• davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    👆If you don’t suppress the inevitable imperial-supported bourgeois counterinsurgencies, your socialist project will go the way of Allende’s Chile.

    • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      The question is whether government/people should get $60/barrel revenue before expenses, maybe $40/barrel after expenses, or $10/barrel but pump 5-10x as much, bribed to be loyal to US. Long term, obviously no corruption and high revenue/profit per barrel has its advantages. It’s not as though Exxon/Chevron can’t get access to Venezuela oil with fair deals, it’s that pretending corrupt puppets are the legitimate leaders provides extortion oil costs.

      When you understand the hoops the US government is willing to jump through to get cheap foreign oil, you should understand that similar policies are used to deprive Americans of their fair share of resource revenue.

    • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      33
      ·
      2 days ago

      What a loser-ass mentality. It’s absolutely possible to remain just and free while being secure. Skill issue.

        • h3rmit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          26
          ·
          1 day ago

          Name one single socialist revolution that didn’t start as a violent dictatorship. You can’t.

          • REEEEvolution@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            1 day ago

            The Russian RSFR, the Paris Commune, The Bavarian soviet Republic, The Rhine Soviet Republic, The Hungarian Socialist Republic, socialist Cuba, socialist Vietnam, socialist Laos…

            Turns out you don’t knwo what you’re talking about! All of them were immediately invaded, their opposition showered in material support and sanctioned to hell and back.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            21
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            The USSR, PRC, Vietnam, Laos, DPRK, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Cuba, etc. all were massive expansions on democracy and working class control. Capitalists, landlords, fascists, monarchists, etc were (usually) violently oppressed, while the working classes were uplifted and society was democratized. From the point of view of the capitalists, they found themselves living in a violent dictatorship, for the working classes they found themselves finally escaping violent dictatorship.

            • h3rmit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              6 hours ago

              Those being anarchists, not socialists. There have been shitloads of anarchist communes working perfectly, until some external force fucks them up or reclaims the land or whatever.

              I asked specifically for socialist ones.

        • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          30
          ·
          2 days ago

          Not even going to reply to your strawman. I said that it’s weak mentality to say “ends justify the means and sacrifice justice and freedom for the sake of fighting a foreign oppressor” - maybe that’s easier to understand? Weak people, weak minds, skill issue.

          • RiverRock@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            23
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            Lol you said nothing of the sort and now you’re running away shouting random reddit bullshit for cover (what strawman? That doesnt even make sense) because you’re acutely aware but too proud to admit that your dumb Marvel-brained bullshit has no basis in reality. Who’s freedom? Who’s justice? You haven’t put five seconds of thought into this and you’re talking to people who have considered it for years or decades. You’re adorable.

            • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              26
              ·
              2 days ago

              It’s absolutely possible to remain just and free while being secure. Skill issue.

              Maybe read it again?

              • RiverRock@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                26
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days ago

                Name one single socialist revolution that hasn’t been immediately attacked by capital. You can’t.

      • m532@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Just and free while being secure: “authoritarian”

        Unjust and unfree while being insecure and overrun by bears: Libertarian

        • h3rmit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          1 day ago

          So, which part is the just and free part that you mention, outside of the theory? As in, in detail, practical examples of those freedoms and justice, please. Besides the theoritscl “to each according to their needs, from each according to their possibilities” (sorry if misstranslated), what practical examples have been just and free throughout time.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            19
            ·
            1 day ago

            The USSR, PRC, Vietnam, Laos, DPRK, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Cuba, etc. all were massive expansions on democracy and working class control. They were finally free and just for the working classes, and society became more about trying to satisfy everyone’s needs than endless private profits, with public ownership as the principle aspect of their economies.

            • h3rmit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              6 hours ago

              Well, most of those I could at some point agree on just, but definitely not free. And the USSR in particular i would not say just either. Holodomor and all that.

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                6 hours ago

                They were absolutely free, compared to the horrible brutality of prior systems and the vast expansions in democratization and social welfare.

                As for the USSR, the 1930s famine was tragic, but was the last major famine outside of war time. After collectivization of agriculture, yields were greater and more stable, and the bourgeois kulak system was practically abolished. Adverse weather conditions, crop disease, and kulaks violently resisting collectivization were the causes of the famine, and replacing that system with a more effective one ended famine.

        • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          26
          ·
          2 days ago

          Or you can be smart and just and have your cake and eat it too. See dozens of countries that prosper without sacrificing their freedoms and justice. You guys are just doomer losers simping for dictators because your minds are too small to imagine a real victory.

          • freagle@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            5 hours ago

            Venezuela has had US antagonistic covert ops operating in country since at least 2007. That’s almost 2 decades of needing to find the US spies and their allies to prevent sabotage, coups, false flags, etc.

            That’s just the military aspect. They’ve also been under worsening sanctions for almost as long, which has been driven by the US strategy to starve the masses so that they revolt. This processes causes increased desperation among the people, which increases crime rates.

            All of these things require the use of authority and as they get worse require more invasive and obvious uses of authority. It’s hard enough to find spies, it’s even harder to find spies and neutaize them without ripping the US off as to how you’re finding them, going even further and finding spies without ever being wrong is nigh impossible.

      • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        ❤️Through the power of love ❤️

        What are your real-world examples—bourgeois “democracies”? If it’s so easy, why hasn’t it happened?

        The pure socialists’ ideological anticipations remain untainted by existing practice. They do not explain how the manifold functions of a revolutionary society would be organized, how external attack and internal sabotage would be thwarted, how bureaucracy would be avoided, scarce resources allocated, policy differences settled, priorities set, and production and distribution conducted. Instead, they offer vague statements about how the workers themselves will directly own and control the means of production and will arrive at their own solutions through creative struggle. No surprise then that the pure socialists support every revolution except the ones that succeed.

        The pure socialists had a vision of a new society that would create and be created by new people, a society so transformed in its fundaments as to leave little opportunity for wrongful acts, corruption, and criminal abuses of state power. There would be no bureaucracy or self-interested coteries, no ruthless conflicts or hurtful decisions. When the reality proves different and more difficult, some on the Left proceed to condemn the real thing and announce that they “feel betrayed” by this or that revolution.

        The pure socialists see socialism as an ideal that was tarnished by communist venality, duplicity, and power cravings. The pure socialists oppose the Soviet model but offer little evidence to demonstrate that other paths could have been taken, that other models of socialism — not created from one’s imagination but developed through actual historical experience — could have taken hold and worked better. Was an open, pluralistic, democratic socialism actually possible at this historic juncture? The historical evidence would suggest it was not.

        Decentralized parochial autonomy is the graveyard of insurgency — which may be one reason why there has never been a successful anarcho-syndicalist revolution. Ideally, it would be a fine thing to have only local, self-directed, worker participation, with minimal bureaucracy, police, and military. This probably would be the development of socialism, were socialism ever allowed to develop unhindered by counterrevolutionary subversion and attack.

        One might recall how, in 1918-20, fourteen capitalist nations, including the United States, invaded Soviet Russia in a bloody but unsuccessful attempt to overthrow the revolutionary Bolshevik government.