you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] 45 points 10 months ago (74 children)
  • [–] 25 points 10 months ago (6 children)

    The meme isn't arguing for accelerationism. It's just observing that the US in it's current incarnation as a fascist state needs to be fought and defeated before anything can get better.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 15 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    So the person who is happy about America failing - the one with the hammer and sickle - is a capitalist?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 12 points 10 months ago (4 children)

    I'm starting to doubt that term ever had any salience or useful definition

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 22 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (60 children)

    The death of the US Empire isn't "accelerationism," it's an understanding that the number one obstacle to socialism globally is the US Empire, and with it out of the way socialist countries are under far less pressure from the outside. Ideally an indigenous led, decolonial socialist state takes the place of the former US Empire, but a strong and healthy empire isn't going to get there. That's why its decay is necessary for both Statesians and the international proletariat.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 60 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 13 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 child)

    Yep, nobody is advocating for making this worse here, but organizing as they necessarily are. We can also celebrate the decay in influence from the US Empire as it dies. Accelerationism is bad because it alienates people for no real benefit, but organizing consistently the entire way through does work.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 11 points 10 months ago

    Still not sure why you think communism is fascism, considering communism stands for collectivized production and distribution to satisfy the needs of everyone while fascism is capitalism in decay violently asserting the freedom of private property and forcing austerity on the public.

    Socialist countries and fascist ones have, consequentially, had enormously different results, where socialist countries were marked with dramatic improvements in life expectancy, literacy rates, housing rates, healthcare, education, employment, and more, fascist states have delivered enormous profits to a tiny subsection of society and dramatically lowered these key metrics.

    Not really sure what your goal is, here, if it's to discredit me then you actually need to put in the legwork to do so. Otherwise it'll backfire.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 12 points 10 months ago (5 children)

    What do you mean by "human nature" that prevents socialism globally? I'm talking about the real world, where tendencies towards centralization, globalization, and monopolization prepare the groundwork for a collectivized and planned economy, just like what Marx initially observed back in the 1800s in early form.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 14 points 10 months ago (4 children)

    There's no ChatGPT involved, and I'd appreciate you dropping the condescension. People's way of thinking is determined by their lived experience, how they work and how they get what they need. As it becomes harder and harder for that to happen, at the same time we are already building up incredibly complex systems of production and distribution.

    What remains is for working class organization, revolution, and nationalizing the large firms and key industries, finance, etc in any given country. Other countries have already done this before, it isn't impossible, and people become increasingly motivated to do so and it becomes increasingly feasible as disparity increases.

    The Party for Socialism and Liberation has a Party Program you can read for a US-based approach.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 11 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    It's absolutely practical, actionable, and realistic, though. If you live in the US, you can join the PSL, as an example, and work towards this goal. Which part in particular do you think isn't actionable or practical?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 10 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    I already told you that the aim is revolution. Nobody thinks PSL is going to win the 2028 presidency, or that the working classes now are already organized. We get there by organizing. The fact that there's work to do doesn't mean the work is impossible or pointless, this kind of "if revolution isn't instant then it's worthless" is the kind of attitude adopted by people that sit on their hands and doomscroll for the entirety of their political existence.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 8 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    No? The US Empire is decaying due to its own internal contradictions, nor are we waiting for a magical greater good, but instead organizing right now. You can stop with the dehumanization and ageism, you have no counter-arguments so you hide behind insults.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 10 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

    I am making an argument, though.

    You’re saying this is a prime opportunity for global socialism without explaining how or why

    I did. The increase in globalization and complexity in international trade is laying the groundworks for a socialist system characterized by collectivized production and distribution, the issue is with the present system of ownership. That requires revolution.

    and with no realistic or actionable methodology that in any way accounts for actual political reality

    I'm suggesting we organize in working class parties for revolution, a strategy that has worked dozens of times around the world in varying conditions. Organization isn't there yet, but that doesn't mean it's impossible, just that it takes hard work.

    Literally all you’re saying is that we should try socialism after the total downfall of society which is about as useful as an asshole on your elbow.

    I've never said that, though. I've said that the US Empire is declining, life is getting harder to afford, and this is increasing working class organization.

    Again, all you do is hide behind insults and refuse to engage with my points.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (48 children)

    You are off your rocker if you think whatever comes next will be indigenous led lol. Not that I would be opposed to it. The scary thing is though, what does come next? If it's socialism great, but what if it's fascism

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 48 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 10 months ago (47 children)

    It's important to recognize that the primary contradiction within the US Empire is settler-colonialism. The ones most oppressed by the current society are generally the ones most quickly adaptive to theory and practice, and this isn't because oppressed people are "morally superior" but out of sheer survival. It's also why there are so many queer communists. Without combatting settler-colonialism, anything that takes the place of the US Empire will fundamentally replicate that and would be closer to barbarism.

