#401
Post rating: +
tell that to nemstov
#402
penitent
Post rating: +
MAO TSE-TUNG: since 1953, the soviet union is no longer a friend of the working peoples of the world. it practices social imperialism abroad, and at home it has abandoned class analysis in favour of a bourgeois, petty fascist 'state of the whole people.'
ALEKSEY (russian national chauvinist): a blurr bleer what does this guy know lol
#403
Mike Nelson here.
Post rating: +

deadken posted:

congratulations to everyone defending the post-khrushchevite revisionist state apparatus itt. "oh actually the soviet union was great, but only once we got rid of that pesky communist, josef stalin, and replaced him with a bunch of social-democratic administrators to implement minimal workplace democracy and some Extremely Good Trains" smdh

obviously as a libertarian hoxhaist i oppose most of what crow said, but i can do so politely instead of whatever these rude dudes are doing.

also, while threads are never About Things, i'd prefer to talk about greece in this thread, rather than the need for ukrainian liberation from the tyrant koba,

#404
Post rating: +
All the shit we talked about is the basics. It's prior to an actual argument about the ussr. He just didn't know anything he was talking about.
#405
penitent
Post rating: ~
so a russian national chauvinist trying to argue against all established proletarian knowledge that the soviet union was not a social-imperialist power is ok because the other guy is an idiot??? *checks the Big Book Of Dialectics* ok well this one checks out but don't do it again
#406
Post rating: ~

deadken posted:

MAO TSE-TUNG: since 1953, the soviet union is no longer a friend of the working peoples of the world. it practices social imperialism abroad, and at home it has abandoned class analysis in favour of a bourgeois, petty fascist 'state of the whole people.'
ALEKSEY (russian national chauvinist): a blurr bleer what does this guy know lol



except socialism is not a voluntarist "march towards or away from communism" but a concrete mode of production, you ignorant idiot

#407
Post rating: ~

deadken posted:

so a russian national chauvinist trying to argue against all established proletarian knowledge that the soviet union was not a social-imperialist power is ok because the other guy is an idiot??? *checks the Big Book Of Dialectics* ok well this one checks out but don't do it again



you know for a proletariat scholar you sure know jack shit about what Leninist theorists actually wrote. read lenin

#408
Kurdt
Post rating: +

deadken posted:

TSE-TUNG

trigger warning: wade-giles

#409
Mike Nelson here.
Post rating: ~

deadken posted:

so a russian national chauvinist trying to argue against all established proletarian knowledge that the soviet union was not a social-imperialist power is ok because the other guy is an idiot??? *checks the Big Book Of Dialectics* ok well this one checks out but don't do it again

obviously i support the independence of the eternal ukrainian nation against crow's social-fascism, but he's my dang friend!!!!

#410
Post rating: +
btw am i a russian chauvinist the same way your dilettante brethren attack stalin? because for a principled maoist you sure seem to be fine with chauvinistic attacks on stalin era ussr. or are you just the typical anticom western 'maoist' who wants to recreate the historical mistake of aligning with the imperial bourgeoisie against "social fascism" of proletarian states? looking forward to your defense of pinochet, little one
#411
Post rating: +
haha maoism
#412
Post rating: ~
just wondering: how were the state organs of the working class overthrown by the kosygin reforms? or was this the world's only peaceful counter revolution by the bourgeoisie? bonus points if you can cite lenin (lol)
#413
Post rating: ~
I'm laughing
#414
hi
Post rating: +
i remember quind trying to argue once that Castro's Cuba was a "Soviet neo-colony" and unlike deadken (who is just trying to pull a "gotcha" on Crow) he really believed it at the time since he was going thru some weird late Maoist phase.



