What do you guys think of TheFinnishBolshevik? I've watched a few of his videos and he seems pretty cool...

What do you guys think of TheFinnishBolshevik? I've watched a few of his videos and he seems pretty cool, but he also says some pretty tankie-like shit.

Also, semi-related question, but what do you think of planned economies?

I like him, his videos are good and he knows a lot of theory, but he's very much a Stalin apologist, but hey I dont have to agree with everyone on everything to like them. Hell I have ancap friends anyway.

As for your other question, they are needed but only for the transitional phase immediately after the revolution, and only really for big industry like steel production or mining, and also for vital services like food, energy and transit. All the other shit can /probably/ go directly to the workers depending on the situation.

He's pretty good, but yeah, he's a tankie.

Planned economy doesn't inherently mean state economy.

Then in what context did you mean it?

He's not OP (I am). I meant it like Stalin's 5 year plans.
About that, I have a few questions (I'm not too knowledgeable on the topic, so forgive any mistakes):
1. I thought planned economies were bad because they did not account for demand nor did they consider natural disasters that may cause shortages
2. The planned economy should only happen during the period of time when the state owns the MoP, and once they go into the hands of the workers, they should stop, right?

There should brief periods of Market Socialism.

Clarify.

Markets are good because if something is inefficient it will be bred out. Before private couriers, the state delivery didn't even use tracking numbers. When there is a shift in technology and the restructuring of an industry takes place, markets will be necessary.

he seems like a pretty cool guy but people need to stop with the historical fetish stuff and take theory and modern politics as what it is

He's pretty cool and seems like an educated guy.

Never heard of. Somewhat surprised there is one. Finns pretty heavily eradicated (think mass-executions and death camps) everyone suspect in heaving non-Right tendencies or Russian accent.


If implemented properly (people tend to lump together Stalin, Khruschev, and Aliende; I'm talking Stalin here) planned economies are very useful.

There practically isn't any reason you shouldn't introduce one to the heavy industry (which it is all about, really). Depending on your situation, it might or might not be useful to extend it to other areas in one way or another. For example, for a consumer goods it might make more sense to introduce some decentralized planning algorithm.

That's a meme. Or a spook. Or a myth. I.e. 95% propaganda and 5% misinterpretation.

No. Anyone can have planned economy. Capitalist oligarchy (consortium?), or worker-owned cooperatives. It's just the resulting central authority becomes indistinguishable from state.

I.e. humans are incapable of determining efficiency?

No but humans are fallible. Technology will get to a point where human input will be so negligible that we won't need it but until then, this is the best idea. Lenin had a good idea.

Nigga this was almost 100 years ago, SKDL (a far-left coalition party) was one of the biggest parties in Finland post-WWII, but didn't really manage to accomplish anything due to heavy infighting between M-L commies and other socialists (all other parties incl. SocDems treating them as pariahs didn't really help either)

The guy traces his ideology to the early Soviet Communism: Bolsheviks formally ceased to exist in 1952 (Party gets renamed into Communist)

And I'm pretty sure being a Communist wasn't a unhealthy lifestyle choice in pre- or during- WWII Finland as well. So I see a pretty short window of opportunity to safely become Bolshevik and split off before VKP(b) becomes CPSU.

Humans are corrupt and occasionally fallible. Markets are consistently inefficient and fallible (and subject to corruption as well, once someone gets enough power).

Also, Lenin's "market" wasn't for "breeding things out".

Well, how does it account for those then?
But wouldn't that take away from worker's autonomy and slow the withering of the state?

For the most part I've only watched his vids in response to LSR and anarkiddos like me.

He made some valid points. Others fell flat. Overall, above average for a tankie. I remain anarchist, but I respect him.

The civil war and the camps after it caused some pretty extreme resentment towards the right going all the way up until the winter war. The agrarian-fascist 'Lappo' movement of the late 20s and early 30s managed to get the comnunist parties banned before going "too far" and trying to stage a pathetic attempt at a coup. Of course, unlike the reds, they only got a slap on the wrist. I would say that the civil war (in the long run) only managed to strenghten the resolve of the left - I mean the whites are still frequently referred to as butchers by the modern left.

Bump

Can someone answer this?