Assuming that historical materialism is true, that you have to develop capitalism before socialism can work, and there must be a declining rate of profit and acceleration of the crises of capitalism before the mass of the proletariat can awaken, then what is the point of all this?
If you try socialism too early it won't work and will collapse, and there's no point even preparing people for it, since historical materialism says the conditions of capitalism will create the consciousness necessary from the division it creates, as the conditions of one system of production create class conflict that is only resolved as the system comes to its end. Obviously, since socialism remains a fringe movement, capitalism isn't going away soon. Capitalism in decay would have most of the proletariat fighting to survive and the bourgeoisie creating a police state.
Don't you have the fear deep down that you might be like a bunch of merchants hundreds upon hundreds of years before the industrial revolution? The telling thing is that merchants never even had to advocate for capitalism in order to become the bourgeoisie. The French Revolution was a de facto bourgeois revolution, but it wasn't a conscious bourgeois revolution. The pieces were in motion without justifying themselves on the grounds of creating an industrial revolution. They only knew this once they were inside of it, and one of the first popular uses of capitalism as a term comes from Karl Marx!
Capitalism isn't even a worldwide system yet. If all the barriers haven't been broken then there objectively is not worldwide class consciousness, and expecting to raise through slogans is pure idealism. Even Lenin realized he had to develop capitalism. In the end the social democrats were always right.
You have no argument for revolutionary socialism over social democracy other than WAAGH I WANT TO FEEL MORE EDGY AND RADICAL IF I'M A SOCDEM I'D HAVE TO VOTE FOR MAINSTREAM PARTIES LIKE LABOUR LIKE MY PARENTS DO AND I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO FEEL LIKE A COOL OUTSIDER! MUH DICK!
Suck it up and vote for a welfare state, international trade, and open borders. If you're American, vote Hillary or shut up about believing in materialism over idealism. Capitalism isn't done yet. Let's get it done in a nice way and actually produce the conditions where the majority of proles want to revolt because capitalism is just a drag on their nice lives and should be done away with finally.
The mixed economy is the most comfy way to progress capitalism until global government and superproduction is achieved, and the bourgeoisie are exposed for the do-nothing parasites on labor that they are. Vote for center-left parties you edgy faggots.
Said the reactionary cunt. All non mainstream center-leftists are objectively reactionary and serve to harm the proletariat and make it harder for us to progress comfy left wing mixed economy capitalism with great social rights like gay marriage. That's the only thing that will get us to communism by getting to the end of capitalism and you shitbags keep interrupting it with year zero bullshit and purges and semi-feudal shenanigans that retard development and put countries back decades.
Lucas Russell
Good post OP, and I agree, "muh revolution" is bullshit used by red fascists to utilize millitary violence to install a dictatorial police state.
The right way to do it is to gradually mold material conditions so that socialism arises naturally. The way to do this in my opinion is to suffocate private industry by using unions to rapidly build worker controlled industry.
Jackson Lewis
All I'm reading is Nigga, I don't even care. Go to tumblr or reddit if you want to play in the liberal sandbox. Until then suck these nuts, son
David Ross
That would collapse things back to a sub-capitalist state. Sounds like some anarcho-syndicalist bullshit.
We need to develop capitalism not suffocate it. Historical materialism says it isn't done yet.
Logan Kelly
The hell it wasn't. The Jacobins knew exactly what they were doing.
Owen Wright
Bullshit. They were fighting for liberalism. It's not like they had Marx's theories and were going "Hey, let's advance to capitalism!"
It was a purely idealist revolution as far as justification. The Jacobin's weren't materialists. They were driven by grievances they wouldn't acknowledge as being the formation of a capitalism based society. They wanted a society based on liberte, egalite, and fraternite. All idealist stuff. They obliviously took part in producing capitalism by destroying the absolutist ancien regime. But no one was coming up with theories like "absolutism is feudalism in decay" and stuff like that. It was all wanky idealist stuff.
John Smith
sounds like someone is a stupid death cultist that believes every bit of "historical materialist" koolaid nonsense.
Sebastian Morales
kill
your
self
Angel Reyes
Triggered red fascist has no argument. What a surprise.
