So

Won't china/russia take the USA's place?

Thats going to be a long way away.

China will emerge as the leading superpower but it will not be the only one. We are going to back to a multipolar world, one in which the international bourgeoisie will be too busy fighting eachother to prevent us from organizing against them.

They'll just start cooperating.

Like they were during world war one? Or world war two? The more multipolar things get the less porkies will cooperate with eachother internationally.

Markets gonna crash very soon. Plus that will increase chance of WW3. Perfect time for socialism.

But they do. They have many times.

Everyone thinks the final crisis of capitalism will happen within their lifetime. Just like Christians do with the Apocalypse.

I agree, it is sheer impossibility that the Roman empire will ever collapse. Those silly slaves have no idea what they are talking about! Therefore, Carthage must be destroyed!

Educate yourself fool. Start at 1:01.

youtube.com/watch?v=5hYKgyUU024&t=5s

AFAIK the idea that Marx said some huge crisis that will destroy capitalism is coming is a meme-y description of his ideas that is popular in high schools for some reason. He thought crisis is inherent to capitalism and that it would be, probably, during one of them that the workers thrown into poverty and unemployment will be more open to radical ideas.

ways, overproduction generated vicious circles, leading to closures and bankruptcies, and high levels of unemployment. Mass unemployment then resulted in a social crisis, for in a capitalist economy people were in a quite new way dependent on wage labour for their survival. Such crises occurred roughly every ten years during the first half of the 19th century.

marxists.org/history/international/comintern/sections/britain/periodicals/communist_review/1922/07/soc_rev.htm
Bookchin has a lot to say about this as well. Check out the Communism vs Communalism thread.

either when the things capitalism can't deal with (like climate change) cause problems that no side of the liberal political spectrum can combat, or when automation in the production process makes a human labour force redundant. tl;dr when people start starving or losing their homes because of natural disaster.

and this all needs to happen in the us, because with the current military hegemony of the us over the globe there is no hope for socialism in any other country

you really don't understand how the bourgeoisie function user. they accumulate capital in a zealous manner, think of it as a sort of religious fanaticism if you will. they're not some masterminds of global manipulation that work together to preserve the work order, most of the propaganda and military action taken in their name is done by people within the state apparatus that are paid to do this. the capitalist only cares about capital accumulation and productivity increase, he leaves the geopolitics to his lobbyists.

No it isn't. We don't even have an International worth a damn.

Marx underestimated the effect of media under capitalism. By time the Frankfurt School began their critique it was too late.

First of all, after a decade of economic stagnation and shrinkage, by what measure are you determining 'failure?'

But some factors are
1. He didn't foresee finance capitalism
2. He didn't foresee two successive world wars
3. Like all historical processes the failure of capitalism is a gradual shift of material relations rather than some single demonstrative event.

Capitalism is good at developing tricks to keep itself going, because it primarily functions as a system of belief, and as long as people believe or are lead to believe that it functions, it will keep on doing so, just as it's done this past decade.

WW1 was a conflict between reactionary feudal empires to were trying to resist the liberalizing effects of capitalism on one side and bourgeois quasi republics on the other, and WW2 was their encore as the German aristocracy tried to reassert its priviIeged status and roll back the developments from the inter war period.

It's hard to say how unipolar bourgeois order is going to behave since they have as many colluding interests as conflicting ones.

*Hard to say how a multipolar bourgeois order

Wolf senpai noooo….

Slavoj explains it in the second half of this video:
youtube.com/watch?v=PKzJnkUHWNs

A smart open-minded person does not ignore people on your side because they have differing opinions on how to get to a goal they both agree on. Sam B. is one of the few great liberals from the Jon Stewart era.

Marx did not predict Neoliberalism. However, now that that's on the way out…

Because Porky's gotten real lucky with Russian roulette. Who knows what the odds of capitalism collapsing are for each individual crisis but over infinite iterations anything with a non-zero chance of happening WILL happen.

Technological advances and the USSR fear gave Capitalism a breath of air.
Tech allowed porkys to gave some muh privileges to the working class in form of a welfare state without losing profits, but that can't last forever and we're just starting to see the limit that tech can give us. Pork greed will outmatch the technological growth and that's when the massive crisis will come.

Well that's the thing, there's nothing to indicate that capitalism will ever have The Big One. For all we know, it will remain forever "stable in instability" if you will. Always oscillating between systemic crisis and recovery.

Maybe the fall of capitalism would require a singularity to trigger it, like some magic technology that allows anyone to manufacture food or some shit.

neoliberalism is perhaps closer to the idealized version of capitalism of smith that marx theorized about. I'd say Marx didn't predict enough how the state will manage the affairs of capitalism (which has propped it up) through all the disasters (over-production) which he thought would cause the main crises. He didn't predict enough "state run capitalism", but with a turn to neoliberalism Marx could be 'more' useful today than say in 1935

Lenin had portraits of Ford in his factories : (

This. We are seriously approaching a form of "privatized communism" wherein the means of production are more or less controlled by a small handful of companies who, by virtue of their market share, can essentially plan the entire global economy out years ahead of time for most goods and services.

I believe Engles mostly talked about forming communism in this way. Mostly starting with nationalizing the banks, as banks themselves work in a sort of 'planned economy' way, Especially as they become smaller in number in a nation.

Sorry to break it to you man, but the system's cracks will show. The fact that porky is now making solar trendy is because they're preparing for the incoming crash (fracking is short lived). Green energy is sustainable, but it can't give the amount of profit fossil has, and porky won't take a reduction of profit anymore. Climate change will reduce the available resources and of course porky will try to seize them, that'll create even more unrest among the population.

Shit, this is an awful future, but I don't see anything to change it. Even massive amount of nuclear, which might be implemented by porky, doesn't have the flexibility of oil, so profits will definetly be reduced.

And who will fight those wars? And on what ground? I doubt they're gonna have a fistfight in the white house

kys

Capitalism is resilient because it is perpetually in crisis or facing some contradiction. It is perpetually evolving and reinventing itself in order to perpetuate itself. Crises, however dire, are not enough in themselves to cause the collapse of capitalism.

Dunno man, I know global warming is a thing, just like I know acid rain and the ozone layer hole were just barely avoided, but I can't help but be weary of catastrophic predictions because Porky finds a way, if not to avoid it, them to just get us to agree to just plain live in a horrible new reality.

Here, by the end of the 19th century, here's what the pundits of the time were going on about:

Obviously, this was wholly avoided by the marching on of economy and technology, and that's the thing: the entire history of human technology in service of economics has been to do the cheapest thing possible until the last minute, then shift out of bare necessity – necessity from the point of view of the property owners, of course, but still.

Porky will find a way to circumvent the lack of oil – yeah transport won't be as cheap but hey just increase the price for the first world consumers and presto, nevermind the fact that its middle class will continue to be squeezed and lead to another crisis some time later.

And about global warming, yeah Porky can't avoid that, but he'll have his media and think tanks convincing us that those +4º average temperatures are just great for the plants, and all the beachfront property lost by sea rise will just lead to more beachfront ready to be developed which will further move the economy WOW ain't that great. Meanwhile, nobody noticed that Porky himself skedaddled in a spaceship piloted by Captain Elon Musk Junior.

Nationalism is the only answer desu

Capitalism is a spook

lol