Edited by HenryKrinkle ()

#415
Post rating: +

Edited by prikryl ()

#416
Post rating: ~

HenryKrinkle posted:

i remember quind trying to argue once that Castro's Cuba was a "Soviet neo-colony" and unlike deadken (who is just trying to pull a "gotcha" on Crow) he really believed it at the time since he was going thru some weird late Maoist phase.



yea we've all been thru an anticommunist liberal phase and a weird maoist phase, but this is 2015 and it's time to do some actual reading instead of believing in absurd fairy tales about potemkin ussr universities or whatever

#417
Post rating: ~
not me, ive always been a русская православа that knowd the народ is pure and true and alao the salvation of humanity and both joseph stalin and putin are good christians who did nothing wrong
#418
Mike Nelson here.
Post rating: +
i don't have to support or oppose anything because i'm a free man of the land
#419
Kurdt
Post rating: ~
i'm also getting tired of all this slandering of comrade brezhnev
#420
Mike Nelson here.
Post rating: ~

gyrofry posted:

i'm also getting tired of all this slandering of comrade brezhnev

a great ukrainian.

#421
Mike Nelson here.
Post rating: ~

Crow posted:

just wondering: how were the state organs of the working class overthrown by the kosygin reforms? or was this the world's only peaceful counter revolution by the bourgeoisie? bonus points if you can cite lenin (lol)

trotsky said overthrowing a worker's state could only happen through cataclysmic war which is why some little trotskyist groups still think russia is a worker's state.

#422
Post rating: ~
im not sure what's being argued anymore but im not sure I agree. what's wrong with maoism other than the people who are attracted to it?
#423
Post rating: +++++
#424
Post rating: ~
lmfao
#425
Post rating: +
#426
Post rating: ~
#427
Post rating: +++++
#428
Dont Mess With Sucess
Post rating: ~

swirlsofhistory posted:

hell yeah

#429
Post rating: ~
im the camera guy in the reflection
#430
penitent
Post rating: ~

Crow posted:

I'm laughing



and not mad, in any way, at all

#431
penitent
Post rating: ~

Crow posted:

deadken posted:

MAO TSE-TUNG: since 1953, the soviet union is no longer a friend of the working peoples of the world. it practices social imperialism abroad, and at home it has abandoned class analysis in favour of a bourgeois, petty fascist 'state of the whole people.'
ALEKSEY (russian national chauvinist): a blurr bleer what does this guy know lol

except socialism is not a voluntarist "march towards or away from communism" but a concrete mode of production, you ignorant idiot



hrm. hrrrm. hrm. and when the soviet union officially dismantled the dictatorship of the proletariat and attempted to conceal the ineluctable class character of the state behind bourgeois formulations of 'the whole people' while simultaneously moving towards a model in which state-owned firms attempted to make profits from the sale of their commodities, commodities which did not belong to the labourer but were reinvested and redistributed by an explicitly non-proletarian state, even if this social formation made the Very Good Trains and allowed some level of workplace democracy, in terms of its concrete mode of production it was no longer socialist. you asshat. you cockwomble thundercunt. in conclusion, you petty national chauvinist neo-tsarist sub-menshevik enemy of the correct line of marxism-leninism and all the working peoples of the world, who wants to make a little nest in the scraggly tangled beard of an orthodox patriarch and caw away revisionist nonsense in throaty tones soon muffled by the immense concentration of hair and grease

#432
Mike Nelson here.
Post rating: +

deadken posted:

Crow posted:

deadken posted:

MAO TSE-TUNG: since 1953, the soviet union is no longer a friend of the working peoples of the world. it practices social imperialism abroad, and at home it has abandoned class analysis in favour of a bourgeois, petty fascist 'state of the whole people.'
ALEKSEY (russian national chauvinist): a blurr bleer what does this guy know lol

except socialism is not a voluntarist "march towards or away from communism" but a concrete mode of production, you ignorant idiot

hrm. hrrrm. hrm. and when the soviet union officially dismantled the dictatorship of the proletariat and attempted to conceal the ineluctable class character of the state behind bourgeois formulations of 'the whole people' while simultaneously moving towards a model in which state-owned firms attempted to make profits from the sale of their commodities, commodities which did not belong to the labourer but were reinvested and redistributed by an explicitly non-proletarian state, even if this social formation made the Very Good Trains and allowed some level of workplace democracy, in terms of its concrete mode of production it was no longer socialist. you asshat. you cockwomble thundercunt. in conclusion, you petty national chauvinist neo-tsarist sub-menshevik enemy of the correct line of marxism-leninism and all the working peoples of the world, who wants to make a little nest in the scraggly tangled beard of an orthodox patriarch and caw away revisionist nonsense in throaty tones soon muffled by the immense concentration of hair and grease