    The US Empire is already fascist, fascism isn't a separate mode of production but instead capitalism in decay.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 47 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 12 points 10 months ago (34 children)

    You're right, that isn't a solid foundation. What is, is working class organization along correct lines of struggle, part of which is decolonization, as the US Empire's primary contradiction is settler-colonialism.

    Further, you're right to say that if the US Empire collapsed now that it would result in barbarism. That's the point of organizing, though, so that when the US Empire is in crisis, we can overthrow it and implement a new system.

    None of this is based on ideals, but learning from historical struggles for socialism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 34 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (32 children)

    It's multi-faceted. Ignoring the settler-colonial nature of the US Empire ignores its primary contradiction, the forces at play in the given society, and why the US proletariat is against revolution right now. Any working class organization needs correct analysis of settler-colonialism to have success elsewhere. It's similar to trying to have a TERF worker organization, by excluding marginalized comrades and taking incorrect lines, we damage the movement and lose some of our fiercest fighters, all while winding ourselves into reactionary contradictions and tailism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 32 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago (30 children)

    It's not at all contradictory to say that in the context of a settler-colony like the US Empire, indigenous peoples will need to play a leading role among the broader working classes. It isn't about racial supremacy, but about acknowledging the importance of decolonization.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 30 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (28 children)

    If I've been misunderstood, then it's important to clarify further.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 28 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (26 children)

    Most people seem to have understood me, and for those who haven't, I've clarified. I am listening, but also responding.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago (24 children)

    I don't really like the condescension in your tone, it leads me to believe your advice wouldn't be very helpful in making people feel heard.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 0 points 10 months ago (20 children)

    Based on voting totals though, it seems most people understood me. I'm not telling anyone how to feel, and for the minority that misunderstood me, further elaboration helps clear it up. I'm not sure what you're trying to add to that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago (18 children)

    I appreciate your intent, but I don't see the problem you're seeing. I'm not being condescendng by saying so, I just fundamentally don't see the problems with what I'm saying from an optics perspective that you claim to see.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (16 children)

    I understand, but the fact that I don't see it doesn't mean that I haven't been listening.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago (14 children)

    See, I do talk to people IRL (both about politics and non-political things) and you're being patronizing by insinuating that I don't. This is why I don't really see why you'd be helpful for me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 0 points 10 months ago (12 children)

    Apology accepted. I understand that that's what you percieve about me, but that just generally isn't a common thing for when people talk to me. I don't get that frequently, and I talk to a lot of people, online and offline. That's why I don't see it as a broader issue, but a smaller and particular one, which is why I focused on further explaining myself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (10 children)

    I can acknowledge that you personally feel this way, but I don't see it as a broader phenomenon because I don't run into this problem. I was never being racist either.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (8 children)

    I listened, I just don't agree.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (6 children)

    I never made anything close to a joke about SA or any racist statements, though, and you sound like someone trying to discredit a point by wielding this accusation like a club just because I don't agree with you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    You compared me to someone refusing to apologize for a joke about SA, which I said I never made anything close to that. I didn't say you said I made one. I really don't think I should listen to what you have to say if you don't actually care to read and understand what I say.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

    Like, you come on in here saying that maybe Americans should lead a communist revolution, because they all think the same,

    Never once said this.

    even though that’s like, a lot of different cultures and everything, and when someone points out that’s kinda racist, your response was to explain communism harder and say that it wasn’t racist because you decided it wasn’t.

    I never said that there weren't a lot of cultures, my point was that those oppressed by present conditions most readily grasp the necessity of resisting them.

    And I’ve tried multiple angles for days to see if you at any point would go “yeah that was a little fucked up of me” or even the minimum of “I could see how someone could see that”, and instead you humblebrag about how “no one else has had a problem with it with my many many friends”, and double down again.

    You completely invented a point I never made, accused me of racism for said point, and then tried to tell me to apologize for the point you invented. No, I am not apologizing for something I never said.

    So I’m pretty sure that wraps up this saga. I can’t get you to admit you did anything wrong because you think you’re perfect

    Nope, I know I'm not perfect. I do know that one person inventing a point doesn't mean I need to apologize for said invented point.

    Knowing your type, you’ll probably insist of having the last word anyway, try to pull off that W in the Internet debate box, but I’m not above that either and maybe you’ll surprise me and end this charade.

