What are these accelerationists you refer to? Is it like, contributing to capitalism to make it burn itself out?
That was the earliest form, though with the notion of dialectical materialism that capitalism was a necessary stage before socialism that had to be ‘completed’.
Nowadays, since “fascism is capitalism in decay”, it’s more like “letting fascists get into power because that will trigger The Revolution™”, despite fascist regimes having consistently failed to lead to revolutions resulting in socialist regimes.
Where are these accelerationists I keep hearing about?
I’m sure a Stalin apologist is asking this in complete good faith.
Do you think because someone who acknowledges Stalin’s successes (as well as his failures), they’re likely to secretly support republicans? If so, why? I genuinely don’t see any connection.
Stalin had no successes. The Soviet people made many achievements in spite of him. That doesn’t retroactively justify he nor Lenin. Any more than the successes under capitalism justifies it’s brutally and oppression or its leaders. Either both are bad, or you’re just playing dishonest calvinball or some sort of kayfabe.
Stalin had no successes. The Soviet people made many achievements in spite of him
Nuclear hot take. Not gonna bother to recount history or direct you to what the Soviet people or other leaders of the time thought.
Any more than the successes under capitalism justifies it’s brutally and oppression
The successes of liberal revolutions did justify brutality directed against the nobility though. When they failed to oppress them, or more frequently, lost the capacity to do so by disenfranchising the workers when the contradictions in their interests became apparent, you get counter-revolution.
I think someone who simps for Stalinist genocide of Poland is unlikely to be asking questions about a commonly espoused ML tactic in good faith.
What the fuck are you talking about?
