Changing from the profit motive to a planned economy dramatically changes how and why human development is steered. Socialism of course will advance production, but it ends consumerism, and having humans over capital means we can decide to have a more harmonious impact on the environment. Profit makes this pretty much impossible, as capital is a control system for accumulation.

Yep, metaphysicians in particular make the mistake of abstracting away essential context, and it leads to misconceptions and faulty understanding. Good luck!

I think you’re confusing the profit motive with development. Accumulation of capital is what drives endless expansion and overconsumption. Socialism is necessary to stop that cycle, as rather than profit, suiting the needs of humanity becomes the goal.

Interesting thoughts, and nice talking to you too! Abstraction isn’t necessarily bad, but it’s indeed incredibly easy to have bad abstraction that obfuscates reality.

Nice racism on your part, very western of you. Sorry, but I’m a westerner too, and much of this has already been admitted by western press.

The west admitted to helping the Banderites overthrow the democratically elected president of Ukraine, and said Banderites started ethnically repressing Russians living in Eastern Ukraine.

As for NATO, NATO is an inter-imperialist anti-revolutionary coalition force. It’s “defensive” like the IDF is. The soviets weren’t a threat to Western Europe, and neither is the Russian Federation, yet the imperialists in Europe and the US needed to contain socialism to prevent it from spreading and threatening their super-profits.

It was the west that backed a Banderite coup in 2014, sparking the Ukrainian Civil War. NATO has been encircling Russia for the greater part of a century at this point.

That’s a good point, regarding the abstract nature of Gramsci’s work. It’s similar to Marx and Engels in that sense. Gramsci is a difficult one, like you brought up he’s often used in reactionary and cynical ways, despite being very supportive of existing socialism.

Do you think in war you only attack what you directly plan on taking?

Do you have evidence that Russia hasn’t taken Shesterovka?

Communists have been on Lemmy since the beginning.

Yep! It’s incredible how much he wrote under strict observation.

No problem! Gramsci’s a bit fresh on my mind since I read a good deal of him a few weeks ago.

Yep, Luhansk should have just accepted being targeted by Kiev rather than fighting back after the Banderites took power.

No, I didn’t. You seem awfully content to ignore that Kiev was caught killing thousands of civilians.

I’m aware that the UN report tries to blame Russia for Kiev killing civilians and separatists, but it’s still nice to see them admit that Kiev was massacring civilians in Donetsk and Luhansk. The west coup’d the democratically elected president, and installed a Banderite government. It’s no surprise that they’d be seceded from and that this gov would then try to force these same people they’ve ethnically repressed back into Ukraine.

I’m not really sure what you’re saying, then. You made a point about people living in fear, this just generally isn’t true.

You can both produce more efficiently and without excess without stopping advancement.

To be clear, the comment on false consciousness was separate to Gramsci, as an addendum to his theories of hegemony. I find both are good explanations, not that they are the same.

Not really, we need to advance to make production more green, efficient, and to reduce our impact on the environment.