#433
Post rating: ~
u wot m8
#434
Post rating: ~

deadken posted:

Crow posted:

deadken posted:

MAO TSE-TUNG: since 1953, the soviet union is no longer a friend of the working peoples of the world. it practices social imperialism abroad, and at home it has abandoned class analysis in favour of a bourgeois, petty fascist 'state of the whole people.'
ALEKSEY (russian national chauvinist): a blurr bleer what does this guy know lol

except socialism is not a voluntarist "march towards or away from communism" but a concrete mode of production, you ignorant idiot

hrm. hrrrm. hrm. and when the soviet union officially dismantled the dictatorship of the proletariat and attempted to conceal the ineluctable class character of the state behind bourgeois formulations of 'the whole people' while simultaneously moving towards a model in which state-owned firms attempted to make profits from the sale of their commodities, commodities which did not belong to the labourer but were reinvested and redistributed by an explicitly non-proletarian state, even if this social formation made the Very Good Trains and allowed some level of workplace democracy, in terms of its concrete mode of production it was no longer socialist. you asshat. you cockwomble thundercunt. in conclusion, you petty national chauvinist neo-tsarist sub-menshevik enemy of the correct line of marxism-leninism and all the working peoples of the world, who wants to make a little nest in the scraggly tangled beard of an orthodox patriarch and caw away revisionist nonsense in throaty tones soon muffled by the immense concentration of hair and grease



The only scientific—historical-materialist—definition of socialism is that it is a mode of production where social labor is organized and the surplus product is extracted collectively in some way, and also that there is no distinguished ruling class that can extract surplus labor. In this, it implies that workers control production.

With this correct definition, one can state objectively that all iterations of the USSR were socialist: social labor was organized, and surplus product was extracted collectively through the state and its bureaucracy.* The social division of labor was determined by a political plan to which state enterprises had to adapt. Furthermore, the amount of surplus labor was already determined by the plan: so, unlike capitalism, it could not be altered by a struggle over wages.

These fundamental economic characteristics determined the particular trajectory of Soviet society, which verifiably differed from any capitalist society, as expected from Marx's general theory.

Regardless of whether you consider the Soviet mode of production not democratic or emancipated enough or "deformed socialism," or some other inscrutable nearly-mystical standard divined by your communist sect of choice, what is undeniable is that it was not capitalism at any point.

* This form is surely not the ideal form of "proletarian democracy" that we dream of, but that was the material reality, and doesn't make it any less socialist; maybe a deformed socialism by your metric, as I said, but still socialism, and the only socialism that has existed so far.

Cheers.

Edited by COINTELBRO ()

#435
Post rating: +
Cheeers
#436
Post rating: ~

deadken posted:

MAO TSE-TUNG: since 1953, the soviet union is no longer a friend of the working peoples of the world. it practices social imperialism abroad, and at home it has abandoned class analysis in favour of a bourgeois, petty fascist 'state of the whole people.'
ALEKSEY (russian national chauvinist): a blurr bleer what does this guy know lol


it would be cool if mao really was posting itt instead of that voxnihili guy who, hunched over a laptop somewhere in the bowels of san francisco, spews poorly conceived and repetitive NATO propaganda

#437
Post rating: +
https://afoniya.wordpress.com/2013/07/25/towards-the-history-of-maoist-dissidence-in-the-soviet-union-an-article-by-alexei-volynets-part-1/
#438
Post rating: ~

xipe posted:

https://afoniya.wordpress.com/2013/07/25/towards-the-history-of-maoist-dissidence-in-the-soviet-union-an-article-by-alexei-volynets-part-1/

dope

#439
Occupied Aztlan
Post rating: ~
that article is great. maoists siding with stalin when he smashed trotsky for holding rallies against the soviet government but not when students do the same. hmm.
#440
Post rating: +
damn, charles krauthammer worked on the DSM III definition of depression. Lmfao