so they blame it all on external imperialist aggression from capitalist nations rather than reflect on why those projects failed.
Unbelievable… we have more than enough proof of imperalist aggression being the reason why socialist states “fail”. I mean for fucks sake Cuba is constantly under threat and is actively being sanctioned. They fucking kidnapped the damn democratically elected president in Venezuela for fucks sake!!! Or how about the coup in Chile?
No no, we may have tried to kill every single socialist project from infancy onward but what those commies need more than peace is some good old fashioned Personal Responsibility
I’m not saying that imperialist aggression didn’t / doesn’t contribute to the collapse of socialist states - it most certainly does - I’m saying campists tend to get tunnel vision and think that it’s the only reason they fail. Cuba has actually been quite successful at enduring in spite of imperialist aggression, and I think there’s a lot of benefit in asking what it is they are doing better than past socialist states. In my opinion the answer lies in the fact that their governmental structure is far more horizontal in comparison to other attempts at socialism such as the USSR, and that has resulted in policy that is far more responsive to the specific material needs of local communities within Cuba. Contrast the USSR in which the pseudoscientific beliefs of a central authority figure turned what could have been a brief and localized food shortage into a full-blown famine spanning the entire union.
With regard to China being state capitalist, I skimmed the essay you linked well enough to see that it does not address the anarchist critique of state “socialism,” namely that state ownership does not truly constitute collective ownership because the state is a hierarchical institution that centralizes decision-making power in such a way that the will of the people affected is often ignored. Don’t get me wrong, I acknowledge the undeniable successes and advantages of central planning when compared to the neoliberal method of not planning at all beyond the fiscal quarter, but those are not the only options. I believe that horizontal planning is superior to both, and is the only way for an economy to be truly socialist in character. Examples of this being done can even be found in the revolutions that created the USSR and the PRC before they seized state power. It’s also not a discrete binary; there is a spectrum between totalitarian dictatorship and full horizontalism, and the projects which are most successful tend to veer towards the latter rather than the former.
The USSR started to trend downwards as a result of sabotage with liberalization and reforms. It was then fully dissolved illegally and was catastrophic to all (now former)soviet states. Then NATO/US bombed the fuck out of Yugoslavia and now we have a huge fascism problem.
Contrast the USSR in which the pseudoscientific beliefs of a central authority figure turned what could have been a brief and localized food shortage into a full-blown famine spanning the entire union.
You are seriously not talking about Holodomor are you? The USSR did its best to help after Kulaks, who were against collectivization, sabotaged their farms and killed their livestocks. And that famine is always used by fascists as a point against communism.
skimmed the essay you linked well enough to see that it does not address the anarchist critique of state “socialism,”
So you did not read it, typical of an anarkiddie… Your aversion to authority is also what makes it really easy for counter-revolutionaries to completely screw over revolutions. Socialism is the transition towards communism and you don’t just press the button to become instantly communist, not when classes exist.
totalitarian dictatorship
Yep, the classic of folding both communism and fascism into one fold to depict both as equally horrible. This is just doing the work for the ruling class for free.
Dang, i thought the slrpnk instance was cool with communists. Guess they’re as zionazi libs as world is haha!
Removed by mod
Unbelievable… we have more than enough proof of imperalist aggression being the reason why socialist states “fail”. I mean for fucks sake Cuba is constantly under threat and is actively being sanctioned. They fucking kidnapped the damn democratically elected president in Venezuela for fucks sake!!! Or how about the coup in Chile?
And your point on China as well as your problem with hierarchy has me believe you’re an idealistic anarchist. I recommend reading https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Essay:Why_China_is_not_Capitalist concerning China being “capitalist”.
No no, we may have tried to kill every single socialist project from infancy onward but what those commies need more than peace is some good old fashioned Personal Responsibility
I’m not saying that imperialist aggression didn’t / doesn’t contribute to the collapse of socialist states - it most certainly does - I’m saying campists tend to get tunnel vision and think that it’s the only reason they fail. Cuba has actually been quite successful at enduring in spite of imperialist aggression, and I think there’s a lot of benefit in asking what it is they are doing better than past socialist states. In my opinion the answer lies in the fact that their governmental structure is far more horizontal in comparison to other attempts at socialism such as the USSR, and that has resulted in policy that is far more responsive to the specific material needs of local communities within Cuba. Contrast the USSR in which the pseudoscientific beliefs of a central authority figure turned what could have been a brief and localized food shortage into a full-blown famine spanning the entire union.
With regard to China being state capitalist, I skimmed the essay you linked well enough to see that it does not address the anarchist critique of state “socialism,” namely that state ownership does not truly constitute collective ownership because the state is a hierarchical institution that centralizes decision-making power in such a way that the will of the people affected is often ignored. Don’t get me wrong, I acknowledge the undeniable successes and advantages of central planning when compared to the neoliberal method of not planning at all beyond the fiscal quarter, but those are not the only options. I believe that horizontal planning is superior to both, and is the only way for an economy to be truly socialist in character. Examples of this being done can even be found in the revolutions that created the USSR and the PRC before they seized state power. It’s also not a discrete binary; there is a spectrum between totalitarian dictatorship and full horizontalism, and the projects which are most successful tend to veer towards the latter rather than the former.
The USSR started to trend downwards as a result of sabotage with liberalization and reforms. It was then fully dissolved illegally and was catastrophic to all (now former)soviet states. Then NATO/US bombed the fuck out of Yugoslavia and now we have a huge fascism problem.
You are seriously not talking about Holodomor are you? The USSR did its best to help after Kulaks, who were against collectivization, sabotaged their farms and killed their livestocks. And that famine is always used by fascists as a point against communism.
So you did not read it, typical of an anarkiddie… Your aversion to authority is also what makes it really easy for counter-revolutionaries to completely screw over revolutions. Socialism is the transition towards communism and you don’t just press the button to become instantly communist, not when classes exist.
Yep, the classic of folding both communism and fascism into one fold to depict both as equally horrible. This is just doing the work for the ruling class for free.