- cross-posted to:
- memes@lemmygrad.ml
- cross-posted to:
- memes@lemmygrad.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
that applies to imperialism too.
plenty of anarcho-libs out there claiming to hate capitalism, while repeating cia talking points about china, venezuela, and so on.
imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism
Imperialism has changed quite a bit from Lenin, such as the current development of one large empire and several vassal states under it benefitting from imperialism. Lenin’s work is actually best translated as “current highest,” not “highest.” Economists like Cheng Enfu have developed theories of Neoimperialism, and Nkrumah with Neocolonialism.
I second this. I enjoyed reading Lenin’s Imperialism very much, but it also felt very dated (as it should, it’s well over 100 years old now). I can’t help but think that if Lenin were alive today, he’d agree. That doesn’t mean it’s not an incredibly important work that we can’t draw from today, but we should also understand how the world has changed since.
I haven’t read John Smith’s Imperialism in the 21st Century yet, but I’ve heard it’s a very good update.
Yep, Marxist-Leninists have been advancing our theory beyond Lenin. What Lenin laid out is still foundational for analyzing the imperialism of today, but we are no longer in the age of competing empires, but a dying mega-empire and the rise of the global south.
I dont currently see how the book can seem dated. I laughed when I read it a week ago how shockingly current it is. Like the fact that international banking is basically the mafia. The imf is like the number one evidence for it.
It’s not that it’s dated into being no longer accurate, it’s that conditions have changed since it was current. Marx didn’t live to see the same heights of imperialism Lenin saw. Lenin did not live to see the consolidation of all competing imperialist powers into one hegemon and several vassals. Lenin is critical and relevant to this day, but we also need to look at how imperialism has advanced.
Agreed. I might have misunderstood. I think black shirts and reds as well as washington bullets are pretty spot on in that regard.
and some can’t seem to see it happening!
My head-cannon of the differences
US Socialist (social democrat) - Busses should be free for everyone.
US Liberal - Free bus passes only for poor people
US Right-wing - Let the free-market decide and somehow only allow US citizens to ride busses.
Oh!? Well this is my head-cannon of the diffences…
US Communists - Just buses? Are you kidding me? We need at least 50k km of highspeed rail, make rail travel free for all, even tourists! And seize all gigafactories and data centers to pay for it.
US Democratic Socialist - Let’s do what Europe does* and provide free bus passes next to free healthcare.
US Progressive - Let the free-market decide for men. Free bus passes only for people of minoritized identities and only if the bus will combat climate change, so diesel buses are out of the question.
US Liberal - Let the free-market decide. Free bus passes if you can prove that you’re using it to go to work.
US Right-wing - Rob the poor blind! Those who don’t contribute to society, should be punished for it. And no buses. If you need a ride, buy a car. If you can’t afford one, then get a job you filthy commie! Also, it’s the rich that contribute to society, so it should be the poor who should pay the most taxes in order to help those who keep the US economy thriving.
US fascist - Transportation should be free for everyone, but especially for the native Americans. We believe in the power of the native Americans. And this all the fault of the rich. So kill the rich, kill the rich, kill the rich…Juice! Buses are part of their (((globalist elite))) agenda, the agenda of “you will own nothing and be happy”. Look up who runs the WEF. Pay good attention to their ((( affiliations ))). So let us native Americans, who speak English and aren’t brown, unite against the Khazarian (((billionaires))) and their brown globalist allies. We should provide free bus passes for non-native Americans however, under the condition that they’re run by ICE and only with destinations outside of the US.
- Very few countries in the EU provide free bus passes, so this group would actually be more to the left than EU social democrats and more close to EU socialist parties.
Good post.
deleted by creator
Lowkey yikes. I don’t want to associate myself with either graphic
Neither capitalist nor anti capitalist, but some secret third thing
(the secret third thing being fascism)
So, capitalism too
Fascism is probably heading more towards neo-Feudalism than sticking with traditional capitalism
No, no fascist country, even the longest standing ones like Franco’s Spain went back to feudalism, they remained firmly in capitalism.
Why not?
Because the Soviets were assholes. I didn’t realize that would be controversial. I wish folks wouldn’t restrict the concept of anti-capitalism to the ussr. Raised fist? Red and black?
What assholes, liberating millions of feudal peasants and modernizing an entire country and eliminating hunger and poverty and spreading literacy and giving women rights and revolutionizing agriculture and medicine and defeating the nazis and inventing space travel and supporting liberation movements around the world. What absolute pricks.
Edit: just saw you lower down being relatively chill
I was going to send a DM to cowbee, but it may be worth knowng for others. I’m a bit older and may be a “normie” leftist with moderate anti-cap views and have unexamined prejudices about the USSR. I liked what I read from Lenin/Marx (one work each, i know!) but don’t like the reality of what I know of Stalin so don’t want that association. After reading some more, I’ll reexamine the USSR prejudices. So thanks to cowbee and folks who didn’t assume malice
Great on you for owning up! If you want to learn more about Stalin specifically, Domenico Losurdo’s Stalin: The History and Critique of a Black Legend is one of the best contextualizations of Stalin to date. Losurdo doesn’t make him out to be a saint nor an exceptional Hitler-like demon, but instead correctly places him in his historical context using western sources. Though, of course, it’s a disservice to the millions of soviets to reduce the achievements of the soviet union purely to Stalin.
I’m impressed by your openness and I hope you have a good day
You’re on a site where the majority of users are Marxists right now, we’re pretty big fans of the soviet union. It wasn’t some utopia, but it was incredibly progressive for its time. Life expectancy doubled, literacy rates tripled, healthcare and education were free and high quality, housing was free or low cost, wages increased and working hours lowered, and society was democratized. Anti-capitalism isn’t restricted to Marxism-Leninism nor to the USSR specifically, but over here we uphold actually existing socialism.
Consider giving Blackshirts and Reds and This Soviet World a read, or check out the intro ML reading list I made.
Civil and Fair, so thanks. I’ll also pay more attention to the instance in the future if only to not be so baffled. Even if folks consider the Soviets progressive for the time, my 2 cents is that tying modern anticapitalism to the realities of USSR, especially Stalinism, does a disservice to progressive movements and even Marxism. But as you say, it’s a minority opinion, so I’ll accept my downvotes. Thanks again
Marxism-Leninism has been used by billions of people around the world for the purpose of liberating the working classes. I think you should do more research before saying such things.
deleted by creator
Creating division between people who want to make things better and people who want to maintain the current absolutely dogshit status quo is actually a good thing
We love gross generalizations. Most people I meet just don’t really think about it in those terms. I’d say it’s probably more accurate to describe liberal voters as not being anti-capitalist
Now a liberal politician? Yeah 100% pro capitalism
