• @volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          216 hours ago

          Seriously though, I don’t know how anarchists can look at the consequences of the Perestroika, Glasnost and eventual dissolution of the Eastern Block, the millions of lives lost to unemployment, alcoholism, drugs and suicide, and still use the word “tankie” (coined to degrade the communists in support of the intervention of the USSR in Hungary when it went down that very path).

          • db0OP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            116 hours ago

            It’s precisely because we saw the path of the USSR. Because we can see that ML regimes always leads to oppression and capitalism. They’re just another way to convert poor agrarian/feudalist societies to capitalism and have no socialist potential. Terrible system.

            • @volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              216 hours ago

              Because we can see that ML regimes always leads to oppression and capitalism

              Marxism-Leninism saved Eastern Europe from Nazism, the level of genocide we would have seen in Eastern Europe if it hadn’t been for the existence of the USSR is unimaginable. Anarchists, on the other hand, have been proven absolutely incapable of stopping fascism, as was the case of the Spanish Second Republic, with some Anarchist unions such as the CNT numbering ONE MILLION members, and refusing to take action against the growth of fascism because “taking action would make us as bad as them :(”. The consequence were 40 years of fascist dictatorship. At least AES countries, flawed as they were, can claim to bring industrialization, wealth redistribution, meaningful fight against fascism, a stop to unequal exchange, solid and moral geopolitical positions and support for emancipatory movements elsewhere in the world. Anarchism doesn’t have a single serious historical claim other than Rojava and Zapatistas, two extremely small movements without much potential for growth, with one of them directly supporting the regional interests of US imperialism.

              You’re buying the framework of the ruling class of your country, ask yourself why you reach the same conclusions about socialism than libs

              • db0OP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                1
                edit-2
                16 hours ago

                Mhm, so we agree that “AES” is just capitalism yes? Sorry but I’m a socialist. I’m not planning to do a revolution just to get capitalism again, but painted red. Especially when it’s just more oppressive and homophobic as well.

                You’re buying the framework of the ruling class of your country, ask yourself why you reach the same conclusions about socialism than libs

                Lol

                • @volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  215 hours ago

                  No, I dont agree that AES is capitalism, it’s just that you don’t have historical knowledge of the decision-making power of the working class over policy and the means of production in AES countries.

                  Strong unions with legal power and decision-making capabilities, local committees supervising political and administrative activity, extremely high social mobility, participation in state politics through the party and through discussion in the press, and most importantly, the absence of a capitalist class. There is no capitalism without surplus extraction from one class to the other, and without a receiving class to absorb whatever metric of surplus value you want to define, there isn’t capitalism. It obviously was flawed, as all systems ever in humanity, but it’s the best we’ve got so far in the struggle against capitalism.

                  Thank you also for not addressing how anarchism has historically consistently failed in creating an alternative to capitalism and to fighting fascism even in countries with strong anarchist tradition.

                  • db0OP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    115 hours ago

                    There is no capitalism without surplus extraction from one class to the other, and without a receiving class to absorb whatever metric of surplus value you want to define, there isn’t capitalism.

                    There was wage slavery, therefore it was capitalist. QED. The extracting class where the party bureaucracy. I don’t even need to debate this. The USSR devolved into kleptocracy with the party bureaucracy at the top immediately after it dissolved and its satellite states immediately splintered and switched to capitalism at the first chance they got which shows just how much the soviet experiment failed at all its goals and how hated it was for persisting only through oppression.

                    Same is true in other “AES” like China, which have literal billionaires ffs.

                    Thank you also for not addressing how anarchism has historically consistently failed in creating an alternative to capitalism and to fighting fascism even in countries with strong anarchist tradition.

                    The failure to succeed in a revolution long term doesn’t mean the movement is ideologically inconsistent. It just means it’s time hadn’t come yet. The collapse of “AES” or coversion into capitalism however does prove that it’s an internally unstable movement whos only goal is to convert feudalism to capitalism.