    I'm not going to stand for libel, you're perfectly capable of admitting that you invented a point I never made. Asking me to apologize for a point you invented is absurd.

    We aren't coming to a deeper understanding together, you're insistent that if I don't agree with you that I'm in the wrong. I understand that people can misunderstand or misinterpret my point, and I clarified that I think it's best to further explain points that are misinterpreted. You took deep offense to that and proceeded to have this back and forth for days with nothing constructive coming from it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Be bigger than that. You don't need to make up what I said, you're more than capable of answering points I made directly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago

    I already explained how you made assumptions based on race. You did it twice. You said that you think native Americans would be more in favor of socialist ideologies. That’s making an assumption based on race, cut and dry, plain and simple, period, end of sentence.

    I never made that argument, nor was my argument based on ethnicity. I said oppressed people, colonized people, are more willing to resist the system that oppresses them. There's nothing biological or race-based about that, except in that the US Empire is a settler-colony on stolen land. To deny that is to make a racist statement, akin to saying the US doesn't have racist systems.

    It’s the added level of ignorance to lump in all native Americans as one collective when they are multiple different cultures.

    I never once did this, again, more of you making up strawmen to fight. All of the various first nations are currently colonized by the US Empire, please speak with anyone from any of these cultures.

    You really didn’t read anything, did you? Just waiting to get that last word on so you feel like you’re right.

    I understood perfectly, you keep digging deeper. It's not about me feeling right, it's about libel.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] -2 points 10 months ago (10 children)

    Well, I wouldn't really say it's fascist quite yet (maybe I'm ignorant) but it's well on the way. My point is it could get a lot worse before it gets better

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 10 months ago (5 children)

    Both your political parties regularly vote to continue funding ICE, DHS and the NSA. Even as recently as a few days ago. They are both pro-militarisation of the police. They both support the prison industrial complex. They both support US actions in Venezuela. And the fact you can't make political protests in the US without the risk of being shot or imprisoned nowadays should tell you that you are already living in a fascist state. It's a fantasy to think that, even if the Dems somehow get this administration out of office, they will fundamentally change any of those things. At least now the mask is off and you know what you are up against. The problem with libs is that they think everything would be a-ok so long as their fascist was in charge.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 9 points 10 months ago

    There are some abominable democrats, but there are some good ones too.

    I totally agree that's true. Most Dems on lemmy are far to the left of their own party on most issues. But unfortunately, the party leadership is way to the right on most issues, and they are the ones in positions of power and influence.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    It seems to me that the political perspective of Americans across the board needs to shift left before much change can be had, so that the Democrats are true leftists and the Republicans are less far right

    This isn't how it actually works, though. The Dems and Reps aren't very representative of the Statesian public, but instead its capitalists. The US is a capitalist state, it's a dictatorship of capital, and both allowed parties represent capital only. This is shown by the low voting rates in the US Empire, the DNC and GOP cannot move left, only working class orgs can represent the working class.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (1 child)

    No they aren't you are right. But Dem and rep interests have changed significantly over their existence, so it's not like their platform changing is totally impossible. Also, there are plenty more than one allowed party, they don't normally get much traction though. Is it not natural in a system that allows multiple parties, for the voter base to generally fall into a few large groups?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 10 months ago

    The ones the DNC and GOP serve haven't changed, capital's interests have morphed depending on varying domesting and international situations. As for allowing multiple parties, on paper that's true, but not in practice. See the ways they fuck with PSL ballot access, such as in Georgia in 2024. Finally, the idea that voters fall into 2 large groups is a consequence of capitalism being divided into 2 dominant classes, proletarians and capitalists, but only having the parties represent the capitalists. It's political theater, not representation.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 13 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    It's been fascist for decades. Fascism doesn't become official only when it happens to white people almost as much as the rest of us.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago

    If you think it wasn't fascist over a century at least and point at anything "politics" then I am pointing at your finger.

    That's a circus; a show.

    Look at the Banks. That's politics. Watch it stringing the hands of workers a families. Sure their politics are in an Arch of characterization oration but they're not even trying to force make anyone do anything.

    Look at the Money. They're puppetstrings fluxxing like Marty never fixed the Cubs mistake when it turned out that whole shenanigan was done like an inbelievably candid rigged card game, so named and trapped all attention from seeing the hot ounce balloon inflated for show. Pop the bubble. It was made to be see happening so we not get the trick dropped in 'Nam and settle for watching this cheeky shown name deflating like a doll.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (2 replies)