better politicians, you’ll just get temporary concessions that will be taken away the next time there’s a crisis. I think looking at the fall of European social democracy since the dissolution of the USSR should prove my point: European workers opted for just getting “beneficial policy” instead of revolution, and now the benefits are gone.
Against class war? What does that matter for our discussion? There is a class war going on right now.
If there is no benificial policy, you should not argue or fight any revolution. Why do you keep talking about cases where there is concession with hyper capitalist corpos as if that is what defines beneficial policy? What are you smoking?
I thought when you were talking about fighting for beneficial policy what you meant was running electoral races trying to elect progressive candidates. IMO the better way to describe a revolutionary state is that it’s a whole new system with a different structure, it’s not just a matter of “policy.” Talking purely in terms of policy is missing the forest for the trees.
Can you please explain to me how the whole new better system works without policy?? You are in the forest. The trees are around you. You are being attacked by trees and say no look at the sea and there is no sea. You’re missing the trees, the forest, and the sea actually, for just blind flailing
I never said there wouldn’t be policy, lol.
Let me put it in other terms. Focusing on just “changing the policy” is like if you were a restaurant and they served you a plate full of sewage and you told your dinner party “ok we really need to make sure we get some better ingredients put in this thing.”
I don’t think we really disagree here. What I actually support concretely is for workers to have stronger unions that are linked to socialist parties and those socialist parties should build parallel power structures, armed and unarmed alike, that eventually threaten and destroy the capitalist state to replace it with a socialist state. Then that socialist state should tend to the needs of the working class, developing productive forces and redistributing wealth to create better outcomes. That would be done through what you call “beneficial policies.” I just think that when you only talk about the “beneficial policy” to a public that’s mainly used to hearing about reform rather than revolution it is easily co-opted by social democrats.