Luis Rivera
Lmao you wrote all that just to bring up the theory of productive forces. Please tell us how this totally isn't the same tired opportunist line that's been peddled since Bernstein.
wew
Also, Marx wasn't suggesting that the developmental arch of western Europe was the immutable model to be applied to the rest of civilization.
The communists ideas of a dictatorship of the proletariat must aim to abolish work before thinking of getting rid of the capitaist system, without the technology to forma post-work society we wont be able to do it
Alos, thank you for correcting the record OP
Lucas Jenkins
Read Bordiga.
Juan Johnson
...
Brayden Gomez
Yeah, but Marx didn't have a good reason for this. He basically contradicted all his earlier work because when cornered he realized that would leave them no way to be cool, edgy, and sexually attractive to women.
In reality, social democracy is the correct historical materialist position. What Marx started he couldn't finish because of his ego and humanist desire to smash capitalism rather than surpass it.
Luis Allen
Literally not an argument. What's with all these faggots spamming anti-syndicalist fallacies? What is their end game?
Liam Mitchell
The Jacobins were fully aware of the fact that they were eliminating the aristocracy and installing a bourgeois system while still marginalizing the sans-culottes. The French Revolution was probably the most significant inspiration for Marx's concept of class conflict.
Yes, sloganeering is always idealistic, but that was not the methodology of the Jacobins in particular. The revolutionaries had a very big tent, and the support of the common man was essential to survival even if the Jacobins did not always have his best interests in mind.
Lincoln Morris
First and foremost, Marxists are not the dominant presence here. We are still overrun by "fashionable" ideologies.
Secondly, it would make more sense to compare USSR to Cromwell's Commowealth of England. I.e. early bourgeois republic, surrounded by feudal states.
Thirdly, it's Communism, you polyp. Not Socialism.
That said: we (Communists) know for certain that we don't have conditions for Communism. Which is why we are resorting to (State) Socialism instead - and it lasted for over 70 years. I.e. conditions are sufficiently good for it and there is literally no reason not to commit to Revolution.
Cooper Scott
This is by far the best brass tune I've heard yet, it's a shame it's for Red Alert 3
Carson Thompson
Ok I kind of agree of you, but if I was american I'd still vote Stein. Why Hillary?
Brody King
Well it isn't. The idea that capitalism is the only way to develop is nonsense and there's a rich history of worker cooperatives to prove it. The Mondragon region is a perfect illustration.
Grayson Reyes
Hillary Clinton is not "center-left". She has has been to the right of everything in her history, the only thing mildly leftist thing she ever did was dabble in the concept of universal healthcare during a brief period in the '90s.
Aiden Hall
Is not Historical Materialism.
Camden Campbell
Aren't libshit centrists sucking up to minorities centre-left in the US?
David Jenkins
I've been thinking the same, but I feel like there might be two problems with this 1) Can nature survive if we let capitalism fuck it the way it does it now? 2) Wouldn't overthrowing the capitalist class become much harder once the globalization is complete?
Eli Gomez
Capitalism is in near constant crisis right now
Tyler Carter
Feudalism was also in near constant crisis with pissed off peasants rebelling all the time and yet look how long it took to get rid of it.
Wyatt Hill
Most of those peasant Revolts were towards the end if feudalism as the structure began to fall apart from the stress of war and the plague. I know its wikipedia, but its a quick overview of how these revolts were mostly in over a 200-year span from 1320s to 1520s as the feudal system was becoming less relevant and the mercantilist system started coming underway
Why is prosperity such a negative concept to most liberals today?
I once considered myself a liberal, but today's liberals seem, more or less, authoritarian. Much more extreme in thinking. Most liberals used to hate being called "commies"… now many accept it as a badge of honor. What happened?
Evan Phillips
Marxist Leninist detected.
Nathan Hall
Jesus christ, I know more about your own ideology than you do. Materialism in the context of Marxism isn't "prosperity". It's a frame of analysis.
John Hall
Buddy, I've got some bad news for you.
You're still a liberal.
Camden Bailey
How many posts will it take you to notice that I have Stalin icon?
